Football 17/18

[pink_triangle]

18 minutes ago, zahidf said:

hmmm. They went for the bid they knew the club wanted 6 hours before the transfer window closed.

 

Apparently Lemar would have said yes, its arsenal who say they ran out of time. Which considering they had 3 months to sort all of it out....

You could make the same argument about City leaving it too late to sign Sanchez. We are in this mad world where you could argue having Sanchez for one season is more useful than having 50 million.

[pink_triangle]

23 minutes ago, zahidf said:

hmmm. They went for the bid they knew the club wanted 6 hours before the transfer window closed

The same thing that many other clubs have done both yesterday and in years past. Some deals work and others don't.

On a slightly related matter that French squad looks scary if they can pull together as a team.

[eFestivals]

29 minutes ago, thetime said:

Well you could look at it both ways, they accepted 92m for him. 

They either knew by previous conversations that he had no intention of going there, or no previous conversation and expect 92m transfer to be completed in hours. Personal terms, agents payment, image rights, bonus rights etc etc. All in a few hours, you sure.

Farce pretty sums it up, it's up there with de gea and the fax machine.

five quid or five hundred million, they get done in a few hours.

[eFestivals]

29 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Which considering they had 3 months to sort all of it out....

same for any transfer.

City were known to want Sanchez more than any other player. They couldn't even do a deal in 3+ months. Utd were known to want Morata; they couldn't even get his attention.

Etc, etc, etc.

Some people love to think that one particular circumstance is exceptional, but it's nothing different to all the rest. It happens or it doesn't, but you have to try else it won't.

[thetime]

Just now, eFestivals said:

Utd were known to want Morata; they couldn't even get his attention.

 

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, thetime said:

yep, that's the fanboyz version after failing to get his attention.

Moaniho even gave a fake reason for the failure.

Edited September 1, 2017 by eFestivals

[Hugh Jass]

18 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

On a slightly related matter that French squad looks scary if they can pull together as a team.

On a related, related note how did the Dutch get so bad?  They gone from major tournament staples to being utterly terrible.

It's incredible that their three biggest players - Robben, Sneijder, RVP were all at the 2006 world cup. Half expected to see Van Bommel wheezing around the pitch.

[zahidf]

9 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

yep, that's the fanboyz version after failing to get his attention.

Moaniho even gave a fake reason for the failure.

Im a man utd hater as much as anyone, but they wanted lukaku, not morata surely? Morata was def up for a utd move!

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Im a man utd hater as much as anyone, but they wanted lukaku, not morata surely? Morata was def up for a utd move!

According to the Big Moan, Utd bid for Morata but were knocked back on the price.

According to the Big Moan, it was really RM playing games around a new contract for Morata and they didn't really have any intention of selling - from the big Moan's own gob!

Every Utd fan hopes everyone else has forgotten about the big Moan's bollocks about losing out on a player who went to Chelski and wasn't being played for a new contract after all.

[eFestivals]

PS: I'm not really making an issue about it, I'm merely pointing out that failures of clubs to get players happens to all clubs all the time.

To suggest that Arsenal were faking a bid that they had accepted is daft. If they wanted to fake a bid they'd have made one which they knew would be knocked back, not one that met the selling club's wants.

[ThomThomDrum]

Why do folk think it was a fake bid?

There is no evidence to support this

Sure the bid was accepted. The player simply did not want to go. What are Arsenal suppose to do with that?

 

 

[pink_triangle]

Is Arsenals transfer window any worse than spurs or Chelsea? I think however Liverpool, City and United have done well.

[The Nal]

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

PS: I'm not really making an issue about it, I'm merely pointing out that failures of clubs to get players happens to all clubs all the time.

True. Amazing that Chelsea being league champions missed out on Lukaku, Chamberlain, Llorente, Sandro, Walker, Van Dijk and Barkley. With some players flatly turning them down. 

[eFestivals]

Just now, The Nal said:

True. Amazing that Chelsea being league champions missed out on Lukaku, Chamberlain, Llorente, Sandro, Walker, Van Dijk and Barkley. With some players flatly turning them down. 

Yep - but they've got a bad rep now for signing players who don't get a kick.

Only VVD of those might have made the pitch regularly. I don't even think Lukaku would get much of a shout (because i don't think he fits Chelsea's style).

[jyoung]

Fans will always moan "Why didn't we sign insert players name here", just like opposition fans will always give you grief when a player joins their team having been linked with yours. That's just part of the fun. 

However it literally all means nothing in the grand scheme of things because when Saturday comes, your team puts out 11 players to have a game of football. They'll win some games, they'll lose some games. Water is wet. Grass is green.

