Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
HankMarvin

James Tarkowski

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 05/08/2019 at 16:16, wattolcfc said:

Surely there is a player out there that is a better defender than Maguire for £80m. If so, get it done and it will have been a successful summer.

Ake

Posted
10 minutes ago, North Leeds Fox said:

Burnley looking at Scott dann allegedly. Would suggest they are after alternatives 

Scott Dann would be the most-Burnley signing ever lol

 

Posted

If Burnley are looking at Dael Fry, maybe we could outbid them. They seem to base their  team on good strong defence, and signed Tarkowski and Keane, before selling the latter for £30M. Maybe Ginger Mourinho is good at spotting a decent Centre Half and we should take Fry for £10M rather than Tarkowski for £40M/£50M.

Posted

So the reality is, if Burnley can replace Tark, they will sell him to us.

 

It really does beg the question, why didn't we exercise a similar philosophy? It's not like this was out of the blue, we have known for months. 

Posted
37 minutes ago, hamptonfox said:

If Burnley are looking at Dael Fry, maybe we could outbid them. They seem to base their  team on good strong defence, and signed Tarkowski and Keane, before selling the latter for £30M. Maybe Ginger Mourinho is good at spotting a decent Centre Half and we should take Fry for £10M rather than Tarkowski for £40M/£50M.

We don't need another unproven CB in my opinion , we already have two.

 

Posted
36 minutes ago, L3n9a said:

So the reality is, if Burnley can replace Tark, they will sell him to us.

 

It really does beg the question, why didn't we exercise a similar philosophy? It's not like this was out of the blue, we have known for months. 

I guess because if we signed a CB for £40m then Man U didn’t meet our valuation we would have signed a CB with funds that could be better spent elsewhere and left with a £40m CB that wasn’t really required 

Posted
Just now, Stephen Hughes said:

I guess because if we signed a CB for £40m then Man U didn’t meet our valuation we would have signed a CB with funds that could be better spent elsewhere and left with a £40m CB that wasn’t really required 

Or maybe when we signed three CB's last summer we were preparing for this eventuality.

Posted
1 minute ago, Stephen Hughes said:

I guess because if we signed a CB for £40m then Man U didn’t meet our valuation we would have signed a CB with funds that could be better spent elsewhere and left with a £40m CB that wasn’t really required 

Except you can have everything agreed and then green light it once replacement is found. Seems to be what Burnley are trying to do.

Posted
43 minutes ago, L3n9a said:

So the reality is, if Burnley can replace Tark, they will sell him to us.

 

It really does beg the question, why didn't we exercise a similar philosophy? It's not like this was out of the blue, we have known for months. 

If we'd have bought Tarkowski first Man U would have known Maguire was then surplus and not paid £80m.

 

Also the fact that everyone and their dog knew we were looking for close to £90m.

Posted
1 hour ago, hamptonfox said:

If Burnley are looking at Dael Fry, maybe we could outbid them. They seem to base their  team on good strong defence, and signed Tarkowski and Keane, before selling the latter for £30M. Maybe Ginger Mourinho is good at spotting a decent Centre Half and we should take Fry for £10M rather than Tarkowski for £40M/£50M.

Whilst I understand your point we already have 2 young CB’s who we’re not sure are adequate or whether we can have full confidence in and we’d be taking a gamble on we don’t need a 3rd, we need someone to come in and do a job now, someone solid and proven.

 

Whilst bringing through the 2 youngsters we have.

 

Unfortunately bringing in someone to come in and do a job, someone solid is going to cost us, I’ll say again - making the Maguire deal almost pointless as we'll see very little profit all things considered and probably weaker for it all.

Posted
14 minutes ago, Matt said:

Whilst I understand your point we already have 2 young CB’s who we’re not sure are adequate or whether we can have full confidence in and we’d be taking a gamble on we don’t need a 3rd, we need someone to come in and do a job now, someone solid and proven.

 

Whilst bringing through the 2 youngsters we have.

 

Unfortunately bringing in someone to come in and do a job, someone solid is going to cost us, I’ll say again - making the Maguire deal almost pointless as we'll see very little profit all things considered and probably weaker for it all.

If we bring in a solid and proven CB to replace HM how do we bring Soyuncu and Benkovic through, presumably one would go on lone and the other would get a few cup games, in a years time we'd still have 2 untried CB's 2 years into their contracts.

Posted

I can confirm that storm Linekars Apples was referring to will take place.......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

last nights madras is starting to bubble. #blamewellens

Posted
21 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

Frankly, having written my car off yesterday, that's a relief.

Oh dear, sorry to hear that. Weather related? Are you near Whaley?

 

My post wasn't of course. It was more Apple and Pitchfork related... 

Posted

I think if this was happening, we'd know by now. We're going with Evans, Morgan, Soyuncu and Benkovic.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...