Virgiling on the vandijkulous
- Thread starter Skullflower
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
This development doesn't make sense for either club. We lose a target, they lose a fee and future business between the two clubs is probably ended for the foreseeable future.
It only makes sense if Soton really, really wanted to retain the player even though it's never shown any inclination to do so with it's players previously. Soton could also have simply said the player is not for sale instead reporting us? Why would they go straight to the mattresses?
I suspect we are part of a bigger picture where those with more financial clout tap up the Soton board with promises of greater riches.
It only makes sense if Soton really, really wanted to retain the player even though it's never shown any inclination to do so with it's players previously. Soton could also have simply said the player is not for sale instead reporting us? Why would they go straight to the mattresses?
I suspect we are part of a bigger picture where those with more financial clout tap up the Soton board with promises of greater riches.
Last edited:
Notice it's the same perennial apologists saying that all clubs do this. Not repeatedly like we do. We look like fucking chumps again, and no one can pin the blame on someone Parry or Ayre, ergo, the club are amateur dickheads, like they have been every summer for ages.
Or the alternative to that view is Klopp felt he nedded to get to Van Dijk to convince him not to go elsewhere. He took a risk, it failed. But we did go all out to get it done.
Although that kinda falls apart if Van Dijk doesn't move elsewhere now.
I do think that was probably the catalyst to Southhampton deciding to go public with their disgruntlement. The fact is we absolutely do need to make the most of the Klopp factor to attract the very best players, but we obviously need to act with some fucking discretion.
This is the second time within days I've seen you spell Southampton with an double h.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?!
I was wondering this. If the player puts in a transfer request now and says he wants to come to us, would we leave him high and dry? And then if we made the club an offer etc in the proper channels.
Jesus, what a fucking shambles.
Someone has to take the fall for this, surely.
Someone has to take the fall for this, surely.
Relax. In a week's time Southampton will issue a statement along the lines of
[article]We apologise for insinuating wrong doing on LFC's part, and we further apologise for making them have to apologise, when no apology was really necessary. We have now entered an agreement with LFC to sell them Virgil Van Dijk for £5M as a gesture of good will; Southampton will also pay his first year's wages as a Liverpool player. We look forward to a continued & ongoing relationship as the feeder club for this seasons PL & CL champions in waiting.[/article]
[article]We apologise for insinuating wrong doing on LFC's part, and we further apologise for making them have to apologise, when no apology was really necessary. We have now entered an agreement with LFC to sell them Virgil Van Dijk for £5M as a gesture of good will; Southampton will also pay his first year's wages as a Liverpool player. We look forward to a continued & ongoing relationship as the feeder club for this seasons PL & CL champions in waiting.[/article]
Well, to be honest, he is a good player but 60M on a centre back?? 200K a week?? that is mind boggling...
If we are gonna spend that kind of cash on a single player I'd prefer us to do it on an attacker.
I did want us to sign him, he is an improvement on our defense and the embarrassment now draped over the club is palpable and the conspiratorialists may well be right, you never know maybe FSG are just a bunch of fucking cunts.
Reading the VdV debacle yesterday only then to wake up and read we've probably fucked up the Salah deal as well.... Jeepers.... it doesn't chime in very well with a member of the management structure issuing an interview saying we don't need to spend big like City last week...
We really do need to spend big, making "statement" signings is not necessarily needed but they would be nice to!
Just do not fucking let us know and shut the fuck up until it's done.
I am confident that we can buy a fucking great centre back for considerably less than what Southampton would have got from us. Now let's see if we can.
If we are gonna spend that kind of cash on a single player I'd prefer us to do it on an attacker.
I did want us to sign him, he is an improvement on our defense and the embarrassment now draped over the club is palpable and the conspiratorialists may well be right, you never know maybe FSG are just a bunch of fucking cunts.
Reading the VdV debacle yesterday only then to wake up and read we've probably fucked up the Salah deal as well.... Jeepers.... it doesn't chime in very well with a member of the management structure issuing an interview saying we don't need to spend big like City last week...
We really do need to spend big, making "statement" signings is not necessarily needed but they would be nice to!
Just do not fucking let us know and shut the fuck up until it's done.
