Jump to content

Tino Livramento


Recommended Posts

I think this is an exciting signing and could turn out to be a very shrewd piece of business. It'll be interesting to see how quickly he develops and how long it takes him to show enough promise to be considered for the first team. If what we are hearing about the agreed buy-back fee is true this has the potential to be an excellent deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Appy said:

For too long. 
 

Sheffield United away a couple of years ago, only a half but it was bad. 
 

Obviously improved slightly second half when he moved position. 

I'm prepared to give him longer than one half of football. It's not ideal but if Ralph has seen potential for him as cover in that area then I think it's worth giving a go. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, S-Clarke said:

Wonder what this means for Valery? There could be a couple of mill in there if a French club get desperate enough in the next few weeks. Then we can get a natural left back to fill Valerys spot.

Sounds like Tino sees himself as a right back, not really a left back. So I'd say potentially a space still open for a left back if we are really going to go all out to fix the depth issue.

Hoping a Ligue 1 manager somewhere is thinking ‘why don’t you come on over Valery’. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully this young lad is as good as the Chelsea fans are making him out to be.  AT this stage all potential but sounds like there could be a massive upside.

Love this new direction the club is going: we can offer bright young talent from big clubs the opportunity for 1st team football much quicker and if it means buy back clauses should be win wins in that if they are successful so are we and we make a profit.  A very different approach from others in the market and one that is more sustainable for clubs our size: we are not going to be splashing out 20 million+ on players.  When we have spent (for us big bucks) pretty much every signing has been a disaster.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the reported figures are true and it is a buy-back clause close to £40m, then I do not see too much wrong with it considering the only players we’ve sold for £30m+ are Van Dijk, Shaw. Schneiderlin and Mane. All were a joy to watch here (well, other than Van Dijk’s last three months) and a clear level above. So, if this does work out and the buy back clause does come into effect, we’ve done well.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SuperSAINT said:

Really pleased with this signing.  Exactly the sort of signing I think we should be making.

Last month, Simon Johnson at the Athletic did a story on the young players wanting out at Chelsea & for us to sign 2 out of the 4 of them is fantastic.

Chelsea's academy is top notch and you don't win player of the year there unless you have talent.

Lets see what the rest of the window brings...

Who are the other 2, get them all in and build a little Chelsea.

Oh and, WHAT AN INSANE SIGNING!

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Looks like a decent prospect, as cover for right back it’s exactly the type of signing we would go for. Not sure why it’s insane in any way.

Get a left back and centre midfielder in now and it will be an OK window.

If this lad can play on the left as well then with him and Salisu able to cover the left back spot i would doubt we are looking to sign another......but who knows !

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, max_saints said:

Oh and, WHAT AN INSANE SIGNING!

I've barely read any of the thread, and never heard of this guy. I know he was player of the season in the Chelsea youth team, but is it really that "insane". Am I missing something? Has he ever played for the Chelsea first team?

I hope I'm wrong, but just feels like he is being built up a lot on here...need to stay realistic about what to expect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jawillwill said:

I've barely read any of the thread, and never heard of this guy. I know he was player of the season in the Chelsea youth team, but is it really that "insane". Am I missing something? Has he ever played for the Chelsea first team?

I hope I'm wrong, but just feels like he is being built up a lot on here...need to stay realistic about what to expect.

Read the rest of the thread and you’ll get it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, jawillwill said:

I've barely read any of the thread, and never heard of this guy. I know he was player of the season in the Chelsea youth team, but is it really that "insane". Am I missing something? Has he ever played for the Chelsea first team?

I hope I'm wrong, but just feels like he is being built up a lot on here...need to stay realistic about what to expect.

From this season, every contract signed is subject to psychiatric evaluation.  If we get a new striker, that is expected to be psychopathic. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, jawillwill said:

I've barely read any of the thread, and never heard of this guy. I know he was player of the season in the Chelsea youth team, but is it really that "insane". Am I missing something? Has he ever played for the Chelsea first team?