Teams always miss out on targets. It's no big deal. Arsenal not getting Lemar, Chels not getting Lukaku, United not getting Griezmann... None of it really matters that much. Like in the past, some players move, some don't. Football carries on.

[pink_triangle]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Yep - but they've got a bad rep now for signing players who don't get a kick.

Only VVD of those might have made the pitch regularly. I don't even think Lukaku would get much of a shout (because i don't think he fits Chelsea's style).

Agreed if your a player and you see what happened to the likes of Salah, De Bruyne, Lukaku at Chelsea, it's understandable you would prefer other options if available.

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Is Arsenals transfer window any worse than spurs or Chelsea? I think however Liverpool, City and United have done well.

I don't think any of those clubs have done badly, really.

Spurs could have lost half their squad, but hung on to almost everyone. Chelsea didn't bring in many of those they tried for, but they didn't need to bring in anyone at all. Utd have strengthened very well.

I can't say I've paid much attention to City, but I'd say they've probably had the worst window. Me, I reckon this is the season where Pep gets found out.

If Liverpool keep Phil, I'd say they've done the best (tho not getting VVD is a big loss). Salah already looks an £80M+ player at half that price. They didn't get Keita for this season but he's already sorted for next, while other players who had (on paper) better options decided on Liverpool as the best option - which is quite an endorsement really.

[zahidf]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I don't think any of those clubs have done badly, really.

Spurs could have lost half their squad, but hung on to almost everyone. Chelsea didn't bring in many of those they tried for, but they didn't need to bring in anyone at all. Utd have strengthened very well.

I can't say I've paid much attention to City, but I'd say they've probably had the worst window. Me, I reckon this is the season where Pep gets found out.

If Liverpool keep Phil, I'd say they've done the best (tho not getting VVD is a big loss). Salah already looks an £80M+ player at half that price. They didn't get Keita for this season but he's already sorted for next, while other players who had (on paper) better options decided on Liverpool as the best option - which is quite an endorsement really.

Id probably have it as

 

1. Utd

2. City

3. Liverpool

4. Spurs

5. Chelsea

6. Arsenal

City did well overall, they got some great players in. They only failed to get a Kompany replacement (Again!)

Utd got 3 good players in and didnt lose anyone. 

Liverpool didnt get in a better defence they 100% need. Or a more reliable goalkeeper. Salah and the Ox are good people in mind.

Lukaku would 100% have got the games at chelsea, he was their Costa replacement. Chelsea only got one of their first choice targets! 

Spurs lost Walker and will prob lose Danny (whiner) Rose. They got some good squad players in, and some handy back ups.

Arsenal got 2 players in, lost one they wanted to keep, Ozil may go to Barca, and Sanchez is left in a pissed off mood. 

Still, better than Newcastle! 

[sdvruxk]

Morata dyed his hair red. He thought he was coming to United. You can still see bits of red in his hair.

But yeah, I was saying why didn't City bid 60m on Monday? It was obvious that they wanted him, didn't seem to be like a panic buy which deadline day transfers usually are. The mind boggles. 

Think Llorente is a good signing for Spurs. Will score goals unlike Janssen. Liverpool not getting a CB could turn out to be crucial. Same for City really for when Kompany gets injured. 

[eFestivals]

21 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Lukaku would 100% have got the games at chelsea, he was their Costa replacement.

he might have been their Costa replacement but he's nothing of the devil that Costa is that makes him so good.

That role needs a tough guy, and that's not Lukaku.

[The Nal]

Rooney done for a bit of drinking driving. Retires from England to stay fit for Everton and goes out drinking.

[eFestivals]

22 minutes ago, sdvruxk said:

Liverpool not getting a CB could turn out to be crucial. 

Can't disagree with that ... tho .... they're no worse than last year (and probably a bit better) at the back, and they covered that frailty by banging them in at the other end. 

This season doesn't look like it's going to be much different, and yet ... they beat Palace, who they've been doing badly against.  

I've no doubts they'll still drop points where they really shouldn't, but they're less likely to have 2 months firing blanks than happened last season.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, The Nal said:

Rooney done for a bit of drinking driving. Retires from England to stay fit for Everton and goes out drinking.

to be fair, you can be a very long way off "pissed" to fail. It's not necessarily how you've said it.

[zahidf]

16 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

he might have been their Costa replacement but he's nothing of the devil that Costa is that makes him so good.

That role needs a tough guy, and that's not Lukaku.

morata isnt either! 

[The Nal]

9 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

to be fair, you can be a very long way off "pissed" to fail. It's not necessarily how you've said it.

I know was joking for comedic effect but its still very silly. Get a taxi if youre going to be boozing at all!