Virgil Transfer Rumours - Summer 17

If the club hold their ground on this 1 they'll have a much stronger hand in the years to come with regards players wanting out at any cost.

Spot on.

Again, I won't have a problem with him being sold as I'm sure most won't - as long as it's not to Liverpool. The sooner I see an accepted Chelsea/Citeh bid the better then we can all move on.

You're making yourself look a little stupid (again) if im honest.

 

VvD signing a contract worked for both him and us. He gets a nice pay rise, we secure an asset and therefore boost his transfer fee when it comes to the time to sell. Lets be honest, given our record of selling anything that's not nailed down, I doubt it even crossed his mind that we would refuse to sell him.

 

I think most sensible saints fans understand that he's too good for us, as was Toby and Lovren before him. I think most would have understood if he'd gone to City/Chelsea/United and kept his mouth shut. He gets the move he wants it all ends amicably.

 

What ****es me off, is the way he's gone about it (snidey meetings, refusal to play and acting the victim) and the vile club he wants to join.

 

Ultimately there's no way back for him now. Bridges are well and truly burnt. The board have done very very well to drag it out as long as they have, but realistically they don't have much choice but to sell now, which will decrease his value unfortunately. The only and best thing the board can now do is make sure they do not sell him to Liverpool.

Why is he devalued? We only need to sell if we are happy with the offer.

Spot on.

This , its only £13m not £70m we lost on Gaston and Osvaldo he'll do his 'short' career no good at all if he's not playing

However maybe club should name a price , say £85m onvo , if no offers close to that value make it very clear to the media that his price has not been met

This , its only £13m not £70m we lost on Gaston and Osvaldo he'll do his 'short' career no good at all if he's not playing

 

However maybe club should name a price , say £85m onvo , if no offers close to that value make it very clear to the media that his price has not been met

What the hell are you talking about.

What the hell are you talking about.

You're making yourself look a little stupid (again) if im honest.

 

VvD signing a contract worked for both him and us. He gets a nice pay rise, we secure an asset and therefore boost his transfer fee when it comes to the time to sell. Lets be honest, given our record of selling anything that's not nailed down, I doubt it even crossed his mind that we would refuse to sell him.

 

I think most sensible saints fans understand that he's too good for us, as was Toby and Lovren before him. I think most would have understood if he'd gone to City/Chelsea/United and kept his mouth shut. He gets the move he wants it all ends amicably.

 

What ****es me off, is the way he's gone about it (snidey meetings, refusal to play and acting the victim) and the vile club he wants to join.

 

Ultimately there's no way back for him now. Bridges are well and truly burnt. The board have done very very well to drag it out as long as they have, but realistically they don't have much choice but to sell now, which will decrease his value unfortunately. The only and best thing the board can now do is make sure they do not sell him to Liverpool.

I think you are being stupid if i`m honest...

How did it work for us any more than if he did`nt sign because the 5 year instead of six would have made zero difference to his value, just got him more money so no extra value to the club..

I think he means that we paid 13m for VVD and so that is what is at stake, not the figure we fans think he's worth.

I'm off to buy a car at 2013 prices

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think he means that we paid 13m for VVD and so that is what is at stake, not the figure we fans think he's worth.

If my house burned down, I'd feel like I lost more than what I paid for it in 1992

I think many people on this forum need to find out the difference between an opportunity cost and sunk cost.

What the hell are you talking about.

He will be on our books for what we paid not a speculative valuation of his worth.

If my house burned down, I'd feel like I lost more than what I paid for it in 1992

My guess is we initially wanted £70m ish gross. Liverpool were prepared to pay that but events transpired (especially internal events with other SFC players) meaning we chose not to sell to them. This position has become entrenched over recent weeks. Other clubs were not prepared to offer to the same level but the transfer request reduces the gross amount we will accept thus bringing other clubs back into the picture.

Wouldn't be surprised to see a cash plus player deal with a sell back figure in the contract.

For what it's worth I think the majority realise that he must be sold now no matter what. He won't want to stay now and the board shouldn't want to keep hold of him. Our priority now is to sell to the highest bidder and get a replacement in asap. It does make me wonder why we didn't sell him back in July though as we probably would of got more for him. The only reason I can see the logic behind waiting is waiting until deadline day, if he's not sold by then we will received offered from all over the place and we choose the highest bidder (in theory) we just need to make sure we get a replacement in that is first team quality or near it, I hear the Polish lad doesn't look great from the performances so far but pre season is pre season I guess.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I reckon most posters hand-on-heart would admit that the fault doesnt completely lie with him.

 

We do come across as unambitious and Lowe-like now. I guess that wont change until the long-term ownership of the club is resolved.

If my house burned down, I'd feel like I lost more than what I paid for it in 1992

Exactly. The notion that we are only risking £13m is completely moronic. We've got a potentially world record fee for a defender at stake here. Only the most irresponsible business would risk losing that out of "principle" - deep down most fans know that full well.

