Virgil Transfer Rumours - Summer 17

Pretty much exactly how I read the situation. I firmly believe that VVD will stay, unless an offer comes in over and above our asking price. I fullu imagine the conversation has gone like this;

 

"You arent being sold this window, settle in, help Hoedt get used to the prem and we will not stand in your way in Jan/summer"

 

Id suggest that will still be subject to a reasonable bid being presented to us however.

 

All in all very happy with the Hoedt signing. I think it spells the end of Gardos, but then thats been a long time coming, you may even see Bednerak move out on loan.

Why on earth would we do that? I am dead set against any gentlemen's agreements of any sort, send him a copy of his contract highlighting the expiration date.

Telling him he can leave next year defeats the whole purpose of what we are doing, "throw a tantrum and you can leave in a year", it's still caving in. Van Dijk cannot be allowed to leave, neither now, nor next year.

Talksport prays saying Liverpool don't need to sell Coutinho; just go and get Van D. Makes the blood boil

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Should reward Yoshida with new contract too. We need him as backup and he's been v loyal.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Clyne = 1 year

Wanyama = 1 Year

Mane = 2 Year

Morgan = 2 year

In last two years we haven't sold anyone > 2 years contract from memory.

The opinion that VVD will be worth the same or even more next summer seems flawed to me . If VVD stays for another season whether playing or not it will be common knowledge that he will be free to leave. Other teams will know that in order for Saints to keep their side of the agreement that we will be under pressure to sell and therefore lower offers will come in .

Saints wouldn't risk this same situation with VVD next summer again .

Personally still think we should sell now and take the money to further strengthen the team .

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

The opinion that VVD will be worth the same or even more next summer seems flawed to me . If VVD stays for another season whether playing or not it will be common knowledge that he will be free to leave. Other teams will know that in order for Saints to keep their side of the agreement that we will be under pressure to sell and therefore lower offers will come in .

Saints wouldn't risk this same situation with VVD next summer again .

 

Personally still think we should sell now and take the money to further strengthen the team .

 

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

Understand the point you're making but:

He's on a long enough contract for us to able to sell on our terms next summer not be dictated to by the buying club/VD or his poxy agent.

If we sell now, there wouldn't be the time this window to strengthen, although with Hoedt coming in perhaps we don't need too many immediate purchases and some could wait until January, or possibly next summer.

Well if we do get another attacking player I would think we were done strengthening already. Would be satisfied with that

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

Is his loyalty bonus now forfeit permanently? Or does it come back into play at some point?

The opinion that VVD will be worth the same or even more next summer seems flawed to me . If VVD stays for another season whether playing or not it will be common knowledge that he will be free to leave. Other teams will know that in order for Saints to keep their side of the agreement that we will be under pressure to sell and therefore lower offers will come in .

Saints wouldn't risk this same situation with VVD next summer again .

 

Personally still think we should sell now and take the money to further strengthen the team .

 

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

What agreement? We don't have to offer him sh!t and we almost certainly haven't or he would have been back by now knowing that he would be off next year. And considering that we haven't sold a single player with more than 2 years left on their contract since 2014, we probably don't do these "off contract" agreements.

The opinion that VVD will be worth the same or even more next summer seems flawed to me . If VVD stays for another season whether playing or not it will be common knowledge that he will be free to leave. Other teams will know that in order for Saints to keep their side of the agreement that we will be under pressure to sell and therefore lower offers will come in .

Saints wouldn't risk this same situation with VVD next summer again .

 

Personally still think we should sell now and take the money to further strengthen the team .

 

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

Probably some truth in this.

For all intents and purposes, he's off next summer -regardless of whether there's an informal agreement. Can't see us holding him to his contract for another summer, however much we're entitled to and I'd love to see us try, without it causing a shîtstôrm and being counterproductive. One summer maybe; but not two in a row. Other clubs know this, though it's doubtful that it'll lead to truly pîsstake offers.

Way too much faith (usually by nonlawyers) put in the force of contracts.

Do you think that the VVD situation was not discussed with their agents? Do you think that they didn't seek assurances about what may happen if a CL club came in? If you think the answer to one or both is no then you are daft.