I hope I'm wrong, but just feels like he is being built up a lot on here...need to stay realistic about what to expect.

Trust me pal, insane probably doesn't quite cut it.  By all measures, this is a signing of biblical standards that has shaken football to its core.

If you don't believe me then read the article about it on the BBC website!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pure speculation on my part but I suspect the buy back is £40m, with a 30% sell on clause for Chelsea, which would in effect mean it would cost them £28m to get him back.

This would explain the different buy back clauses being mooted, albeit it may be the sell on clause doesn't apply in a buy back situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

Would a sell on clause be a part of a buy back clause, seems pointless.

Yeah I agree. I keep seeing people assume thats the case without seeing it evidenced or demonstrated as such in another sale? It makes no sense to me as it defeats the point of a "buy back" clause if the value it stipulates isn't in effect real. I assumed they would be separate clauses with the sell on percentage not relevant to Chelsea buying him back. Is anyone able to definitely answer this one?

Edited by Saint86
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great to see us buying young talent. It's the essential for a self sustaining club. But it would be nice to have seen him play some senior games out on loan. U23s football, especially when you dominate opponents like Chelsea's u23s do, is not the same as playing for Saints first team. Doesn't mean he won't thrive when stepping up, but you dont know until they play. Is he good enough to start from day 1? We might need to give him some time to find his feet. 

Interesting that £5m bought us Cedric with almost 70 games for Sporting Lisbon and capped by Portugal. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chez said:

Great to see us buying young talent. It's the essential for a self sustaining club. But it would be nice to have seen him play some senior games out on loan. U23s football, especially when you dominate opponents like Chelsea's u23s do, is not the same as playing for Saints first team. Doesn't mean he won't thrive when stepping up, but you dont know until they play. Is he good enough to start from day 1? We might need to give him some time to find his feet. 

Interesting that £5m bought us Cedric with almost 70 games for Sporting Lisbon and capped by Portugal. 

I doubt he starts for a while. KWP and Perraud will likely be our starting fullbacks while he gets up to speed with how we play, likely just be a rotation/cup option in the first season. Going forward who knows though, and if either get a major injury he'll have to show what he can do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

Would a sell on clause be a part of a buy back clause, seems pointless.

It's only point would be from a PR perspective. Saints can say it's £40mish, whereas Chelsea can say it's £25mish. Both look better that way and like I say it would explain the different figures being banded about.

Tbh I would have thought it's easier to draft from a legal perspective. The sell on clause applies no matter what so no need to draft exclusion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

Yeah I agree. I keep seeing people assume thats the case without seeing it evidenced or demonstrated as such in another sale? It makes no sense to me as it defeats the point of a "buy back" clause if the value it stipulates isn't in effect real. I assumed they would be separate clauses with the sell on percentage not relevant to Chelsea buying him back. Is anyone able to definitely answer this one?

Without seeing the contract, no. It’ll be down to whatever has been agreed between the 2 clubs. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Say if Chelsea activate the buy back clause and he doesn’t want to go to Chelsea, I don’t see how they can force him in these days of freedom of movement, post Bosman…….? After all he has just rather publicly said he doesn’t see his future at Chelsea……! Who knows in 5 years time Abrahamovic may have lost his fortune….

Edited by SW5 SAINT
Edit
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, SW5 SAINT said:

Say if Chelsea activate the buy back clause and he doesn’t want to go to Chelsea, I don’t see how they can force him in these days of freedom of movement, post Bosman…….? After all he has just rather publicly said he doesn’t see his future at Chelsea……! Who knows in 5 years time Abrahamovic may have lost his fortune….

Sounds like he doesn't want to be at Chelsea as he wants to get minutes, if he gets minutes and smashes it and Chelsea try to get him back for £40m or whatever the buyback is to be a big part of their side he might be tempted.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TWar said:

Sounds like he doesn't want to be at Chelsea as he wants to get minutes, if he gets minutes and smashes it and Chelsea try to get him back for £40m or whatever the buyback is to be a big part of their side he might be tempted.