We wanted to keep him because we wanted another year out of him and to then sell him for an even larger fee on the back of another good year and, hopefully, a top performance at the World Cup.

He's forced out hand now so ultimately we will sell but it will be on our terms and probably not to Liverpool. Morgan and Vic showed the professionalism to buckle down but it doesn't look like Virgil is going to do us that courtesy so we will sell whilst his value is preserved. A patchy season followed by a Berahino situation won't do us any good at all and will only serve to decrease the fee we get.

I think VVD has been badly advised. Nobody has bothered to look at the tenuous relationship between LFC and Saints because of the recent transfer history. Players were reluctantly sold after being unsettled. VVD is the straw that broke the camels back.

Taking emotion out of it, of the top six clubs that we are trying to break into, LFC are probably the weakest. Why would we want to strengthen them when it is possible that their Champions League or possibly Europa League games could cause them problems in the League. Our target has to be strengthen midfield and centre back discarding VVD to anybody but LFC. Then target catching Everton, then LFC, both tied into European competition whilst we are not. We are not going to compete with Chelsea, MC or MU financially. Spurs are better than us at present whilst Arsenal could possibly be vulnerable but LFC could be the weak link.

I think the club are doing absolutely the right thing. VVD may not get sold because his valuation isn't met or we just don't sell him. If he is, fine, if he isn't after Aug 31st it is a whole new ball game. The club will have put their foot down and everybody will be aware they are not going to be messed around. VVD/agent should be made aware that the Jan window is not an option whether he integrates successfully or not.

Listening to Carragher and Redknapp last night the hypocrisy was expected but stlll unbelievable. SFC, a selling club, tapping up is usual, VVD will already have had discussions with the interested clubs, all the details will already have been agreed and will probably have even talked to the manager, sound familiar? Now we have the evidence confirmed from the inner circle.

There is no way that we should even consider letting VVD go to LFC.

He'll be worth the same amount next summer unless he rules himself out all season. Long contract and all that.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/18932/10978801/virgil-van-dijk-certain-to-leave-southampton-this-summer-says-jamie-redknapp

"He goes, it's an absolute certainty," Redknapp told The Debate - Live. "He won't play for Southampton again. "He has put in a transfer request and I think that probably suits Southampton. Let's be honest, I was there for a short time, Southampton are a selling club. If you have any ambition to be a top player you leave Southampton.

 

"Victor Wanyama, Sadio Mane, Adam Lallana, everybody else has gone. They paid £13m to Celtic for Van Dijk and they will get close to £60m, they will get a fortune for him.

 

"I don't blame Virgil one bit. This is what happens in football. He will already know how much he could get at Liverpool, how much he could get at Chelsea, this is what happens in football.

 

"He has probably already spoken to the managers. He could probably earn three or four times his Southampton money at Liverpool or Chelsea, so why wouldn't you want to go and play for a better club?

 

"I'm sure Southampton fans will say, 'That's out of order', but if anyone received an offer to go to a better job, you take it. You're ambitious.

 

"Southampton cannot really complain. They have always sold their best players and now they are about to sell another one. They should be happy they can reinvest or bring another player through the academy.

 

"The last thing you want is a rotten apple in the dressing room, especially with a new manager. He does not want Van Dijk causing problems.

 

"Pellegrino wants to know who's on board and who wants to play for him so the quicker they resolve this issue, the quicker they can get a couple of players in.

 

"I don't see any way Virgil van Dijk is a Southampton player once this window closes."

Thanks Jamie.

He'll be worth the same amount next summer unless he rules himself out all season. Long contract and all that.

In the history of world football, what are the precedents for that?

It is so rare it isn't really worth considering as an outcome. He isn't going to strike for an entire season, players don't do that.

I think he means that we paid 13m for VVD and so that is what is at stake, not the figure we fans think he's worth.

I'm off to buy a car at 2013 prices

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think VVD has been badly advised. Nobody has bothered to look at the tenuous relationship between LFC and Saints because of the recent transfer history. Players were reluctantly sold after being unsettled. VVD is the straw that broke the camels back.

 

Taking emotion out of it, of the top six clubs that we are trying to break into, LFC are probably the weakest. Why would we want to strengthen them when it is possible that their Champions League or possibly Europa League games could cause them problems in the League. Our target has to be strengthen midfield and centre back discarding VVD to anybody but LFC. Then target catching Everton, then LFC, both tied into European competition whilst we are not. We are not going to compete with Chelsea, MC or MU financially. Spurs are better than us at present whilst Arsenal could possibly be vulnerable but LFC could be the weak link.