You do realise he changed agents after signing his new contract? I think the new agent probably approached him to swap agents after liverpool contacted them to try and get vvd to them

Probably some truth in this.

 

For all intents and purposes, he's off next summer -regardless whether there's an informal agreement or not. Can't see us holding him to his contract for another summer, however much we're entitled to, without it causing a shîtstôrm and being counterproductive. One summer maybe; but not two. Other clubs know this.

 

Way too much faith (usually by nonlawyers) put in the force of contracts.

Firstly, any 'agreement', formal or informal, will undoubtedly still include us selling at a price that is acceptable for us. We are not just going to tell him he can leave regardless- it is still on our terms.

Secondly, who's to say that having VVD in the side for another season won't be worth as much or more than the value we might lose on him? Each place in the league is worth about £2million, plus extra tv money. If we lose £10million off his value but finish a few places higher than we would have, we will have done well.

Firstly, any 'agreement', formal or informal, will undoubtedly still include us selling at a price that is acceptable for us. We are not just going to tell him he can leave regardless- it is still on our terms.

 

Secondly, who's to say that having VVD in the side for another season won't be worth as much or more than the value we might lose on him? Each place in the league is worth about £2million, plus extra tv money. If we lose £10million off his value but finish a few places higher than we would have, we will have done well.

Clearly an offer will have to be acceptable to us, though our bargaining power will be reduced. With relations already poisoned, can you genuinely see us holding firm for another summer, if our target valuation is not met? I can't.

That's not to say that we'll be lowballed (though can see some clubs -cough Levy- trying their luck). More likely that it will be a messy compromise -and any figure that's agreed will look modest relative to other transactions for comparable players and will certainly be lower than the types of fee that some are hoping for here.

Second, assuming he comes in from the cold, I agree he can make a difference to our performances, league position and any prize money we receive. Of course, how much of a difference he makes remains to be remain. Some argue that you can get still get the best out of a player after a transfer dispute since they are ultimately professionals (see Schneiderlin); others argue you get a less than committed player, slightly tainted goods (see Wanyama). It'll be a fascinating test of these competing hypotheses. I tend to subscribe to the first view -and never got the Wanyana hate FWIW.

From RAWK

"If we agree a fee for Howedes then Southampton will be forced into playing their hand."

They are so clueless. We HAVE played our hand. He is not for sale. Especially to Liverpool.

So dense.

What agreement? We don't have to offer him sh!t and we almost certainly haven't or he would have been back by now knowing that he would be off next year. And considering that we haven't sold a single player with more than 2 years left on their contract since 2014, we probably don't do these "off contract" agreements.

At the moment VVD is all out to leave but its really the only amicable solution to get another commited season.

While its true that we have not sold off a player with over 2 years left on their contract I think that this situation is different based solely on his value .

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

Clearly an offer will have to be acceptable to us, though our bargaining power will be reduced. With relations already poisoned, can you genuinely see us holding firm for another summer, if our target valuation is not met? I can't.

 

That's not to say that we'll be lowballed (though can see some clubs -cough Levy- trying their luck). More likely that it will be a messy compromise -and any figure that's agreed will look modest relative to other transactions for comparable players and will certainly be lower than the types of fee that some are hoping for here.

 

Second, assuming he comes in from the cold, I agree he can make a difference to our performances, league position and any prize money we receive. Of course, how much of a difference he makes remains to be remain. Some argue that you can get still get the best out of a player after a transfer dispute since they are ultimately professionals (see Schneiderlin); others argue you get a less than committed player, slightly tainted goods (see Wanyama). It'll be a fascinating test of these competing hypotheses. I tend to subscribe to the first view -and never got the Wanyana hate FWIW.

Yeah I agree with most of that. Either way, I'd still rather we keep him, even if it means getting less money later. If nothing else it may go a little way to changing people's perception of the club as rolling over and selling as soon as a big club comes knocking.

If it was Liverpool (I'm 100% sure it's not) then Saints will immediately report them to the FA and the info the club have, so the gossip is up north, could see Liverpool getting a transfer ban.

 

Saints won't sell. That message has been loud & clear and the clubs have accepted that. That said, I was told last week, standby for the insane end of window bids incoming.

 

If they sell then VvD has won and all players will know, as will every other club, that put the pressure on then Saints will buckle. Saints cannot afford to back down now.

