Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I’ve never understood why some clubs insist on upping the price because the player has a sell on clause. If the selling club agreed to putting the clause in there, why on earth should the buying club pay for it?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ian Nacho said:

I’ve never understood why some clubs insist on upping the price because the player has a sell on clause. If the selling club agreed to putting the clause in there, why on earth should the buying club pay for it?

The selling club gets to set whatever price they want to, but I agree - they shouldn't expect anyone to pay for them agreeing to something they wish they hadn't.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, dannythefox said:

We’ll get this done then there’s a decent chance we’ll start seeing 3 at the back more 👌🏻

Just curious - is that something you want to see? I'm more interested in seeing Barnes, Vardy and Under terrorising defences as a front 3.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

His name is literally Islam, I'm not sure they Burnley White Lives Matter crew could cope 

That’s what I mean. I stopped short of calling Dyche a huge racist because there is no evidence for that of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Raw Dykes said:

Just curious - is that something you want to see? I'm more interested in seeing Barnes, Vardy and Under terrorising defences as a front 3.

Will Under be playing today? Seems unlikely no?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If we were to sign him then there would be massive pressure on Rodgers to start him every game due to the large fee. Who do you drop out of Evans and Soyuncu? And I can't see us going to a back 3 on a regular basis with the signing of Under. Put all our efforts into Tah I say.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Costock_Fox said:

I don’t know, is he a little bit err foreign for Dyche?

Almost certainly yeah. They're like Bilbao but instead of only signing Basque players they exclusively target 6ft+ white Brits

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Will Under be playing today? Seems unlikely no?

It’s not unlikely - he isn’t 

he only arrived in the U.K. yesterday and his clearance wouldn’t have come through before noon on Friday 

 

48 minutes ago, Raw Dykes said:

The selling club gets to set whatever price they want to, but I agree - they shouldn't expect anyone to pay for them agreeing to something they wish they hadn't.

We didn’t get what we wanted for chilwell ....... ‘events dear boy, events’ .......

Edited by st albans fox
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Walshy5 said:

If we were to sign him then there would be massive pressure on Rodgers to start him every game due to the large fee. Who do you drop out of Evans and Soyuncu? And I can't see us going to a back 3 on a regular basis with the signing of Under. Put all our efforts into Tah I say.

 

 

You don’t drop either. you play 3 at the back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

You don’t drop either. you play 3 at the back.

So how you going up top the? Barnes and Under as inverted wingers meaning you'll have to drop Maddison/Tielemans or Ndidi (when fit) or are you going with two strikers in which case Under is on the bench and Barnes is either with him or playing up top? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Foxy_Bear said:

So how you going up top the? Barnes and Under as inverted wingers meaning you'll have to drop Maddison/Tielemans or Ndidi (when fit) or are you going with two strikers in which case Under is on the bench and Barnes is either with him or playing up top? 

 

 

i basically just meant  we’ll be playing a few different formations to fit the needs of more games we will be playing.

 

plus, we might start 3 at the back and switch half way through. Or the other way round..

Edited by MPH
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ian Nacho said:

I’ve never understood why some clubs insist on upping the price because the player has a sell on clause. If the selling club agreed to putting the clause in there, why on earth should the buying club pay for it?

Basic business. Always pass as much cost on to someone else in the chain to protect your own margin.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We're desperate for cover as it is with just 2 centre-halves in the team. If we switch to 3 at the back, we'll want another 2 in the squad, and at least one of Barnes and Under will be left on the bench.

 

Although it looks like we're spending big on a CB, I don't think it means we're going to 3 atb. It just means we'll be able to rotate, which is something we will need to do this season.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...