Virgil Transfer Rumours - Summer 17

No need to be mystified Charlie, I just can't stand trolls.

There aren't any trolls on this forum. It's the only forum on the world wide web that holds that status.

That would only damage us in the long run. We've set ourselves up as a club for good young players to come to and develop before leaving for a bigger club. If we start letting wantaways rot in the reserves, then these talented players will no longer see us as a step to bigger things and won't want to join us. Instead we'll end up like Sunderland, signing 30+ year old has beens on big wages.

I disagree.

We can still be a platform club for players but what we can't allow is players to sign a six year contract one summer then moan because they can't leave the next.

We also can't back down having submitted a complaint about Liverpool. It would be a compete shambles.

I disagree.

 

We can still be a platform club for players but what we can't allow is players to sign a six year contract one summer then moan because they can't leave the next.

 

We also can't back down having submitted a complaint about Liverpool. It would be a compete shambles.

I'm not saying we can do either of those things and I agree with you on both points. What i'm saying is, everybody loses if we start doing things like letting players 'rot' in the reserves.

He's holding out for the loyalty bonus. As things stand, he's no intention of submitting a transfer request. Thinks the move will happen anyway. He's a cvnt.

Thanks for the info - don't listen to the happyclappers and Leslieites on here. They'll try to silence and intimidate you but the truth will always prevail.

Stuck between a rock and a hard place here. If we sell, our whole 'finding a backbone' display would look frankly pathetic. Not only that but the fans will rightly feel deceived (again) and the deteriorating trust between the board (espeically Les Reed) and the fans will be left in shatters.

Alternatively, we keep hold of him and hope for a similar scenario to what happened with Morgan. Obviously, there is every chance we could have a Berahino situation on our hands.

If we do swallow our pride and sell him, the club must make certain he is sold on our terms. We are in the strongest position. We have him tied down for another 5 years so we should not accept a penny less than the £70m initially touted.

Personally, I think our bridges with Liverpool should be well and truly burned after their total lack of respect for not only the rules but our club. I can already imagine the gloating 12 year old scousers (and no doubt older as well ) all over twitter and the like if they get him. Considering how much empthasis the club has put on branding and the clubs image globally these last couple of seasons, I genuinely believe they want to stand firm and lose this stigma of being a selling club (especially to Liverpool). Unfortunately, despite holding all the cards, this kinda feels like a lose/lose.

Sell for £70m and replace with 3/4 proven internationals that immediately improve the first XI. I'm all for our transfer policy and back the club completely, but if we replace VVD with prospects, we'd be playing a dangerous game. Jonathan Tah and William Carvalho would be top of my list, but unclear how realistic these targets would be. That said, as us fans know more than most, money talks...!

Sell for £70m and replace with 3/4 proven internationals that immediately improve the first XI. I'm all for our transfer policy and back the club completely, but if we replace VVD with prospects, we'd be playing a dangerous game. Jonathan Tah and William Carvalho would be top of my list, but unclear how realistic these targets would be. That said, as us fans know more than most, money talks...!

Carvalho is awesome.

What nail, whose head? All you've been saying for the last ten years is that we will finish 17th, you're as big a dickhead as the troll. Why do I get the impression that you are one and the same?

 

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

If it makes you feel better...

Jim White‏

@JimWhite

Source informs me, as yet, no firm bids for @SouthamptonFC want away defender Virgil van Dijk.

Well, we can't sell if no one is bidding!

sell for £75m, buy another CB and Sigurdsson.

Problem is 1. Liverpool doesn't wanna pay 75, else he would be gone already. 2. Sigurdsson has no reasons to join us. Probably going to spurs. 3. Selling now would make us look weak.

VVD wants to leave, pool doesn't wanna pay our set price = VVD stays with a lemon face for a couple of weeks. He will get over it. Nothing is new really when thinking about it.

Carvalho is awesome.

Seconded.

Sell bring in new CB, def mid, sigurdsson and someone else if cash remains.

Sell bring in new CB, def mid, sigurdsson and someone else if cash remains.

How are you going to fund all those players wages with that pal?

Jim White‏

@JimWhite

 

Source informs me, as yet, no firm bids for @SouthamptonFC want away defender Virgil van Dijk.