Definitely the third paragraph is exactly how it is, when will some actually grasp it

What agreement? We don't have to offer him sh!t and we almost certainly haven't or he would have been back by now knowing that he would be off next year. And considering that we haven't sold a single player with more than 2 years left on their contract since 2014, we probably don't do these "off contract" agreements.

Get in the real world, we arent big enough to hold onto him any longer than another summer, and if we did it will likely damage our long term strategy. I know people arent a fan but our current model seems to be to allow ourselves to be a stepping stone for talented young players. That benefits us in the short to medium term, allowing us to progress under their talents and sell for reinvestible profits.

Of course, we need to prove our back bone too, which hopefully we have in this instance. But you can only hold our nerve for so long. If he doesnt want to be here then you cant have a detrimental figure in the dressing room. Eventually the players that agree with Saints view point will gradually grow weary of the situation. Therefore our best bet is to have an informal agreement, so that we get the best of the player for another year, and he gets his way in the future. Theres nothing wrong with compromising here, its not a long term battle we can win.

The important thing for me is to ensure that he remains here until next year, that strengthens our position, unless of course an astronomical bid is made late on, that we would be stupid to turn down. I do believe that situation is still very much on the horizon, hence our current crop of 6 CBs. Im also curious as to why Sakho is still at LFC, especially due to the relationship between him and Klopp. Expect a last minute scramble for VVD IMO, with Sakho being offered in some capacity.

Considering the market £75 million will probably be standard next year anyway.

To be honest he'll be in no different a situation than Mahrez currently is, i.e waiting for the buying club to meet the selling club's valuation and VVD will be told that and will have to accept it. Once 1st of September rolls round I think it'll hit home that he doesn't have as much power as he thought (or was told) he has and he might reconsider his position. We may also see him think about the advice he has been given and whether it was really in his best interest or his agents.

He'll also know that the club won't sell him January either. A lot can change in a year and certainly with premiership teams there is a shift IMO of clubs standing more firm against this aggressive transfer policy where other clubs try to unsettle players to agitate for moves.

Plus it entirely depends who clubs sign, the likes of Chelsea and Liverpool etc. may find centre-backs that they are happy with and VVD is left with nowhere to go.

Get in the real world, we arent big enough to hold onto him any longer than another summer, and if we did it will likely damage our long term strategy. I know people arent a fan but our current model seems to be to allow ourselves to be a stepping stone for talented young players. That benefits us in the short to medium term, allowing us to progress under their talents and sell for reinvestible profits.

.

Get with the programme. That says our former strategy. Ralph laid out the change in strategy last week.

Get with the programme. That says our former strategy. Ralph laid out the change in strategy last week.

Ralph is very much in the 'Ill say what you want to hear' mould. So I remain to see whether our strategy changes significantly, and for that to happen then we would need to see a step change in spending to compliment what we have here already.

We are still a selling club, in pretty much every sense of the word. Ive not got a massive problem with that, especially if we have actually found our backbone this year. If we keep showing improvements like we have been then theres no reason why we cant all be happy with that.

Hoedt is exactly the sort of signing that is in keeping with that strategy though. Young, hungry, not too expensive, rough edges to smooth out. Of course long term the timescales and asking prices may have changed but ultimately its 'business as usual'

Virgils latest like on Twitter. Puff or P.Diddy discussing being a realist instead of a dreamer...

https://mobile.twitter.com/diddy/status/899670713686151168

Maybe the penny has dropped for him, the lure of playing in a Dutch national CB pairing every week, who knows?

Maybe the penny has dropped for him, the lure of playing in a Dutch national CB pairing every week, who knows?

is Heodt a regular starter for holland at CB?

Ralph is very much in the 'Ill say what you want to hear' mould. So I remain to see whether our strategy changes significantly, and for that to happen then we would need to see a step change in spending to compliment what we have here already.

 

We are still a selling club, in pretty much every sense of the word. Ive not got a massive problem with that, especially if we have actually found our backbone this year. If we keep showing improvements like we have been then theres no reason why we cant all be happy with that.