I am confident that we can buy a fucking great centre back for considerably less than what Southampton would have got from us. Now let's see if we can.
Even Fat Sam would be laughing at us.
Sent from my iPhone 8 Plus using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone 8 Plus using Tapatalk
Well if we are to believe the rumours we have bid 17M for some other CB valued by his club at 30M. Sounds about right to me.
Relax... YES it was dumb and YES it was shitty... but clubs touch players up all the time, it is how it works generally, this time we fucked it up or somebody from the VdV camp did, or fuck it maybe we just didn't want to spend SHITLOADS of cash on a centre back.
Fat Sam will always be a total cunt whatever he does or wherever he does it... I do not give a flying fuck what he thinks.
Was this a case of us leaking the info about him choosing us in a misguided attempt to boast?
The club didn't get caught tapping up. Some massive bellend at the club got caught talking about it.
Ginsoak regularly - yes, Mark, regularly - met players in hotels, their own houses, at airports, at games, wrote to them, called them, paid for family members to travel here and there, etc etc. But the club never leaked it or crowed about it before any transfer. Paisley met Dalglish in Glasgow before making any enquiry to Celtic. Roy Evans left messages as 'The Man from Del Monte' when sounding out Collymore long before the club contacted Forest. Houllier got up to all kinds of pretty blatant stuff when he was persuading players to sign. Rafa did it with Keane. It's done, frequently, by us and others, and only a tiny amount of thought is needed to realise that the system would hardly work if it didn't happen. But it's the publicising of it that upsets clubs. Whoever it was who briefed the hacks like this should go, as soon as possible.
Ginsoak regularly - yes, Mark, regularly - met players in hotels, their own houses, at airports, at games, wrote to them, called them, paid for family members to travel here and there, etc etc. But the club never leaked it or crowed about it before any transfer. Paisley met Dalglish in Glasgow before making any enquiry to Celtic. Roy Evans left messages as 'The Man from Del Monte' when sounding out Collymore long before the club contacted Forest. Houllier got up to all kinds of pretty blatant stuff when he was persuading players to sign. Rafa did it with Keane. It's done, frequently, by us and others, and only a tiny amount of thought is needed to realise that the system would hardly work if it didn't happen. But it's the publicising of it that upsets clubs. Whoever it was who briefed the hacks like this should go, as soon as possible.
Indeed.
But fuck it, it is done now so forget about it... let's go and win that fucking league...
But fuck it, it is done now so forget about it... let's go and win that fucking league...
So we didn't tap him up ?
It's a bit of a mess alright and there's mistakes in this all over the shop.
It's clear a move was discussed with Van Dijk without Southampton's permission. I refuse to believe that it was without their knowledge though. It's also clear that there was a media briefing about VVD's choice of club, which seems to be what has tipped Southampton over the edge.
It's an odd move on all sides, if the media are right about City dropping their interest due to price, then that leaves Chelsea as the only ones left willing to pay £60m - and they'll surely look for a discount now if they come back in for him (Conte also met with him, again if media reports are to be believed). There's a few reports this morning stating that we will try and salvage the deal, but why did we make the statement yesterday? If this was to avoid FA sanctions, then surely the chances of us going back in for him (and getting him for the price we were previously prepared to pay) are slim.
So, we have shot ourselves in the foot. But then, so have Southampton - he might never fetch this price again if he doesn't return from injury and they've gone from no bidding war but a guaranteed buyer to back to square one; cool if they don't want to sell him, but indications are that he's eager to leave.
It's clear a move was discussed with Van Dijk without Southampton's permission. I refuse to believe that it was without their knowledge though. It's also clear that there was a media briefing about VVD's choice of club, which seems to be what has tipped Southampton over the edge.
It's an odd move on all sides, if the media are right about City dropping their interest due to price, then that leaves Chelsea as the only ones left willing to pay £60m - and they'll surely look for a discount now if they come back in for him (Conte also met with him, again if media reports are to be believed). There's a few reports this morning stating that we will try and salvage the deal, but why did we make the statement yesterday? If this was to avoid FA sanctions, then surely the chances of us going back in for him (and getting him for the price we were previously prepared to pay) are slim.