 

Well, we can't sell if no one is bidding!

Is anybody keeping an eye on eBay?

Agreed. Getting up there with the skates now for me.

I hope MLG updates Southampton's rivals on FM accordingly. Got to be at least 75, surely.

I wouldn't even consider selling the c*nt until he puts a transfer request in.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

I don't see how liver****e can bid for him as they ended their interest in him did they not? Nothing has changed in that respect. Two faced ****s will tho.

Watching the Liverpool game and they mentioned Coutinho and how Barcelona want him and Newbon? said Liverpool had refused offe rand Coutinho has to get on with it as they werehis employers, then 20minutes later he mentioned VVD and put a different slant on that situation. The media just don't care

What exactly are these loyalty bonuses? How are they constructed? Does anyone know what he's entitled to? Surely nothing after only seeing out 1/6 years of his contract?

It's a one off payment written in a players contract that the player gets if he is sold or released before his contract ends and he hasn't put in a transfer request.

I'm not sure but they might also get it when they sign a new contract

I'd imagine VVD's is upwards of £1m/1.5m

Watching the Liverpool game and they mentioned Coutinho and how Barcelona want him and Newbon? said Liverpool had refused offe rand Coutinho has to get on with it as they werehis employers, then 20minutes later he mentioned VVD and put a different slant on that situation. The media just don't care

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

Problem is 1. Liverpool doesn't wanna pay 75, else he would be gone already. 2. Sigurdsson has no reasons to join us. Probably going to spurs. 3. Selling now would make us look weak.

 

VVD wants to leave, pool doesn't wanna pay our set price = VVD stays with a lemon face for a couple of weeks. He will get over it. Nothing is new really when thinking about it.

Not sure Sigurdsson would go back to Spurs, especially as where is he going to play? They have two of the best AMs in the league in Eriksson and Ali.

Siggurdsson looks likely to go to Everton IMO as a replacement for Barkley, but I don't see a reason he wouldn't want to come here, we'd probably offer him a pay raise and he'd be moving from a relegation threatened club to an upper mid table club looking towards Europe.

What's more likely is that we won't pay £40 million for him, especially as he's soon to be 28 and will have little re-sale value in 2-3 years. But to be honest at current market for a guy who scores 10-15 goals from midfield, as many assists, can take penalties, free kicks, corners all in a relegation threatened team I'd say in today's market that is a good deal.

Man City have just paid £50 million for walker who can barely cross a ball, £40-50 million for a consistently quality player like Sigurdsson seems fair to me.

---------------------------------

Thing is if we have no bids we have no bids, also I don;t think Liverpool are going to bid, I reckon they took too much of a PR hit and the owners want to steer well clear.

Is Wimmer still for sale. He wants regular first team games.

I know Spurs were holding out for about £15m, but I'm sure we could do a deal.

I hope you're right. In my mind, this is the crunch with Liverpool. They've manipulated our players in the past to the extent that they think it's normal and justifiable. They also think they're above punishment. If we cave in on this one, they will just carry on and the implications for Saints really are very serious.

 

The moment has to come when we make a stand, or we might as well just give up altogether, and if Les and co don't realise that, the anger amongst fans will make the rumblings over Puel fade into insignificance.

 

The outcome of this is absolutely critical to Saints' future.

 

And thanks for an excellent post.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

I agree totally, this is the crunch, not only with Liverpool, but also the other glory teams. As you say, Les will see the fan base go into meltdown if Virgil is sold to Liverpool, but if we stand firm and deny his departure, he will not only receive the plaudits from us, but also the gratitude of the other clubs below the top six. Somebody has to make a stand against agents and players adopting these sorts of tactics and we are well placed to take a lead from a position of strength where we do not need to sell, either financially or contractually.

I did entertain the amusing thought earlier, when considering the probability that Liverpool had surreptitiously briefed prominent ex-players to stick their oar in, that we should have made it clear that for every intervention by such an ex-player in the media, Virgil's sale price would increase by £1 million. That would either have resulted in a quick plea from Liverpool to their ex-players to shut up, or the asking price would be about £8 million higher by now.

