egg

That's not my point. If they offer significantly more than anyone else we'll take their money. Principles will disappear if there's another £5m on the table.

I find it astonishing that people think that we won't take Liverpool's money if they come in with a bid that's much higher than the next best bid.

No chance imo but him in front of Romeu and the new guy, and behind Gabbi would be superb. Let Redmond, Tadic, JWP and Boufal fight for the 2 wide spots whilst putting pressure on Barkley. Would be a huge upgrade on Davis.

Agreed. Rather than multi function players who won't improve our first 11 we need specialist players to improve us where we are weak. Personally I'd like a proper attacking midfielder to play behind the striker. 3 strikers are enough and I'd happily lose long if it means bringing in a decent attacking midfielder and making do with what we have out wide and up top.

My comment that you quoted was in response to someone saying that we need one player who can do a job up front, as a 10 and out wide. I asked who he had in mind.

I'm with you on this. Gardos arrived a good international CB. Sure he's been injured but there's no reason why he's now not back to his best. How good that best is we don't really now but we paid good money for him at the time which suggests that we thought highly of him. I'm worried about Bednarek though, he has a long way to go.

Gray wouldn't improve us imo and isn't the 7,9,10 and 11 rolled into one that the fella was saying we should sign. King is a great 9 and I'd take him in a heartbeat but I reckon he's well out of range now.

For me, yes. We've progressed beyond wanting players who can do a job in many positions. Long can so a job in a variety of positions, but on last year's form none of them very well. We need players who can improve the team in a specific position. We have JWP who's best position is unclear, ditto Boufal, PH and others. We've experimented in pre season with Austin as a 10. I want players who will have the ability to improve the team. Sure, good players can adapt to different roles but show me a player who is available to us who would improve us up front, in the hole and out wide.

You're not after much from one player!! Any suggestions of who?

I got as far as it's Les's fault that he tied our best player to a long contract and that Liverpool then acted like ****s. Bad man Les, should have seen that coming. Ffs.

Yes. With a heavy heart - I hate employees holding guns to employers heads and I'm worried what message giving in to the little **** sends to other want away players. However, we need to strengthen and don't need a bad apple around the place. Leaving him to rot does us no favours, and neither does attempting to force a reluctant player to reintegrate. On balance I say cash in and move on.

Talented lad for sure. Great defender, as was Watson and Svensson. What Alderweireld and VVD (like Wright) have is the ability to defend like a CB should, but also play. Hall would have been brilliant and we'll never know how good he could have been (ditto Richards) but I never saw a great footballer in him, just a very good defender.

Agreed. Just. Mark Wright was superb and the best centre half I'd seen in a saints shirt before VVD. Alderweireld was the best since him. In between them, Richards, Svensson and Dave Watson were brilliant.

Thanks. Any clues on whether these are first team starters or squad players?

Yep. Giving an apology for doing something that they had permission to do makes no sense whatsoever.

And then apologising!

Noted. I just assumed he was really thick.

Err, what we receive as a total fee and what we receive during an accounting period are two completely different things. Plus, have a read of the little * and ** in the accounts summary.

It's not Chelsea that has to be sweetened, it's Christensen. If he'd rather stay out and 'fight for his place' he can and will. With Terry, Ake and Zuma gone he must be close to their first team.

They were separated deals. Players moving in opposite directions are not necessarily part exchanges.

This. Contracted players have to agree to join other clubs, they can't just be traded. With that said, Christensen would be a fantastic signing and as good as we could hope for as a VVD replacement. After 2 good seasons in the bundesliga he'd cost proper money though - Chelsea refused a 20m euro offer a couple of years ago.

Of course they'll be more money for him for the short period he was to be here but the point is what's in it for him, rather than us, to sign for such a long period.

Assuming we refuse to sell to Liverpool, and he refuses to play for us, and Chelsea make an acceptable offer he ain't got much choice.

Interesting, thanks for sharing. He'd be a great fit at city but I fear they'll see walker's price as a comparable.

We'll agree to disagree. The fundamental points are that a) extended contracts (where it is accepted that the player will move during the contract, like with VVD) are for the club's benefit not the player, and b) there will likely have been agreements or understandings reached when that deal was agreed relevant to the future transfer. You lurch to conclusions about that whereas I say none of us know.