He might, but - excuse me while I lose my mind for a moment - if Real Madrid also come in for him, where does that leave Chelsea?  Doesn't the buy-out become a base release clause for anyone else?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Verbal said:

He might, but - excuse me while I lose my mind for a moment - if Real Madrid also come in for him, where does that leave Chelsea?  Doesn't the buy-out become a base release clause for anyone else?

In theory Chelsea could buy him and sell on for a profit to Madrid, not sure how often this sort of thing happens in practice though

Edited by TWar
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TWar said:

Sounds like he doesn't want to be at Chelsea as he wants to get minutes, if he gets minutes and smashes it and Chelsea try to get him back for £40m or whatever the buyback is to be a big part of their side he might be tempted.

I guess if it's a contract thing then he would have little choice but to rejoin whether he wanted to or not.  Freedom of movement is a bit of a moot point as he effectively has none for the next 5 years anyway (he couldn't just walk away from Saints).  Let's face it though, if he is a hit then he won't be looking to stay with us, so returning to Chelsea would seem very attractive to him you would think?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jawillwill said:

I've barely read any of the thread, and never heard of this guy. I know he was player of the season in the Chelsea youth team, but is it really that "insane". Am I missing something? Has he ever played for the Chelsea first team?

I hope I'm wrong, but just feels like he is being built up a lot on here...need to stay realistic about what to expect.

That’s our fan base for you..

get excited about every Tom dick and Harry we had never heard of before and it’s now at the stage we getting excited over untried kids 

Southampton board got it easy appeasing us :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sunglasses Ron said:

I guess if it's a contract thing then he would have little choice but to rejoin whether he wanted to or not.  Freedom of movement is a bit of a moot point as he effectively has none for the next 5 years anyway (he couldn't just walk away from Saints).  Let's face it though, if he is a hit then he won't be looking to stay with us, so returning to Chelsea would seem very attractive to him you would think?

I think the release clause/buyback clause means the club have the right to sign the player for that amount of money. The player is not obliged to agree personal terms or to accept it however. Isak had a buyback from BVB if I remember correctly and rejected them when they tried to activate it.

As you say though, Chelsea are a lot more attractive than us if he is offered good minutes so I don't see him turning that down and presumably neither do they or they wouldn't have bothered negotiating it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TWar said:

I think the release clause/buyback clause means the club have the right to sign the player for that amount of money. The player is not obliged to agree personal terms or to accept it however. Isak had a buyback from BVB if I remember correctly and rejected them when they tried to activate it.

As you say though, Chelsea are a lot more attractive than us if he is offered good minutes so I don't see him turning that down and presumably neither do they or they wouldn't have bothered negotiating it.

I guess time may tell! Always been fascinated with how the world of football has negotiated its way through the ever-evolving world of employment legislation! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sunglasses Ron said:

I guess time may tell! Always been fascinated with how the world of football has negotiated its way through the ever-evolving world of employment legislation! 

I think legally speaking they operate less as employers-employees and more as contractors with exclusivity clauses. It's certainly the case for NFL players as they can't legally unionise. Players can unionise in this country, as we have less draconian union laws but I think the terms of contractual interaction are similar.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kinda sad people are jumping on one another for being excited about this. (I may have missed something in the detail across 5 pages but this seems the case). We have genuinely signed one of the standout young English talents, someone who at every level he's played has excelled (normally playing well above his age group, UEFA Youth League, captaining England u17s). 

he's 3 years younger than Reece James who is therefore naturally ahead of him, but youth coaches seem to suggest Tino has more to his game than RJ (someone who has kept TAA out of England squads etc) , especially when it comes to versatility in more attacking positions and situations

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TWar said:

I think legally speaking they operate less as employers-employees and more as contractors with exclusivity clauses. It's certainly the case for NFL players as they can't legally unionise. Players can unionise in this country, as we have less draconian union laws but I think the terms of contractual interaction are similar.

