Vestergaard

[iancognito]

On 04/04/2025 at 21:31, Sol thewall Bamba said:

 

That would have been SEVEN years ago, MARK HUGHES turning his nose up at him.

 

We offer him a new deal in 2024.

 

I'm still not sure even on here the level of incompetence is really recognised.

Get Mark Hughes in the summer. Might have a chance of getting rid of the useless lump.

[inckley fox]

3 hours ago, jv1 said:

Shoot me down if you wish however

 

He was decent in the championship he isn’t going anywhere 

 

same goes for mavididi and winks 

 

not good enough for prem but plenty good enough for the championship 

You're right, more or less. I thought Winks was targeted by sides in the FLC post-Xmas and struggled with the attention. Mavididi did well, but we saw enough in the way of limitations, and dips in form, to be wary about his prospects at a higher level.

 

Ultimately, it depends whether you want success in the second tier built around a large number of players that you know to be too poor to make the step up. The Enzo project capitalised on the strengths of players like Faes and Vestergard, that we already knew to be unfit for top tier football but suspected were, in the right system, a class above the second tier. And we were right in that assumption.

 

But without ample funds to rebuild the squad upon promotion - and with the dressing room largely unwilling to compromise on Enzo's footballing ideals - we were doomed before kicking a ball. If, from here on in, we predominantly build around those two and Winks / Coady / Justin / Kristiansen / Mavididi / Ayew / Reid / Daka or even Vardy / Ndidi, then promotion would most likely be pointless to everyone outside the accounts department. We'd be giving ourselves too much to do thereafter.

 

It'd be nice to see us show some desire to be a top flight club again. That means as a general rule looking for people who haven't been tested (at least not thoroughly) at the top, but you believe to be capable of stepping up, rather than exploiting the strengths of those who nobody else wanted at the highest level because they're either no longer good enough or never were. Naturally, that can't be uniform. You're bound to need a few short-term fixes (as we did in 2015 with GTF, Philips etc.), but if the backbone of your team needs dismantling it's never going to be easy.

 

Sadly, I think we'd be seeing major changes in the recruitment department now, with an eye on a different approach for the forthcoming summer, if we'd woken up to this.

[jv1]

1 hour ago, inckley fox said:

You're right, more or less. I thought Winks was targeted by sides in the FLC post-Xmas and struggled with the attention. Mavididi did well, but we saw enough in the way of limitations, and dips in form, to be wary about his prospects at a higher level.

 

Ultimately, it depends whether you want success in the second tier built around a large number of players that you know to be too poor to make the step up. The Enzo project capitalised on the strengths of players like Faes and Vestergard, that we already knew to be unfit for top tier football but suspected were, in the right system, a class above the second tier. And we were right in that assumption.

 

But without ample funds to rebuild the squad upon promotion - and with the dressing room largely unwilling to compromise on Enzo's footballing ideals - we were doomed before kicking a ball. If, from here on in, we predominantly build around those two and Winks / Coady / Justin / Kristiansen / Mavididi / Ayew / Reid / Daka or even Vardy / Ndidi, then promotion would most likely be pointless to everyone outside the accounts department. We'd be giving ourselves too much to do thereafter.

 

It'd be nice to see us show some desire to be a top flight club again. That means as a general rule looking for people who haven't been tested (at least not thoroughly) at the top, but you believe to be capable of stepping up, rather than exploiting the strengths of those who nobody else wanted at the highest level because they're either no longer good enough or never were. Naturally, that can't be uniform. You're bound to need a few short-term fixes (as we did in 2015 with GTF, Philips etc.), but if the backbone of your team needs dismantling it's never going to be easy.

 

Sadly, I think we'd be seeing major changes in the recruitment department now, with an eye on a different approach for the forthcoming summer, if we'd woken up to this.

Yep agree with that - biggest concern has to be getting some of the ones you want to move on actually out of the club - contracts and stupid money means it will be hard to move a good few on 

[davieG]

Pure speculation but then isn't it all that way.

 

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/centre-back-contract-could-cancelled-10168430

 

Centre-back contract 'could be cancelled' in Leicester City cost-cutting mission
Centre-back Jannik Vestergaard has not even made the bench for Leicester City since February after finding himself out of the picture under manager Ruud van Nistelrooy

ByJordan Blackwell
10:52, 9 MAY 2025

Jannik Vestergaard and Leicester City could negotiate an early end to the centre-back’s contract this summer as they look to cut costs, reports from Denmark have said.

Vestergaard has two years remaining on his City deal after signing a fresh contract last summer.

But with City needing to adjust to a much-decreased budget as they return to the Championship, Danish outlet Bold report that his contract could be cancelled.

 

They speculate that the process would see City hand Vestergaard a year’s salary to get him out of the door now, writing off the second year.

That feels like a last resort for the club, who would rather make back money by selling the centre-back should he be surplus to requirements.

It certainly feels like he will be out of the picture should Ruud van Nistelrooy remain in charge, with the 32-year-old having not even made the bench since February.