So, we have shot ourselves in the foot. But then, so have Southampton - he might never fetch this price again if he doesn't return from injury and they've gone from no bidding war but a guaranteed buyer to back to square one; cool if they don't want to sell him, but indications are that he's eager to leave.
I made it clear enough. Like all clubs, we tapped up another player. Unlike most other clubs, we talked about it. I doubt you're naive enough to think that tapping up as such is at all unusual.
Who knows how this will pan out. We've unsettled a player then backed the fuck away....
The next process is now in Virgils court, he will either change his mind and go to City, Chelsea or Utd or stick to his guns and push for us....
Its messy but I wouldnt say its completely dead in the water, I guess it truly depends if Virgil only wants to come to Liverpool....
The next process is now in Virgils court, he will either change his mind and go to City, Chelsea or Utd or stick to his guns and push for us....
Its messy but I wouldnt say its completely dead in the water, I guess it truly depends if Virgil only wants to come to Liverpool....
The story from the Liverpool/VVD side was very clear, he'd picked us. Do you think that leak was an attempt to control the price in someway? It certainly seemed to suppress any other bidding clubs.
[article]The Telegraph‘s Sam Wallace writes that “A world-record offer could possibly make them reconsider, but this summer the mood is very different to previous years.”
That’s not a very clear point though, given that reports were already claiming a £50 million or £60 million fee, which would have been a world-record offer for a defender, and we’re surely not talking about £90 million!
The Times‘ Paul Joyce notes the potential for the player himself now to force through a move.
In 2014, Dejan Lovren handed in a transfer request to force through a move to Anfield.[/article]
That’s not a very clear point though, given that reports were already claiming a £50 million or £60 million fee, which would have been a world-record offer for a defender, and we’re surely not talking about £90 million!
The Times‘ Paul Joyce notes the potential for the player himself now to force through a move.
In 2014, Dejan Lovren handed in a transfer request to force through a move to Anfield.[/article]
The mock outrage and contrition over talking without permission is ridiculous. I doubt any deals start in any other way.
Take agents. An agent doesn't sit meekly in his office waiting for a club to accept an offer, and then snap into action. An agent is always looking and listening out for interest in his client. And if a manager calls him and asks if a client would be interested in signing, and the agent arranges a discussion between them, what's wrong? It's the sort of thing that happens in most industries. Clubs don't go around making formal enquiries out of the blue. Even the preparation of a bid takes time and money, lots of discussions by the board and the accountants and the staff. You can't go through all that on the off-chance. You need to have some idea to begin with that it's going to be worth your while pursuing.
I don't see anything unethical about it.
Obviously there's a subjective reaction, depending on where you are. Fans hate it when they lose player like this, and don't care much if at all when they get a player like this.
Discretion is usually the key. It's when Barca, for example, just ignore all the usual niceties and trumpet their interest for weeks or months that really pisses people off. But to not do it at all, in any way, that is simply impractical.
The mistake by the club was to discuss it so freely and smugly. That's what FSG need to make sure never happens again.
I think meeting with the player is fairly unusual.
Mourinho did get caught for it with Ashley Cole.
I would expect all clubs to be in contact with the agent. But the meeting was clearly going beyond what is the norm.
We gave Southampton a perfect opportunity to screw us by doing that.
Arsenal reported Chelsea over the Cole transfer, Fulham reported us over Dempsey and the youth player and Southampton have just reported us over VVD.
The only time tapping up becomes a problem is when the selling club take issue with it. I reckon there's a bit of it in every single deal, whether it's International team mates putting the feelers out, managers having a word (or a stick of rock in Blackpool) or agents hawking their wares on the sly.
The real issue here is that fans have spent the last few days beating their chests at the club fending off City and Chelsea for a key target, it's a long way down from that.
Exactly. Chelsea and City discussed plans with the player and offered a wage deal. Without first asking permission from the club to contact him. That's tapping up. So if acting without permission was the real problem, Southampton would have reported Chelsea and City as well as us and all three would have been forced into making grovelling apologies. The only difference is that the two other clubs didn't brief people about how their talks went, because they didn't go well. So this isn't about tapping up, it's about one club talking too much about it.
Similar threads
-
- Locked
