Wilfred Ndidi (signed for Besiktas 9m)

[Bob Weasel Fox]

31 minutes ago, Bordersfox said:

Yes but who was better Ian Marshall or Ndidi? 

Nostalgia plays a part, Lennon was better 😂

[Bordersfox]

1 minute ago, Bob Weasel Fox said:

Nostalgia plays a part, Lennon was better 😂

Lennon , ah great fella I remember back in that heady summer of 1997 I was little more than a bairn in Simpkins trying to pull a 74 year old GILF.  

 

Now Lennon took a fancy to her and right there on the dance floor he headbutted me and gave me a swift one to the knackers.  Top bantz! As I was lying on the sticky floor I saw Neil heading to the exit with his new beau on his arm.  Can't fault the lad.  

 

Would your Ndidis or your Winkss or your Skipps being doing that?  Of course not*.  No comparison for me, none at all.  Lennon all day long.

 

*actually Skipp might, seems the sort who likes a GILF. 

[FrankieADZ]

[Sol thewall Bamba]

Oh great exactly what we didn't need. 

[VLC86]

You’d imagine this would be pretty simple. Match the fee agreed or get pretty close or it’s not happening.

 

I know we need the cash but if they offer a

couple of million less and he’s not willing to go to Turkey instead we will have to accept it. Although, sounds like he’s agreed to go to Turkey.

[FrankieADZ]

betis wont pay pay what Besiktas will

[AKCJ]

13 hours ago, Bert said:

It’s a tough one between Muzzy and Tielemans. I think a lot of people are a bit blinded by Tielemans cup winner. Don’t get me wrong he was absolutely class for us, bar the relegation season. I think in today’s game Muzzy would be suited to the 10 whereas Tielemans is an 8. The better comparison of players for me, would be Muzzy and Maddison. 
 

 

I'd also say the better comparison is Savage/Ndidi, Lennon/Tielemans and Muzzy/Maddison.

[Bert]

45 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

I'd also say the better comparison is Savage/Ndidi, Lennon/Tielemans and Muzzy/Maddison.

Yep. That’s spot on for me. 

[TheStig]

Question: If there is a release clause and several clubs are interested - will there ever be a bidding war between the interested parties or is it just up to the player to decide where he wants to go?

[onekeithweller]

1 minute ago, TheStig said:

Question: If there is a release clause and several clubs are interested - will there ever be a bidding war between the interested parties or is it just up to the player to decide where he wants to go?

I’m pretty sure Chelsea paid above the release fee to secure the Kante transfer.

[TheStig]

Just now, onekeithweller said:

I’m pretty sure Chelsea paid above the release fee to secure the Kante transfer.

Ok thanks so it is actually possible to improve the deal (from our point of view) if there are several bidders...

[LCFC_JAY]

8 minutes ago, onekeithweller said:

I’m pretty sure Chelsea paid above the release fee to secure the Kante transfer.

Did they? Surely once a club is willing to pay the release clause, the decision is up to the player and it shouldn't matter whether a club bids over it or not?

[UniFox21]

23 minutes ago, LCFC_JAY said:

Did they? Surely once a club is willing to pay the release clause, the decision is up to the player and it shouldn't matter whether a club bids over it or not?

They weren't a CL club, so the clause didn't apply to them. 

[Scotch]

35 minutes ago, onekeithweller said:

I’m pretty sure Chelsea paid above the release fee to secure the Kante transfer.

I'm not sure how true that is....

 

We can't reject a bid that meets the agreed upon clause because someone else offers more. In that scenario it would just be down to Chelsea to offer the player a better financial package than anyone else. 

[Scotch]

3 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

They weren't a CL club, so the clause didn't apply to them. 

That makes more sense. 

[sdb]

2 hours ago, Bordersfox said:

Lennon , ah great fella I remember back in that heady summer of 1997 I was little more than a bairn in Simpkins trying to pull a 74 year old GILF.  

 

Now Lennon took a fancy to her and right there on the dance floor he headbutted me and gave me a swift one to the knackers.  Top bantz! As I was lying on the sticky floor I saw Neil heading to the exit with his new beau on his arm.  Can't fault the lad.  

 

Would your Ndidis or your Winkss or your Skipps being doing that?  Of course not*.  No comparison for me, none at all.  Lennon all day long.

 

*actually Skipp might, seems the sort who likes a GILF. 

Skipp would 100% be sat in the corner sulking that someone else likes the girl he fancies 

[urban fox]

Another club could offer twice the transfer fee, but there is no guarantee the player will go there. We have seen this before. Player x states publicly they are only interested in going to club y. Club y then lowball their offer to the selling club ( whilst at the same time giving the player a lucrative signing on fee). The player gets more, but the selling club end up with less, despite having several better offers. The power is always with the player in these situations, and they are always going to go where they will get the best personal terms. It is wide open to dodgy deals but that is the world we live in these days. Not saying that Wilf would get involved in anything shady, but he is perfectly entitled to wait and weigh up which options would be better for career and family.

[Super Shinji]

31 minutes ago, LCFC_JAY said:

Did they? Surely once a club is willing to pay the release clause, the decision is up to the player and it shouldn't matter whether a club bids over it or not?

Surely a release clause just means that if a club bids that amount, we have to accept it and allow the player to discuss terms? Therefore one club could offer the release clause, then another bidding war could start and it would be up to us who we agree to sell to? (Providing they have both bid at least the required amount).

[SouthStandUpperTier]

14 minutes ago, LCFC_JAY said:

Did they? Surely once a club is willing to pay the release clause, the decision is up to the player and it shouldn't matter whether a club bids over it or not?

The £20m release clause was for Champions League qualified clubs only, but that clause didn't prohibit us from selling to a non-Champions League club like Chelsea. Chelsea got him for £32m, but that wasn't the best bid...

 

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/story/_/id/37479596/chelsea-make-move-sign-france-midfielder-ngolo-kante-leicester-reports

 

The Daily Telegraph reports that the nature of the £20m release clause in Kante's contract still allows Leicester to sell to the highest bidder.

 

Shanghai SIPG have submitted an offer of £35m but the player is not keen on a move to China, according to the Daily Mail.

 

[FrankieADZ]

[LestaLad]

Just now, FrankieADZ said:

£9m is decent!

[TheGoldenGod]

Ruddernomics

[Noahfence]

John boy is on fire! 

[Finnegan]

1 hour ago, TheStig said:

Question: If there is a release clause and several clubs are interested - will there ever be a bidding war between the interested parties or is it just up to the player to decide where he wants to go?

 

No there'll never be a bidding war and it doesn't make sense that Chelsea paid above the release clause for Kante. A release clause is a release clause, why would that happen?

 

An infinite number of clubs could trigger the release clause, its then up to the player to decide where they go. There can still be a bidding war but not with us, with the player.

 

Edited 5 August 2025 by Finnegan

[Turtle27]

Not a bad fee considering he could have gone for free last summer. Must be the only good thing we did last summer window.