A regular starter under van Nistelrooy during the first few months of his tenure, the Dutch manager has not explained Vestergaard’s sudden absence.

But there are no guarantees over van Nistelrooy’s future, and so there would still be scope for Vestergaard to turn around his career at the King Power Stadium, just as he did the last time they dropped into the Championship.

Out of the frame under Brendan Rodgers, Vestergaard played an integral role in the club’s promotion last term under Enzo Maresca.

It was that form that earned him the new three-year deal, which was only announced after the Italian manager had moved to Chelsea.

In recent weeks, Wout Faes and Conor Coady have been City’s first-choice centre-back pairing, with Caleb Okoli on the bench.

When Faes was injured at Brighton last month, Okoli started and van Nistelrooy chose not to have Vestergaard on the bench, saying James Justin and Luke Thomas offered cover at centre-back if needed.

The futures of all four of City’s centre-backs is in doubt, but especially those of Vestegaard and Faes, the Belgian a strong contender to be sold.

City have Ben Nelson coming back to the club from his loan and he’s expected to feature next term, while they also have Harry Souttar, although he may be out until the end of the year with an Achilles injury.

[Stadt]

2 minutes ago, davieG said:

Pure speculation but then isn't it all that way.

 

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/centre-back-contract-could-cancelled-10168430

 

Centre-back contract 'could be cancelled' in Leicester City cost-cutting mission
Centre-back Jannik Vestergaard has not even made the bench for Leicester City since February after finding himself out of the picture under manager Ruud van Nistelrooy

ByJordan Blackwell
10:52, 9 MAY 2025

Jannik Vestergaard and Leicester City could negotiate an early end to the centre-back’s contract this summer as they look to cut costs, reports from Denmark have said.

Vestergaard has two years remaining on his City deal after signing a fresh contract last summer.

But with City needing to adjust to a much-decreased budget as they return to the Championship, Danish outlet Bold report that his contract could be cancelled.

 

They speculate that the process would see City hand Vestergaard a year’s salary to get him out of the door now, writing off the second year.

That feels like a last resort for the club, who would rather make back money by selling the centre-back should he be surplus to requirements.

It certainly feels like he will be out of the picture should Ruud van Nistelrooy remain in charge, with the 32-year-old having not even made the bench since February.

A regular starter under van Nistelrooy during the first few months of his tenure, the Dutch manager has not explained Vestergaard’s sudden absence.

But there are no guarantees over van Nistelrooy’s future, and so there would still be scope for Vestergaard to turn around his career at the King Power Stadium, just as he did the last time they dropped into the Championship.

Out of the frame under Brendan Rodgers, Vestergaard played an integral role in the club’s promotion last term under Enzo Maresca.

It was that form that earned him the new three-year deal, which was only announced after the Italian manager had moved to Chelsea.

In recent weeks, Wout Faes and Conor Coady have been City’s first-choice centre-back pairing, with Caleb Okoli on the bench.

When Faes was injured at Brighton last month, Okoli started and van Nistelrooy chose not to have Vestergaard on the bench, saying James Justin and Luke Thomas offered cover at centre-back if needed.

The futures of all four of City’s centre-backs is in doubt, but especially those of Vestegaard and Faes, the Belgian a strong contender to be sold.

City have Ben Nelson coming back to the club from his loan and he’s expected to feature next term, while they also have Harry Souttar, although he may be out until the end of the year with an Achilles injury.

If we try and sell him any purchasing team would want us to pay a % of his wages anyway. Better off cutting out losses on him quickly rather than waiting for a market that inevitably isn't there.

[ealingfox]

Absolutely crazy decision to give him a new deal and even crazier how many of our fans celebrated it.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

I'm actually quite happy with all the rumours that have come out so far about outgoings. 

 

Faes, Somuare, Ndidi, VK, Daka and now Vestegaard. 

 

Just need The Overlap to sign Coady up on a 3 year deal and we're laughing. 

[honeybradger]

3 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

I'm actually quite happy with all the rumours that have come out so far about outgoings. 

 

Faes, Somuare, Ndidi, VK, Daka and now Vestegaard. 

 

Just need The Overlap to sign Coady up on a 3 year deal and we're laughing. 

Don't get too excited, they're just rumours after all.

[ClaphamFox]

5 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

Absolutely crazy decision to give him a new deal and even crazier how many of our fans celebrated it.

Did they?

[SouthStandUpperTier]

And here I was looking forward to watching him standing on the ball for seconds on end next season, trying to draw the likes of Stoke, Derby and Preston out of their low block.

[filbertway]

Would be class if cancelled by mutal consent. Hire Russel Martin and his first order of business is to demand we resign Vesty on a 2 year deal

 

Edited 9 May 2025 by filbertway

[South Shire Fox]

Why would we pay off his contract? Hes still a Denmark international and a half decent player (minus the pace). Someone abroad will have him

Edited 9 May 2025 by South Shire Fox

[Claudio Fannieri]

17 minutes ago, South Shire Fox said:

Why would we pay off his contract? Hes still a Denmark international and a half decent player (minus the pace). Someone abroad will have him

Because it’s highly unlikely the new club would pay a decent enough fee and cover all his wages plus we would be liable for any contractual bonuses etc makes sense to let him go for free if we can rip up his contract, remove the liability and free up significant budget. 

