st albans fox Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 11 minutes ago, ian_marshall said: Any of our ITKs or journo's able to confirm this? At the moment only JP has mentioned the deal but then that is countered by the fact that Sky are reporting it who aren't usually that reliable these days. it was jim white, not SSN.
FoxyJim1987 Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 Irrespective of the fee, every prem club has money to burn now every year anyway. We could sell him for a fiver it makes no difference. The guy wants out and is wanted by the best team with the best coach so let him go, we don't want another saga like January, plenty of quality wingers out there get one or two in like Shaqiri Inui Hazard etc will all cost way under what we would get for mahrez.
sphericalfox Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 1 minute ago, Fox 4 Life said: Poor Leicester, they only have £60m to spend on our player, let's give him them for £30m.... said no team ever What you on about? If we have actually sold him for £75m, then a prospective selling club will hold out for more. If it's a suggested £60m, it works for both us and Man City to a degree. I never suggested that because of this we're now entitled to 50% savings on expenditure did I? 1
4everfox Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 1 minute ago, Sol thewall Bamba said: That's not how it works though. Little old Leicester the pushovers. They'll sell their best players for cheap when you've got nothing clubs like Southampton selling defenders for 75 million! This is my problem.
Fox 4 Life Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 Just now, sphericalfox said: What you on about? If we have actually sold him for £75m, then a prospective selling club will hold out for more. If it's a suggested £60m, it works for both us and Man City to a degree. I never suggested that because of this we're now entitled to 50% savings on expenditure did I? It really doesn't, us getting an extra £15m doesn't automatically add that the price of the player we are buying. Any foreign club sees £££ the minute a premier league club is involved anyway, especially ex champions. You are kidding yourself if you think getting less money than he is worth is helping us.
AKCJ Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 3 minutes ago, murphy said: But there are ways of doing things. Mahrez has burnt his bridges with a lot of fans with his behaviour it would seem and I agree, it is a shame that it has come to that. At the start of the summer I would have wished him well but now I just want him gone. I would also say this, how do you think he would take it if the club dug it's heels in and said to Man City, 'no, you can't have a £100m player for 60? ' He would be 11/10 on the tantrum-o-meter. We have to sell him, a contracted player, because he wouldn't play for us again. I would I be wrong to assume that you would you be happy if we signed a player that burned his bridges with his club? It's the way it is. Mahrez is a 100m player. I can't fathom a reason to not want a player of his quality wearing the City shirt.
goose2010 Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 6 minutes ago, 4everfox said: Thinking positively, I'd guess that the players will think kicking off and handing in transfer requests left, right and centre will get you no where but the youth team. Looking in from the outside it makes the club look a little bigger so would probably have a positive effect on future signings. No player signs for a club thinking about how they are going to leave, they just don't. Edit: And look what those clubs sold those players for. That is what my argument is based on! you're saying players don't use clubs as a stepping stone? come on mate surely you don't really believe that?! just be happy that you have had the opportunity to see one of the greatest ever LCFC players play in your life time. 1
Sol thewall Bamba Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 1 minute ago, 4everfox said: Little old Leicester the pushovers. They'll sell their best players for cheap when you've got nothing clubs like Southampton selling defenders for 75 million! This is my problem. What would you suggest?
FoxyJim1987 Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 2 minutes ago, sphericalfox said: What you on about? If we have actually sold him for £75m, then a prospective selling club will hold out for more. If it's a suggested £60m, it works for both us and Man City to a degree. I never suggested that because of this we're now entitled to 50% savings on expenditure did I? That makes no sense at all. Say we want Thorgan Hazard, we offer 30m, Borrusia aren't going to say yeah OK because we know you got ripped off for Mahrez you can have him cheaper. Every club knows every prem club has money to burn, whatever the fee is we get for Riyad, we will be squeezed to the max for anyone we try to sign, especially from abroad.
That_Dude Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, 4everfox said: Nothing to do with the fact that I'm not a multi millionaire then no? It takes some talent to become one. A cool head too. You're completely overreacting and screaming for daylight robbery whilst there is no official confirmation about the exact fee nor the amount of add-ons. Furthermore, with no other bidding club and a player dead set to move, there wasn't really that much of room for negociations. Your "let him rot in the reserve to set an example" is a laughable as unpracticable from a PR, team management and last but not least financial point of view. You don't even need to be a multi millionaire, let alone a football club owner to understand that. Just a bit of common sense. Edited 3 July 2018 by That_Dude 1
murphy Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, AKCJ said: I would I be wrong to assume that you would you be happy if we signed a player that burned his bridges with his club? It's the way it is. Actually I would have misgivings about signing such a player but I would expect the fans of his selling club to be mightily pissed off as some of us are. 4 minutes ago, AKCJ said: Mahrez is a 100m player. I can't fathom a reason to not want a player of his quality wearing the City shirt. I would, but the problem is he doesn't. Edited 3 July 2018 by murphy
AlloverthefloorYesNdidi Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 Relieved this is finally happening Very interested to see how he gets on 1
norwichfox Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 1 minute ago, Izzy Muzzett said: What a fvckin huge profit we've made on him though Conceivably around the same which Man City will make on him next year when they sell him
sphericalfox Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 1 minute ago, Izzy Muzzett said: What a fvckin huge profit we've made on him though Nah mate we've been skanked. Need another £40m on that fee...
4everfox Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 1 minute ago, Sol thewall Bamba said: What would you suggest? I would suggest selling our players solely for the benefit of the club. What the player wants shouldn't even be considered. No negotiating, set the price and stick to it. The way I see it, if the player didn't want to be here they wouldn't have signed their substantial contract. The club must always come first.
AKCJ Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 2 minutes ago, 4everfox said: Little old Leicester the pushovers. They'll sell their best players for cheap when you've got nothing clubs like Southampton selling defenders for 75 million! This is my problem. Or when you've got clubs like Southampton selling players like Sadio Mane for 34m.
4everfox Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 Just now, AKCJ said: Or when you've got clubs like Southampton selling players like Sadio Mane for 34m. Kante 32m
Guest ttfn Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 1 minute ago, AKCJ said: Or when you've got clubs like Southampton selling players like Sadio Mane for 34m. Wasn’t that 2 years ago? Not exactly comparable is it.
Sol thewall Bamba Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 1 minute ago, 4everfox said: I would suggest selling our players solely for the benefit of the club. What the player wants shouldn't even be considered. No negotiating, set the price and stick to it. The way I see it, if the player didn't want to be here they wouldn't have signed their substantial contract. The club must always come first. Ah so you'd keep him here until his contract ended and then let him walk out the door for free.
AKCJ Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 1 minute ago, ttfn said: Wasn’t that 2 years ago? Not exactly comparable is it. You wouldn't have taken 34m for Mahrez two years ago.
Ted Maul Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 The Mahrez debate has been done to death, but surely we've got more ambition as fans than to see our club as a stepping stone to rich clubs when we've got so much money ourselves? I want us to be more than that, and I think that's what the owners have got planned. 1
TonyN11 Posted 3 July 2018 Posted 3 July 2018 8 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said: Relieved this is finally happening Very interested to see how he gets on I'm also relieved this is happening, very interested to see how we get on! 3
Recommended Posts