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
 Share
HankMarvin

James Tarkowski

By HankMarvin, in Transfer Talk

Recommended Posts

ARM1968

ARM1968

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, urban fox said:

after Sunday's performance i can see Burnley asking for Amartey as part of a swap deal. Big Dan plus £30m? Might be workable, and tempting but we saw how good he can be for us so not sure i would let him go. He would certainly be a sensible target for Dyche though due to his versatility.

Despite the haters I don’t see a massive difference between Tarkwoski and Amartey. Dan is a player who we have played mostly out of position. He would do a solid job at CB and we already have him. Why spend £30+ million on an older and possibly slightly better CB?  Don’t get it. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
urban fox

urban fox

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

Despite the haters I don’t see a massive difference between Tarkwoski and Amartey. Dan is a player who we have played mostly out of position. He would do a solid job at CB and we already have him. Why spend £30+ million on an older and possibly slightly better CB?  Don’t get it. 

Quite. i was speculating that Burnley might suggest such a deal but not sure i would go for it. I like Amartey and he has shown that he is probably worth a considerable amount more to us than his current market value might suggest.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hackneyfox

hackneyfox

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

Despite the haters I don’t see a massive difference between Tarkwoski and Amartey. Dan is a player who we have played mostly out of position. He would do a solid job at CB and we already have him. Why spend £30+ million on an older and possibly slightly better CB?  Don’t get it. 

 

5 minutes ago, urban fox said:

Quite. i was speculating that Burnley might suggest such a deal but not sure i would go for it. I like Amartey and he has shown that he is probably worth a considerable amount more to us than his current market value might suggest.

 

Jeez guys he's played one game in 2 years and you think he's better than Tarkowski. What happens if he's poor against WHU?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
foxpleasure

foxpleasure

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, hackneyfox said:

 

 

Jeez guys he's played one game in 2 years and you think he's better than Tarkowski. What happens if he's poor against WHU?

One bad game in two years wouldn't be that bad to be fair.

Edited by foxpleasure
  • Like 1
  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
turtmcfly

turtmcfly

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

Despite the haters I don’t see a massive difference between Tarkwoski and Amartey. Dan is a player who we have played mostly out of position. He would do a solid job at CB and we already have him. Why spend £30+ million on an older and possibly slightly better CB?  Don’t get it. 

 

Maybe against Man City/Liverpool, where it's to a large degree limited to their defensive capabilities, but in games where we have more possession (which I hope will be most of them) I'd back Tarkowski to be much better at building from the back. 

 

Like a lot of us, I have a soft spot for Dan, but I'm not yet as ready as you appear to be to deal with hearing 'Schmeichel plays it out short to Amartey' on a regular basis.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ARM1968

ARM1968

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, turtmcfly said:

 

Maybe against Man City/Liverpool, where it's to a large degree limited to their defensive capabilities, but in games where we have more possession (which I hope will be most of them) I'd back Tarkowski to be much better at building from the back. 

 

Like a lot of us, I have a soft spot for Dan, but I'm not yet as ready as you appear to be to deal with hearing 'Schmeichel plays it out short to Amartey' on a regular basis.

Not sure in those games we would go 3/5 at the back. More likely 442. Let’s be honest, Tarkowski is NOT £30 million better than Dan. He just isn’t. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Fozdog said:

I just don’t get it with our fans. “We’re not signing anyone, the owners are cheap!”

They open the Amex and now you’re all complaining.
You need to spend money to compete in more than one league.

I’m from Oz and even I understand this. 

Tanner saying Fofana is close and we are unlikely to be doing both.  Smokescreen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dannythefox

dannythefox

Posted
Posted

Knowing what I no about both I’d prefer Tarks because he’s ready to go and he knows the league, but fofona could end up makings up a load off money if he turns out decent big gamble on a lad at 19. We’ve seen decent players come from over the water and have been out there depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
turtmcfly

turtmcfly

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

Not sure in those games we would go 3/5 at the back. More likely 442. Let’s be honest, Tarkowski is NOT £30 million better than Dan. He just isn’t. 

