Mat Kendrick's Dentist

5 minutes ago, Mazrim said:

Says who? Ash doesn't get much, doesnt claim to, but Sam Lee is a nailed on bullshitter. 

He's clearly been right. You're in denial mate

6 minutes ago, StanBalaban said:

Don't disagree about Preece not knowing a thing, but have Man City actually done anything that can be tangibly verified? 

If they've agreed everything with Jack and his agent, what's stopping them making a bid? 

What does "tangibly verified" mean though? People write it off as "clickbait BS" any time a journalist reports on City being in talks for Jack. Transfers are a matter of continual dialogue nowadays. It's not Football Manager where you explicitly click "Submit Bid". City are in talks with Villa on how to do a deal. The fact that talks are being entertained at all suggests to me that there's either a buyout clause or a gentleman's agreement in place, and that the talks are about how such a payment could be structured. I imagine City are trying to find a way to buy Jack, while still having enough funds immediately available to buy Kane, without breaching FFP

6 minutes ago, Mazrim said:

I'd say he is more privy to Villa matters than Sam **** Lee.

He definitely isn't but let's not go around in circles

6 minutes ago, Okonokos said:

NSWE aren't to be messed with. Love that.

Sounds like maybe there is not release clause after all and the ball is in NSWE's court. I trust them 100%, whatever happens.

Preece knows the square root of feckall, unfortunately. He's been saying City's interest is hot air all summer, which is demonstrably nonsense. People believe in him because he says what they want to hear. I'm not saying Jack will definitely go btw, just that Preece clearly doesn't know anything

1 hour ago, Wainy316 said:

Pah, who needs signings?  We went from 16th to 6th once by only buying Thomas Sorensen and Gavin McCann once.

Just because there's a release clause (or gentleman's agreement) doesn't mean there's no room for negotiations. Transfer fees are normally amortized over the lifetime of a player's contract. Similarly the fee is generally paid in multiple installments. Occasionally clubs who have a player with a release clause make it difficult for the buying club by demanding the entire fee up front, making it tricky to navigate FFP. Jack can go for £100m. It's a matter of whether City are willing to pay it (and potentially how it's structured)

6 minutes ago, stewiek2 said:

Playing Devils advocate regards that Mahrez video-

Sam Lee said de Bruyne, Aguero and Fernandinho had a go/word at him. Now I'm no language expert but that accent giving him grief sounds very northern, to me sounds like Kyle Walker. So in the response to Sam Lee saying it was KDB, Aguero and Fernandinho, he is correct in his response to Sam Lee. And it sounds like he's giving him grief for not passing to what sounds like him saying 'my dad?!'

Sam Lee has been a reliable journalist for years and City dullards have slated him because of Mahrez's tweet. The video I posted lends credence to the idea of Mahrez being criticized by players and staff for dribbling, rather than passing, and I believe Lee's comments were well-sourced

6 minutes ago, birdman said:

He says Mahrez lied. Shots fired! 

Pretty clear he did!

2 hours ago, The_Steve said:

Truly. Mahrez embarrassed him. Imagine being a player and seeing some journalist chat crap about you - it’s good they called it out. What a chump. 

https://twitter.com/TJ93_2/status/1419974051062325275

29 minutes ago, The Other Mat said:

I get that... But we wouldnt be letting our star player agree personal terms with another club, especially the likes of City, before we've offered him an improved deal and discussed where his future lies face to face. City's agreed offer will undoubtedly be bigger and worth £Xm's more than ours. It would undermine Villa's position and the improved terms we offer him. The only way it happens is if we've agreed to sell him (which I doubt is likely at this point) otherwise why bother offering him a new contract? 

If his agent has already got assurances from City about the terms they would offer, without our permission, then that would be considered tapping up would it not? 

The way Sam Lee is reporting sounds totally illogical from a business perspective. 

Every club "taps up". We will have agreed terms with Buendia (and everyone else we sign) before we agreed a transfer fee. It's the done thing. Agents and intermediaries find out if a deal is desirable for the player and buying club. Then negotiations begin with the selling club. That much is fact. What is unclear is the presence or absence of a clause in Jack's case. I believe there's a good chance that there is a clause, or perhaps a gentleman's agreement. But that's just my own opinion, based upon the journalists I trust, as well as my intuition regarding Jack staying last summer

10 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

so it sounds like you work in the industry hence your knowledge exceeds mine, but you can surely see why it triggers people? to say it's done bar the paperwork indicates that the deal is done and it's just a formality. yes i get that it's just his "sources" that have said that, but he's still putting his name to the article and if jack signs a new deal, it won't be his sources that get stick from fans...he knows full well what he's doing.

he's very dismissive of indications jack will sign a new deal, BTW

 