 

I think the club are doing absolutely the right thing. VVD may not get sold because his valuation isn't met or we just don't sell him. If he is, fine, if he isn't after Aug 31st it is a whole new ball game. The club will have put their foot down and everybody will be aware they are not going to be messed around. VVD/agent should be made aware that the Jan window is not an option whether he integrates successfully or not.

 

Listening to Carragher and Redknapp last night the hypocrisy was expected but stlll unbelievable. SFC, a selling club, tapping up is usual, VVD will already have had discussions with the interested clubs, all the details will already have been agree and will probably have even talked to the manager, sound familiar? Now we have the evidence confirmed from the inner circle.

 

There is no way that we should even consider letting VVD go to LFC.

The whole "We have all the cenre halves we need " thing from Klopp is just a Kansas City Shuffle, the press look left while Liverpool tell his agent that they will match any loyality bonus he loses. The Guardain yestwerday wer talking of the dippers offering him £200,000 per wekk, which is more than I had sen listed anywhere else, so that would fit my theory .

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/18932/10978801/virgil-van-dijk-certain-to-leave-southampton-this-summer-says-jamie-redknapp

 

 

 

Thanks Jamie

From Aston Villa's published accounts

The cost of acquiring a player can be made up of many components. These include the transfer fee itself and agents fees. The costs are capitalised and included as intangible fixed assets. These costs are then depreciated or ‘amortised’ over the length of the players contract. The amortisation charge reduces the value of the asset and creates a charge in our profit and loss account. As an example if we purchase a player for £1m on a 4 year contract we would have an amortisation charge of £250k per year. At the end of year 1 he would have an asset value of £750k. At the end of year 4 he would have a value of nil.

If a player signs a contract extension we would amortise the remaining asset value of that player over the length of the new contract."

I think you are being stupid if i`m honest...

How did it work for us any more than if he did`nt sign because the 5 year instead of six would have made zero difference to his value, just got him more money so no extra value to the club..

Had he not signed a new deal last year, he'd have had 3 years left, this summer.

"She has put in a transfer request and I think that probably suits Louise. Let's be honest, I was there for a short time. If she has any ambition to be a top entertainer you leave Jamie.

I'm not surprised she's looking to cancel her contract, he's starting to look like his dad.

"She has put in a transfer request and I think that probably suits Louise. Let's be honest, I was there for a short time. If she has any ambition to be a top entertainer you leave Jamie.

He's just another average bloke who thanks to playing top level sport nicked himself another chick way out of his league. She was bloody scorching hot back in the day. And probably still is.

As for him talking about how he was part of the club for a while so has some idea of the way things work inside now. What a ****.

The way that the pundits are appraising this situation is nothing short of disgraceful. Totally insulting to clubs like Southampton. Modern football is rotten to its core. Oh and Jamie, if you have any ambition to be a top player why on earth would you join Liverpool? Talk about living in the past.

Had he not signed a new deal last year, he'd have had 3 years left, this summer.

OK, but the t osser should not have signed then

In the history of world football, what are the precedents for that?

 

It is so rare it isn't really worth considering as an outcome. He isn't going to strike for an entire season, players don't do that.

exactly which is why we should just tell him he is in our plans and will remain at the club for at least another season unless we receive a ludicrous offer in the region of 85m. He will not go on strike for the whole season and will after a sulk realise it is in his best interests to knuckle down and play to the best of his ability, people will quickly forget how good he was last season if he spends 6 months refusing to play (for which I assume we don't need to pay him!)

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/virgil-van-dijk-liverpool-transfer-chelsea-southampton-latest-a7882136.html

As they conclude, we hold the upper hand, as van Dijk's and Liverpool's position is weak. Chelsea and any other team offering an eye-wateringly high fee for him are in with a shout, but only if we decide we want to sell. The article opines that if we keep him past the closure of the transfer window, he will have no real alternative than to buckle down and play.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/virgil-van-dijk-liverpool-transfer-chelsea-southampton-latest-a7882136.html

 

As they conclude, we hold the upper hand, as van Dijk's and Liverpool's position is weak. Chelsea and any other team offering an eye-wateringly high fee for him are in with a shout, but only if we decide we want to sell. The article opines that if we keep him past the closure of the transfer window, he will have no real alternative than to buckle down and play.

All seems about right. The rumours about a possible loan to buy for an incoming player lends itself to Chelsea getting a deal done. They still have some stockpiled talent they need to find games for, and our recent business with them has been pretty amicable, so I can see that happening.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/virgil-van-dijk-liverpool-transfer-chelsea-southampton-latest-a7882136.html

 

As they conclude, we hold the upper hand, as van Dijk's and Liverpool's position is weak. Chelsea and any other team offering an eye-wateringly high fee for him are in with a shout, but only if we decide we want to sell. The article opines that if we keep him past the closure of the transfer window, he will have no real alternative than to buckle down and play.