Eh?  NFL players are heavily unionised and have been for decades.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_Players_Association

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, TWar said:

I think the release clause/buyback clause means the club have the right to sign the player for that amount of money. The player is not obliged to agree personal terms or to accept it however. Isak had a buyback from BVB if I remember correctly and rejected them when they tried to activate it.

As you say though, Chelsea are a lot more attractive than us if he is offered good minutes so I don't see him turning that down and presumably neither do they or they wouldn't have bothered negotiating it.

He is a (short) lifelong Chelsea supporter, it has always been his dream to play for the Blues. I think you can be confident that if he does well and Chelsea activate the buyback option, that he will go back. It is usually at least 2 seasons before a club can activate a Buyback. Seems to me that if Chelsea think he is worth 45m and want to buy him back that he will have had some phenomenal performances for us, so that can only be good. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, VectisSaint said:

He is a (short) lifelong Chelsea supporter, it has always been his dream to play for the Blues. I think you can be confident that if he does well and Chelsea activate the buyback option, that he will go back. It is usually at least 2 seasons before a club can activate a Buyback. Seems to me that if Chelsea think he is worth 45m and want to buy him back that he will have had some phenomenal performances for us, so that can only be good. 

Yeah I agree. The buy back isn’t ideal, but if exercised it‘ll mean he’s been a good player, which can only be good for us. 

it’s not a bad model, it’ll hopefully build Some trust with the big clubs a d we can hopefully cherry pick their best young talent as a means of developing them. 

If we can afford to bring in some older, more experienced players around them, it could really work well for us. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, TWar said:

Then I am very wrong! 😅

Must be misremembering something, maybe they were denied legal protection to do industrial action or something.

I think you are thinking about the 'sport' of Pro Wrestling.  They have famously been denied a Union for decades as owners are able to view them as 'independent contractors'.

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1110575-wwe-news-wrestlings-risks-warrant-a-labor-unions-rewards

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, once_bitterne said:

I think you are thinking about the 'sport' of Pro Wrestling.  They have famously been denied a Union for decades as owners are able to view them as 'independent contractors'.

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1110575-wwe-news-wrestlings-risks-warrant-a-labor-unions-rewards

That's probably it! Thanks, the guy who got me into NFL was also a big pro wrestling guy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like a good and inexpensive deal for a young player with genuine potential, what's not to like?

Our policy of giving young players game time has clearly tipped the scales in our favour - it's a yes from me.

And if he does well for us and looks world class, let's try not to be too surprised when he goes back to Chelsea.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, TWar said:

That's probably it! Thanks, the guy who got me into NFL was also a big pro wrestling guy.

No probs.  The major US sports are massively unionised compared to sports over here.  It's why they have actual strikes over there in sports.  In '87 about half of the NFL season was lost and owners bought in replacement players to play games while the actual players formed picket lines outside the training grounds.  In 1994 the baseball season was cancelled mid way through due to a strike and the current agreement between baseball players and owners expires at the end of this season and it's highly likely that there will be no season at all next year given how far the two sides are apart in negotiations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, once_bitterne said:

No probs.  The major US sports are massively unionised compared to sports over here.  It's why they have actual strikes over there in sports.  In '87 about half of the NFL season was lost and owners bought in replacement players to play games while the actual players formed picket lines outside the training grounds.  In 1994 the baseball season was cancelled mid way through due to a strike and the current agreement between baseball players and owners expires at the end of this season and it's highly likely that there will be no season at all next year given how far the two sides are apart in negotiations.

That's absolutely nuts! Is it just a pay dispute or are they protesting something else?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Super_Uwe said:

Quietly excited about him signing, let's see how he manages to settle in and make an impact early on.

I am assuming the club hasn't paid £5 million for him to sit on the sidelines all season!

we've spent a lot more than that on those who have so dont rule it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Lighthouse changed the title to Tino Livramento

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})