Of course I understand people will be triggered. In my personal opinion, Jack leaving would be an absolute disaster. But people were triggered when it was reported Delph, Milner, and many others were going, and claimed it was clickbait/ITK bollocks, etc. That's what happens when a journo reports news that is unpopular with your team's fans. People need to understand that these things aren't black and white. There clearly is something in the Jack to City link, as it'd be very easy for someone from any of the 3 camps to quash it otherwise. Hopefully Villa can convince Jack to stay on for at least another year, but even if we can, it doesn't mean there was nothing in the link

4 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

this is a quote from him in the article comments

Yes, he's saying his multiple reliable sources have told him it's all done bar the paperwork (which is important). When this is the case it's fair enough to write the article, as double-sourcing is the normal journalistic standard. Being fair to him, though, he didn't say "it's done", in the article, and acknowledged the suggestion among those close to Jack that he's being offered a new contact. Again, fair enough. Fluid situation

1 hour ago, tomav84 said:

exactly. i'd give them more respect if they just admitted when jack signs his new deal "sorry, i got this wrong. my sources said it was done!"

maybe as a journo, you just cannot be seen to be getting things wrong

He explicitly said in his article that it isn't done

1 hour ago, Kiwivillan said:

I've been posting on Blue Moon for about a month now and they're hanging their hopes on Sam Lee, Shaun Goater, and various "ITKs" It's same dribble as Grealish to Manure last season

It wasn't "dribble" last year though was it? Jack admitted he hadn't known where he was going to be playing last season 24 hours before he signed the contract. It was very much possible that he could've gone to United had a large enough bid come in. Transfers are fluid situations, and just because one doesn't get over the line (and hopefully Jack to City doesn't), doesn't mean it was all CLICKBAIT BULLSHIT

1 hour ago, The Other Mat said:

This bloke is basically saying we've let Jack agree terms etc before our owners/manager have had a chance to sit down with him and discuss his future face to face, which, let's be real is a ridiculous fantasy. There's no way we've let him do that before we've put our contract in front of him? That's not how successful business men work, especially those intent on competing at the highest level and when dealing with a team with the financial clout if City. Pie in the sky bollocks from Sam Lee. 

It's the total opposite of pie in the sky. Personal terms are agreed before a fee between clubs for literally every transfer nowadays. There's no point in going through a thorough transfer process if the player doesn't even want to come

9 minutes ago, AvonVillain said:

Grealish to Man City could happen 'quite quickly'.

More journalistic excellence via Twitter.

Sam Lee is normally quite reliable.....

14 minutes ago, nepal_villan said:

Since he missed his penalty against Sheffield United two seasons back, Jack has shied away from penalties. That's why Watkins and El Ghazi took them last season. Leads me to believe (without knowing for certain) that Jack probably did not volunteer to take a penalty.

If Jack is to truly be a world class player, he needs to add penalty taking (and free kicks) to his repertoire.  Off-hand can't think of too many attacking greats who don't take them.

He doesn't shy away from pens. He grabbed the ball to take one against Southampton last season but those on the touchline instructed him to leave it for Watkins. As he said in an interview a couple of weeks ago, he'd happily take a pen at any time

18 minutes ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

Nice. Where's this from mate?

8 minutes ago, maqroll said:

Sky Sports saying Man City won't try to sign Grealish is they sign Kane or Haaland and that striker is their top priority. But we knew this already. I just wish Villa would announce the new contract yesterday.

Any link mate?

HE'S SIGNED A NEW DEAL!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, those are the words Midlands journalist Luke Hatfield expects to be saying later this summer. "I dunno mate, I just have a gut feeling he might stick around............I get a few quid for each article you write with this, yeah?"

3 minutes ago, Junxs said:

Even stranger then!

That's Stormzy, mate

12 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said:

Viscount 4 journalists that say he's signing a new contract.

That's mint!

5 minutes ago, The_Steve said:

Because the Athletic never, ever dabbles in clickbait or speculation.

Well.......no. It's subscriber-based, so clickbait would make little sense

6 minutes ago, The_Steve said:

Ornstein has tweeted once about City making a bid and that was yesterday.

I'm not talking about his tweets. I'm talking about his articles in The Athletic, which are accurate, and aren't click-incentivized

6 minutes ago, useless said:

Because the press reports that we've offered him a new contract have come from reliable sources, John Percy being one, and no one has reported that £100m will be enough to get him, just that that's the figure that Man City are likely to offer and those that initially reported that figure are places like The Sun, Talksport and the Daily Mail, hardly reliable sources.

Reliable journalists in The Athletic (Sam Lee and David Ornstein) and The Independent (Miguel Delaney) have been saying for weeks that we'll sell for £100m and they were written off as "paper talk guff". It categorically didn't stem from spurious reports in The Sun and Talksport. On the other hand, Rob Dorsett, who has long been (unfairly) ridiculed on here, broke the news that we've offered a contract, and it was instantly accepted! People believe what they want and are burying their heads in the sand if they think this is all just paper talk. Obviously with all that said, I hope we manage to convince Jack to stick around for at least another year