turtmcfly

...and we could also be looking at losing more if he's a flop. Seems academic anyway if the option is clause or no deal. A few minutes ago this was a flat 'no' from you based on a buy-back clause being in place. I'm now none the wiser. If you admit 'we would ultimately benefit in a buy-back deal' then that would be a very strange position to still hold. The only downside to an activated buy-back that I can see is that we could have bought someone else who would have been as good or brought on one of the youngsters through the ranks during the year/two years he'd be here. Not a very convincing argument if you ask me...

Spot on. The club should create a service whereby you can sign up for hourly emails saying 'Dear Bedwetter, we still haven't signed a manager'

taking this analogy further (and perhaps moving it somewhat into the realms of auto-erotica) let's just say he offers up his back end a little too freely

Of course you're not in front of a PC 24/7 (you've got to sleep, and slope off for discrete shermans etc.) But feck me, it feels like you are.

Who knows, but if that is the case...the combination of Vardy staying and Lukaku going (even it if only looked like that at the time of any negotiation) would be a great help

Was reading the Musa thread when this exact thought struck me. The concept that Musa was a replacement for Vardy because he was rapid made think about all the other things Vardy is as well which Musa (to date) isn't. And more to the point, how much better he has got at them, especially recently. He's moved categorically from any notion of a 'one trick pony' to a pretty scary all-round attacking player (with defensive chops thrown in). The fact he's plainly 'in touch' with the supporters (of either team) is the icing on the cake. He makes the concept of the '12th man' much more tangible. Ironically (I hope) this is the season Arsenal ought to be putting an offer in. Which leads to a question - is there a team in the premier league he wouldn't start for?

You either need to to swap the word 'just' for 'partly', or the phrase 'absolute cretin' for 'fellow cretin'

Aw man, think I've got something in my eye... ...which is useful as it means I can't work out what what that poster in the top right is about

Surely a 'good footballer' is one who has a positive effect on the outcome of a game for his team. The more positive the effect, the better the player. That you won't shift your criteria of what makes a good player is your problem.

It's true, he can't keep the pace he sets for 90 minutes. Is that a) because he's unfit or b) because the pace he sets is mental? It's almost like he knows he's only going to be on for 60-70 minutes and so he knows he can go full-bore. It's almost like it's a plan.

Thank you very much. You should also know that I talked Gray up from 11.75 million.That, my friend, is why I'm here and you're... well, you're not.

I'm certainly lacking details of exactly what was on the table, what other options he had (or made up) etc., without which my admittedly basic negotiation skills would be even more sorely taxed than usual. I'm going to ask you the question I've asked you before. If a 12 million release clause was a sticking point with him and his representatives, without which he would have refused to sign a deal, should we have walked away?

You say clubs would 'want 'more'. Well of course. But it's not the general direction of travel that's in question, it's the degree. Serious question - no sarcasm! Do you think we could have held on to Kante if he hadn't got a release clause? Of for that matter it would have made a difference to us stopping Vardy going to Arsenal if he'd wanted to?

Honestly, I understand how we arrived at that position. I know why these players have their respective current valuations. I have a problem with the contention that some on here (you would have to include yourself in this) knew all along how it would pan out with e.g. Gray, or by the same token that a release clause of four times his transfer fee for Kramaric would have been laughably irrelevant. People use hindsight way to much to castigate Rudkin et al for making decisions which won't have looked half as daft when they were made. And all of this without anyone knowing what actually went on negotiation wise. A question - how many players have we 'lost' because of a release clause i.e. without a release clause we could have realistically kept them here (or realistically got a higher fee for them)?

You can't work out I was being ironic?