Interesting point I have just listened again to the MoPe interview ..........he actually said VVD said he wanted away and his head wasn't right and that it was totally Mope decision to isolate him.

I know I am probably being too charitable here but it actually doesnt say he refused to play

Sell for £70m and replace with 3/4 proven internationals that immediately improve the first XI. I'm all for our transfer policy and back the club completely, but if we replace VVD with prospects, we'd be playing a dangerous game. Jonathan Tah and William Carvalho would be top of my list, but unclear how realistic these targets would be. That said, as us fans know more than most, money talks...!

I doubt we will get 3 or 4 proven internationals for 70 million (less Celtic's cut) in today's inflated market.

I agree totally, this is the crunch, not only with Liverpool, but also the other glory teams. As you say, Les will see the fan base go into meltdown if Virgil is sold to Liverpool, but if we stand firm and deny his departure, he will not only receive the plaudits from us, but also the gratitude of the other clubs below the top six. Somebody has to make a stand against agents and players adopting these sorts of tactics and we are well placed to take a lead from a position of strength where we do not need to sell, either financially or contractually.

I did entertain the amusing thought earlier, when considering the probability that Liverpool had surreptitiously briefed prominent ex-players to stick their oar in, that we should have made it clear that for every intervention by such an ex-player in the media, Virgil's sale price would increase by £1 million. That would either have resulted in a quick plea from Liverpool to their ex-players to shut up, or the asking price would be about £8 million higher by now.

Sunday papers will be interesting tomorrow. Ex Liverpool players all making a few quid with their biased opinion on this circus.

Interesting point I have just listened again to the MoPe interview ..........he actually said VVD said he wanted away and his head wasn't right and that it was totally Mope decision to isolate him.

 

I know I am probably being too charitable here but it actually doesnt say he refused to play

Which is basically what we got with Morgan and Victor.

If a club other than Liverpool offer £70m+ (with more than a fortnight left of the transfer window) then sell him. If not make him stay.

Interesting point I have just listened again to the MoPe interview ..........he actually said VVD said he wanted away and his head wasn't right and that it was totally Mope decision to isolate him.

 

I know I am probably being too charitable here but it actually doesnt say he refused to play

I think you are right. Van Dijk probably hasn't said categorically that he will not play but that is almost immaterial if his attitude is such that the manager doesn't trust him to prepare as part of the team or to perform if picked. It's good to see the manager taking the decision he has and there can be no doubt that he has the backing of Les Reed and the Board in doing so. But it's difficult to see any outcome that would leave the player at this club because even if Van Dijk convinces the manager that his attitude has changed, Pellegrino won't want a player in the team who is likely to be jeered by the fans. Winning the fans back could be much harder for him. In his post yesterday, OldNick mentioned the solution quite a few people have suggested, which is to sell him elsewhere and preferably out of England.

Personally, I find it hard to imagine enjoying the sight of him in a Saints' shirt again and I have no wish to see him at St Mary's playing for anyone else.

I reckon the end to this is that VVD gets offered a new contract for circa £100k/week, being top salary by a mile, and he gets sold next summer.

I don't think he will go Liverpool, he'll get the same chat Morgan got.

Brentford one up. Yes, Brentford

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sweepstake on VvD *liking* the Asian Cup win on Twitter.

Meh this isn't exactly new look back at previous players to pull this sort of **** sadly most seem to get their way.....c unts

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3153513/Raheem-Sterling-refusing-play-Liverpool-tries-force-50m-Manchester-City-s-no-means-big-sulk.html

I reckon the end to this is that VVD gets offered a new contract for circa £100k/week, being top salary by a mile, and he gets sold next summer.

 

 

 

Why would we need to do that? He is ours anyway

Interesting point I have just listened again to the MoPe interview ..........he actually said VVD said he wanted away and his head wasn't right and that it was totally Mope decision to isolate him.

 

I know I am probably being too charitable here but it actually doesnt say he refused to play

This is true.

I reckon the end to this is that VVD gets offered a new contract for circa £100k/week, being top salary by a mile, and he gets sold next summer.

 

I don't think he will go Liverpool, he'll get the same chat Morgan got.

Why would we want to offer him a new contract? The ink has hardly dried on the last one yet.