 

Hoedt is exactly the sort of signing that is in keeping with that strategy though. Young, hungry, not too expensive, rough edges to smooth out. Of course long term the timescales and asking prices may have changed but ultimately its 'business as usual'

is Heodt a regular starter for holland at CB?

I don't think so but they could be seen as the future I suppose. Would have thought the Belgian pairing at spurs is a model?

I don't think so but they could be seen as the future I suppose. Would have thought the Belgian pairing at spurs is a model?

surely, VvD would start with Heodt where ever each of them play (assuming they are both starring)?

surely, VvD would start with Heodt where ever each of them play (assuming they are both starring)?

That's what I would assume.

He liked some tweets of Southampton training videos a few weeks ago, he appears to have unlike them as they are no longer there.

Don't ruin it by relenting on VVD, Saints. Can't let the spoilt scousers have their man. Chelsea, Barcelona? Fine

surely, VvD would start with Heodt where ever each of them play (assuming they are both starring)?

They also have De Vrij remember, who is a very, very talented centre back. Hoedt, VVD and De Vrij are their standouts.

Maybe they play 3 at the back....

They also have De Vrij remember, who is a very, very talented centre back. Hoedt, VVD and De Vrij are their standouts.

 

Maybe they play 3 at the back....

And Martins Indi gets a look in every now and then as well. Hoedt is just starting to be an option, made his debut for the Dutch team earlier this year.

I don't think so but they could be seen as the future I suppose. Would have thought the Belgian pairing at spurs is a model?

That is all four of his caps....

Also VVD has been injured or basically not fit for that period, so if anything Hoedt has basically been filling in for him. Their main centre-back is De Vrij, who is also at Lazio, is a very good player, who's contract is apparently running out when I was reading that Lazio thread to other day. He's been linked to Liverpool and a few other clubs over the summer and is apparently happy to leave on a free next year if he doesn't go this summer. The Lazio fans seem a bit confused they were selling Hoedt when De Vrij was also going, but reckoned they got a good deal overall and also reckoned De Vrij wouldn't come to us,

There is also Ake, De Light who is a very good young prospect at Ajax, Martins Indi who just signed for Stoke and Reidewald who just signed for Crystal Palace, plus Daley Blind as well. I'd say their main two would be De Vrij and VVD. But most of the Dutch defence seems to be in the Premier League.

Hoedt seems to be in the next group of players, but there is no reason he couldn't push to becoming first choice with us, and forming a partnership with VVD probably wouldn't harm his chances, they are also a left foot/right foot combo.

Kevin Palmer of the Irish Independent has another piece on VVD. He says that the relationship between player and club hierarchy is too broken for him to remain with Saints. One of the exacerbating factors in the whole affair has been a residual of poor relations between club and agent following Koeman's "abrasive" departure last summer.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/premier-league/the-inside-story-on-why-virgil-van-dijks-reputation-at-southampton-is-shattered-and-why-they-should-sell-him-now-36062647.html

Kevin Palmer of the Irish Independent has another piece on VVD. He says that the relationship between player and club hierarchy is too broken for him to remain with Saints. One of the exacerbating factors in the whole affair has been a residual of poor relations between club and agent following Koeman's "abrasive" departure last summer.

 

http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/premier-league/the-inside-story-on-why-virgil-van-dijks-reputation-at-southampton-is-shattered-and-why-they-should-sell-him-now-36062647.html

Probably prompted by some ex Scouse player mouthpiece.....

That independent source obviously has some 'in side' scoop, they've been very well informed on this whole affair up until now.

I think it's more their opinion that he should leave though. I still think the club will stand firm.

If VVD wants to refuse to play for the reset of the season, then it's his loss. Toss away your career.

Kevin Palmer of the Irish Independent has another piece on VVD. He says that the relationship between player and club hierarchy is too broken for him to remain with Saints. One of the exacerbating factors in the whole affair has been a residual of poor relations between club and agent following Koeman's "abrasive" departure last summer.

 

http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/premier-league/the-inside-story-on-why-virgil-van-dijks-reputation-at-southampton-is-shattered-and-why-they-should-sell-him-now-36062647.html

This is probably spot on.

Kevin Palmer used to work for the club, not sure if he still does but I expect he still has good contacts.

Kevin Palmer used to work for the club, not sure if he still does but I expect he still has good contacts.