 

If you can guarantee Evans and Soyuncu are going to be available for every game, you should have said so! 

 

If I think about our options playing either 2 or 3 CBs without one of them, I have way less confidence than you in Amartey. TBH I can't really see how 3 CBs would be an option in any games where we might want to use it

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Ric Flair said:

There will be a lot of spilt bovril at turf moor if Tarkowski is left thumbing a floppy up his own harris when we sign Fofana. 

We can look forward to Dychey baby slagging us of for leading the lad a merry dance no doubt.  His dream move snatched away at the death!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gerard

Gerard

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, RowlattsFox said:

You cant keep buying young prospects though, one of our biggest problem last year was the lack of experience and leaders, Tarkowski adds to that. It's more than I'd like to pay but for me its a good signing, if it happens. Even at the price he is still 3rd choice in a back 4 but I think he'd back himself to get in the side any stay there. Evans won't be able to play as many games this season, without a doubt. Don't see Tarkowski as a back 3 sort of signing, that's more Fofana for me. Doubt we'd sign both but didn't think we'd sign Soyuncu and Benkovic but we did. It would be a shame, but probably correct, if we don't see Wes Morgan play again. 

Plenty of leaders and experience in our team.

 

Kaspar, Evans and Vardy. We're also full of players like Tielemans, Soyuncu, Castagne, etc who are young but leaders. It's not like the whole team is full of wonderkids.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mozartfox

mozartfox

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, ARM1968 said:

Not sure in those games we would go 3/5 at the back. More likely 442. Let’s be honest, Tarkowski is NOT £30 million better than Dan. He just isn’t. 

:appl:Spot on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
moore_94

moore_94

Posted
Posted

Lock it up mods

 

James Tarkowski is set to stay at Burnley past next week’s transfer deadline day, Lancs Live can reveal.

 

The defender was wanted by West Ham and Leicester City and is open to leaving Turf Moor to further his international ambitions.

 

But the Clarets have priced him out of a move away having rejected two bids from the Hammers and one from the Foxes.

 

Neither club is prepared to meet Burnley’s valuation, understood to be at least £40m, and as a result the player is now set to remain at Turf Moor.

 

Tarkowski has returned to training after overcoming a toe problem and could feature in the Carabao Cup tie against Man City or the Premier League trip to Newcastle United on Saturday.

 

The transfer window closes on Monday and it is highly unlikely any club will make any late offers for the 27-year-old who has two years to run on his contract.

 

The Clarets turned down a £30m plus add-ons bid from Leicester over the weekend having already rebuffed two offers from the Hammers.
 

West Ham made their move earlier in the window with an opening bid of £23million, or £20m rising to £25m with add-ons, before returning with a second offer of a straight £24.5m, or £20m rising to £30m with add-ons.
 

Both clubs were keen on Tarkowski with David Moyes having made the former Brentford man his priority this summer. But he and Brendan Rodgers are now set to turn their attention to other targets in the final days of the window.

 

Tarkowski staying, and the emergence of Jimmy Dunne, also means Burnley are unlikely to invest in a new defender this summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
turtmcfly

turtmcfly

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, desertfox2 said:

No but he potentially might be and maybe even quite a bit more one day. Tarkowski is at the maximum value he ever will be. 

 

Looking like it's a moot point now anyway, but I note that 'potential' can work both ways. 

 

There are clearly pros and cons to both players, but the '30 million better than Dan' framing I was referring to is irrelevant unless you don't want to buy either. It doesn't help the choice in any way I can see

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FoxesWalk

FoxesWalk

Posted
Posted

We will go for him next summer surely? He only has 1yr9mo left on his deal right now, he will leave for free at end of next season. Looks like we are getting Fofana if we have pulled out of this though. 
 

Can live with Soyuncu, Evans, Fofana, Amartey and Fuchs/Morgan in a crisis 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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