Why would we want to offer him a new contract? The ink has hardly dried on the last one yet.

It would be a bit like getting a 2 year phone contract for 40 pound a month, and after the first year is up go back in the shop and say if I can keep this phone for another year I'll give you 70 pound a month instead

Perhaps we can only buy if we sell first

Wrong thread

we need 2-3 weeks to get in a good center back or 2 ( if we aren't already in the process now)

So time is our main concern... I don't want us scrabbling around on the last few days of the window, then scouring the out of contract players like we did with Fonte's replacement.

Enough damage has been done to our pre-season preparations already.

Why would we want to offer him a new contract? The ink has hardly dried on the last one yet.

We could offer him a new one with a reduced pay and removes the captaincy. We could also reduce the length of his contract. He may not accept it but we could make the offer.

As I see it Liverpool want VVD, they can't bid as long as Saints say they won't sell him, otherwise they could be in deep transfer ban trouble. The only way VVD can join Liverpool is if the current non co-operation tactic wears the management down. Then Saints would have to contact Liverpool, if they hold firm Liverpool are stymied no matter what the agents and VVD want. In any event we should get in a replacement ASAP.

we need 2-3 weeks to get in a good center back or 2 ( if we aren't already in the process now)

So time is our main concern... I don't want us scrabbling around on the last few days of the window, then scouring the out of contract players like we did with Fonte's replacement.

Enough damage has been done to our pre-season preparations already.

That's why we won't sell him. We identify our targets almost a year in advance.

That's why we won't sell him. We identify our targets almost a year in advance.

& sometimes we just buy Taider / Juanmi / Gardos.

That would only damage us in the long run. We've set ourselves up as a club for good young players to come to and develop before leaving for a bigger club. If we start letting wantaways rot in the reserves, then these talented players will no longer see us as a step to bigger things and won't want to join us. Instead we'll end up like Sunderland, signing 30+ year old has beens on big wages.

I think they will be able to tell the difference. All VVD had to do last year was decline the new long term contract and say that he was going to want to leave next summer (or the summer after than since he had four years left at the time). This will tell players who sign for us that we plan to keep them for two or three years and then sell them on at a profit, but if they fit well, they will be offered a longer term contract at significantly increased wages, but they will be expected to stay longer in exchange. Exactly the message we should want to send.

I have published 'A Modest Proposal (re Virgil van Dijk)" on my blog.

http://redsloscf.blogspot.com/

http://redsloscf.blogspot.co.uk/

If , as seems the case, the owners are unwilling to budge and keita hasn't downed tools, instead of uppong the bid, we tempt the player / agent with more cash / longer contract / lower release clause.

They are such a cesspit of a club.

This is Tom28's post today re VVD from the Stephens thread:

VVD has met personally with LR twice in the last two days (disclaimer: one of those could have been a phone call). Fairly amicable meetings by all accounts given the circumstances and the fact that they basically hate each other. LR apparently is open to the idea of selling VVD providing a) the offer meets our valuation (sorry, I don't know what that is) and b) the deal is done with at least three weeks of the transfer window remaining to give us enough time to get a top quality replacement. In light of VVd's stance, we have stepped up our monitoring of the CB targets on our list and starting informal discussions with clubs. LR and VVD discussed Liverpool; both parties recognise that selling him to Liverpool would be a hugely unpopular move with our fanbase, even though Saints believe they will get the most money from Liverpool. Apparently, VVD has softened a little and would consider moving to another top club besides Liverpool. He's totally hell bent on leaving though. Interesting development - apparently Chelsea have indicated to VVD's agent that they no longer have an interest. He was definitely talking to them a few months back but he picked Liverpool over them so perhaps understandable that they've moved on but when you consider they've lost Terry, Zouma and Ake, they are short at the position. As things stand, there are no bids for him at all but the feeling is that won't be the case for long now the news is out.

 

Sorry, nothing groundbreaking or solid today but seems the club are open to the idea of selling him privately, if not yet publicly.

Les Reed has been a nobb on this one

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Les Reed has been a nobb on this one

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What's he done wrong? Care to explain that rather brash statement?

Should he have just given in and sold him, or would that have been wrong as well?