We need to see an end to the attitude that players always have the right to move to a "bigger" club (ie for more money) regardless of any current commitments.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Nice to see a balanced, reasoned piece. It's the first article I've seen that touches on a possible shift in power away from players and agents, with clubs refusing to do business and holding players to contracts. In my opinion, a welcome development.

 

We need to see an end to the attitude that players always have the right to move to a "bigger" club (ie for more money) regardless of any current commitments.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

I wonder when we will see the first deliberate poor performance or even own goal from a player in such a position

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/virgil-van-dijk-liverpool-transfer-chelsea-southampton-latest-a7882136.html

 

As they conclude, we hold the upper hand, as van Dijk's and Liverpool's position is weak. Chelsea and any other team offering an eye-wateringly high fee for him are in with a shout, but only if we decide we want to sell. The article opines that if we keep him past the closure of the transfer window, he will have no real alternative than to buckle down and play.

Linked to in that is this tweet;

Anyone have any idea if he's reliable?

I'd be very happy if that's the stance the club are taking.

I wonder when we will see the first deliberate poor performance or even own goal from a player in such a position

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would be career ending, and deliberately scoring an own goal is match fixing which is somewhat frowned upon. Difficult to prove obviously!

I wonder when we will see the first deliberate poor performance or even own goal from a player in such a position

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just before we see a record suspension.

Linked to in that is this tweet;

 

Anyone have any idea if he's reliable?

 

I'd be very happy if that's the stance the club are taking.

All that I know is he is a fellow Saints fan but not sure whether he has reliable sources!

I've seen a few performances which were questionable in terms of commitment, and later it transpired they were off. So avoiding injury. Quite sure it happens. Ps Grobbelaar was involved in a few incidents wasnt he? Not saving quite as many as he could...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All that I know is he is a fellow Saints fan but not sure whether he has reliable sources!

Ah k, fair enough, thanks.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/virgil-van-dijk-liverpool-transfer-chelsea-southampton-latest-a7882136.html

 

As they conclude, we hold the upper hand, as van Dijk's and Liverpool's position is weak. Chelsea and any other team offering an eye-wateringly high fee for him are in with a shout, but only if we decide we want to sell. The article opines that if we keep him past the closure of the transfer window, he will have no real alternative than to buckle down and play.

Interestingly enough Jamie Redknapp has told the scousers that Virgil is a professional sort (don't choke) who will buckle down and play if he doesn't get his move :

"If he does stay at Southampton, he will get on with it and he will be exceptional for them" says ex-Liverppol legend and son of Hangdog.

http://www.empireofthekop.com/2017/08/08/jamie-redknapp-what-ive-heard-about-virgil-can-dijk/

Not sure that many people on £70k a year are sending their kids to "excellent private schools" but there you go.

Well okay then, 8/9 days.

MLG would have been proud of that post. Fact is, for the 2 weeks wages he has just been fined, he could easily put a kid through private school, from year 7 until he's finished sixth form.

Worth checking here shortly

"Kevin Palmer‏Verified account @RealKevinPalmer 27m27 minutes agoMore

Interesting vibes coming from the Southampton end after Virgil van Dijk's statement....story will be posted here shortly #saintsfc #LFC #CFC"

https://twitter.com/RealKevinPalmer

I wonder when we will see the first deliberate poor performance or even own goal from a player in such a position

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you were an interested club and a player you were watching started playing poorly or deliberately scoring own goals for a season do you think you would still be interested come next summer? From the players point of view if he plays badly he gets dropped and a season not playing is hardly good for his future career.

I've seen a few performances which were questionable in terms of commitment, and later it transpired they were off. So avoiding injury. Quite sure it happens. Ps Grobbelaar was involved in a few incidents wasnt he? Not saving quite as many as he could...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you were an interested club and a player you were watching started playing poorly or deliberately scoring own goals for a season do you think you would still be interested come next summer? From the players point of view if he plays badly he gets dropped and a season not playing is hardly good for his future career.

Two games before window? How about then?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Two games before window? How about then?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What he is going to play well to the best of his ability until the last two games of the season...I'll take that

And wwhen he refuses to play as he would?

VVD: "“As a proud professional I am insulted by the suggestion that it was me who refused to train"

Just play him, as soon as he is left out his value drops because the buyer knows we are in a sticky position.

Dear Virgil,

I'm so glad you share the club's ambitions

We would have achieved them by now if it wasn't for players like you, Lallana, Lovren, Clyne, Mane, Wanyama,Schneiderlin, Alderweireld,etc,etc.

And why would you want to go to Liverpool, a team we so comprehensively outplayed over 2 legs last season?

In the meantime, Barcelona's board have arrived in the UK to secure the transfer of Coutinho.

:lol: :lol:

Would be quite funny if Barca, whose bods are in the country at the moment, signed Coutinho then flew down to Soton and signed VVD. Not beyond the realms of possibility. The former IMO a given, the latter.....!