I did not know that. Probably explains the inside info. I assumed that the Kevin Palmer articles were one of the leaks that VVD and his agent complained about in the statement accompanying his transfer request.

I did not know that. Probably explains the inside info. I assumed that the Kevin Palmer articles were one of the leaks that VVD and his agent complained about in the statement accompanying his transfer request.

So VVD is on his way?

This is probably spot on.

Nothing really new though. It's more or less what we've been saying all summer. However, I'm personally of the opinion that we don't sell him, no matter what.

So VVD is on his way?

The "they should sell him now" bit of the article seems more like Palmer's opinion than anything else.

I imagine 'Kevin Palmer' gets all his info from the liverpool end (Echo maybe) and of course his paper runs a John Aldridge column !

Works at Saints ?? never heard of him doing that.

This latest article is nothing more than speculation and typical tabloid journo at work.

The club have made it crystal clear that he wont be sold and both Krueger and Reed have their jobs on the line if they change that situation.

I imagine 'Kevin Palmer' gets all his info from the liverpool end (Echo maybe) and of course his paper runs a John Aldridge column !

 

Works at Saints ?? never heard of him doing that.

 

This latest article is nothing more than speculation and typical tabloid journo at work.

 

The club have made it crystal clear that he wont be sold and both Krueger and Reed have their jobs on the line if they change that situation.

Do you really believe that last bit? There is no way the jobs of Ralph or Les are remotely on the line if they sell VVD. Not a chance. Reputation amongst some fans, absolutely but not their jobs.

Shame Virgil has been terribly advised by his agent and followed it. One day maybe the players will realise they are being mugged by these parasites who use them to get rich out of the limelight whilst the player gets the hate.

There are things I know but cannot say. I will share them on here on 1st September if VVD has gone. But the report that things are now toxic is absolutely true. Even if VVD stays, I don't see a way for him to play given what I've been told in the last 24-36 hours. I fully expect him to go now. The club will be criticised by some and some will say this was the clubs plan all along. I can promise you it was not.

There are things I know but cannot say. I will share them on here on 1st September if VVD has gone. But the report that things are now toxic is absolutely true. Even if VVD stays, I don't see a way for him to play given what I've been told in the last 24-36 hours. I fully expect him to go now. The club will be criticised by some and some will say this was the clubs plan all along. I can promise you it was not.

I suppose if we get a massive bid, then he would've gone anyway.

The question is... Are we likely to get a bid suitable? (£70m+).

Had a weird thought the other day that one of these days a player will try to actually sue a club for restriction of trade. Or something. And that maybe VVD's advisors might be trying something similar to wriggle out of the contract. Hope it really isn't toxic. But selling now to Liverpool will be a huge kick in the teeth and we will be a joke rollover club

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There are things I know but cannot say. I will share them on here on 1st September if VVD has gone. But the report that things are now toxic is absolutely true. Even if VVD stays, I don't see a way for him to play given what I've been told in the last 24-36 hours. I fully expect him to go now. The club will be criticised by some and some will say this was the clubs plan all along. I can promise you it was not.

I think fans will accept £70m +. You sound like you're softening us up though for a lower fee. No matter how "toxic" things are there's a contract and the club need to stick to their guns.

Kevin Palmer of the Irish Independent has another piece on VVD. He says that the relationship between player and club hierarchy is too broken for him to remain with Saints. One of the exacerbating factors in the whole affair has been a residual of poor relations between club and agent following Koeman's "abrasive" departure last summer.

 

http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/premier-league/the-inside-story-on-why-virgil-van-dijks-reputation-at-southampton-is-shattered-and-why-they-should-sell-him-now-36062647.html

If the relationship between player and club hierarchy is broken down it is purely because of the totally out of order actions of the player. So if we sell he gets his way and the theory that you can engineer a move away from us by acting like a c.nt is proven for the future reference of all players who fancy a move shortly after signing a lucrative long term contract. We have to make him stay and if that means he spends a season (and it needs to be a season, not just until January) kicking in his heels refusing to play then so be it and more fool him. If he does do that I would be in full support of us forcing him to stay a further season firstly for being a c.nt and secondly to serve as an unequivocal warning to others that we will not be f.ucked about any more.