[slymunn]

18 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

Because it’s highly unlikely the new club would pay a decent enough fee and cover all his wages plus we would be liable for any contractual bonuses etc makes sense to let him go for free if we can rip up his contract, remove the liability and free up significant budget. 

He has no book value, so any fee would go down as profit. Add to that any % of wages and its a fair bit saved.

[Claudio Fannieri]

31 minutes ago, slymunn said:

He has no book value, so any fee would go down as profit. Add to that any % of wages and its a fair bit saved.

Not if we have to contribute to his wages and pay any other contractual obligation payments, any shortfall would be liable to us and would then have to be included in our PSR calculation. Him leaving for free clears his wage with no negative PSR consequences. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

1 hour ago, ClaphamFox said:

Did they?

Babylon did!

[slymunn]

Just now, Claudio Fannieri said:

Not if we have to contribute to his wages and pay any other contractual obligation payments, any shortfall would be liable to us and would then have to be included in our PSR calculation. Him leaving for free clears his wage with no negative PSR consequences. 

That's the same as 'releasing him' and paying out his wages or any agreement in that.

[Claudio Fannieri]

3 minutes ago, slymunn said:

That's the same as 'releasing him' and paying out his wages or any agreement in that.

They are looking to cancel his deal, he will walk away and rip up his contract meaning he will be able to negotiate a healthy signing on fee which mitigates any reduced wages he may have to accept. 

[slymunn]

3 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

They are looking to cancel his deal, he will walk away and rip up his contract meaning he will be able to negotiate a healthy signing on fee which mitigates any reduced wages he may have to accept. 

'They speculate that the process would see City hand Vestergaard a year’s salary to get him out of the door now, writing off the second year.'

 

So PSR would be a full years wage, which isn't walking away for free.

[The boy Linacre]

1 hour ago, South Shire Fox said:

Why would we pay off his contract? Hes still a Denmark international and a half decent player (minus the pace). Someone abroad will have him

Is he actually really a half decent player???

 

Can't remember when he got his new contract BUT I was lookin down from the top deck at Stamford Bridge when Nicolas Jackson scored Chelsea's 1st in the cup, Vesty was still turning as the ball hit the back of the net & told my lad, thats what the Prem is like Jannik.

But no, we decided to give him a forever contract because he looked a good player at a LOWER Level after.......

repeatedly failing in the top flight (incl 9-0) along with the curly haired Statler to his Waldorf.

 

Edited 9 May 2025 by The boy Linacre

[Vlad the Fox]

Can’t wait to read we’ve turned down a £10m deal from Shef u because rudkin wants £11m. 

[Vlad the Fox]

I think there’s a possibility of forcing him, and faes, to move. With an international tournament next summer the club could tell them they’re playing no part next season so find another club, if they want to be part of the World Cup squad it will be in their interest to get gone. 

[Mike the Metal Ed]

4 minutes ago, The boy Linacre said:

Is he actually really a half decent player???

 

Can't remember when he got his new contract BUT I was lookin down from the top deck at Stamford Bridge when Nicolas Jackson scored Chelsea's 1st in the cup, Vesty was still turning as the ball hit the back of the net & told my lad, thats what the Prem is like Jannik.

But no, we decided to give him a forever contract because he looked a good player at a LOWER Level after.......

repeatedly failing in the top flight (incl 9-0) along with the curly haired Statler to his Waldorf.

 

"Hmm... That Vestergaard sure is composed on the ball."

 

"Yeah, too bad he's passing it back to the centre mark after Jacob Murphy left him for dead and scored!"

 

DO HO HO HO.

[OntarioFox]

2 hours ago, ClaphamFox said:

Did they?

I'll stick my neck above the parapet and say it made sense at the time to extend, given how integral he was to Enzo's system. He's the only ball-playing centre half we have.

The length of the extension was insane in the circumstances though. And we proceeded to royally shit the bed when Enzo left, leaving us with a lump of a centre half incapable of playing in any system that didn't slow the game down to a crawl to accomodate him.

 

I don't necessarily blame the board for extending the contract as presumably Enzo wanted him. A three year extension was absolutely laughable though, and has proven to be the latest case of shit-for-brains thinking as far as sustainability goes. He'd never been in favour until Enzo's arrival, and it was extremely likely he may have ended up back in the shadows after he left. Which is what happened.

Rudkin's face when:

Edited 9 May 2025 by OntarioFox

[Finn Claw II]

This is a great way for us to negotiate down any fee we might receive.  
 

£5m or I’ll buy out his contract and you can have him for free.

 

we have at least 2 possibly 3 CBs to move on Faes, Coady and one of Vesty or Souttar.