DakotaVilla

We’d obviously only buy him if that’s an extremely unlikely outcome. He was in a packed club ….it’s apparent that this is not a Adam Johnson/Mendy level case already.

Exactly. He might just be completely innocent of all allegations. Won’t derail this thread further.

At this stage he is innocent. It’s pointless to speculate either way but I’d be shocked if a club like Brighton are continuing to play him if it’s a truly egregious offence. it’s absolutely something we should be looking to take advantage of if the due diligence indicates that there was no offence or even if it’s relatively minor or would you have rejected the opportunity to sign Neymar and Ronaldo - due to similar allegations they have faced - in their prime for the same reason? This is the sharp end of elite sport. You don’t win any medals or trophies for being a lovely bunch of lads.

At this stage Bissouma is innocent. It is for his accuser or the CPS to prove guilt. Very few people will know what actually happened but it appears that Brighton (a widely respected club) have done their due diligence and continued to allow him to play and he has been bailed and allowed to travel internationally freely. He may well be guilty but if there is anything in this link the club would have done extensive back ground checks to see if he has any sort of similar behaviour in his past. if the background checks don’t reveal anything then we absolutely should go all in to buy him now as the reality is that he will be going to one of the biggest clubs in the world if/when he is cleared.

This thread is **** up shit. Go back 10 months and this was the guy we were worried about losing to City not the snake who ultimately achieved his desire of leaving. Mans just got to Copa America final, winning the Olympic final but apparently isn’t good enough for us. Give your head a wobble and then give him a big contract - duggie will be a champions league midfielder with or without us.

That’s absolutely fine. We all know now that we can’t expect any loyalty from any footballer. if he gets us into top 4 and then moves on for 80-100m he’ll have done his job.

The point is that he and his agent had already agreed personal terms with city months ago. They were just waiting for the bid to be accepted.

So according to your sources what miraculously changed in the last few weeks?

So when his agent leaked to talksport and the daily mail that terms had been agreed during the euros that was incorrect?

Grealish agreed terms with city months ago. This whole charade about training etc was about trying to get the best payment terms for city re the 100m.

Sorry to break it to you but he’s gone.

They were fully mugged and Jack lied to all of them. Deal was done months ago.

Unfortunately Jack’s the biggest clearing in the woods out of all of them - this deal was done many months ago. Only question was whether city would pay the 100m or not.

When does this move to other football?

His step father said that Bailey will be having some time off In Jamaica before joining up with the squad. He inferred that his grandmother is very ill.

If/when jack leaves I’m afraid it leaves the owners in a really poor light. Failure to convince Jack to stay and a failure to have the strength to basically say no to a sale. I could accept the above due to the reality of football but what I can’t accept is the complete and abject failure to prepare for this scenario by getting our business done first to avoid the grealish premium that’s basically going to turn the 100m into 80m - which is basically 1.5 Ben white’s in this market.

The point is that if there is no release clause and/or active public demand by Jack then it’s the owners decision to sell not Jack’s decision to leave.

Let’s deal in fact for a moment and not the ridiculous and embarrassing amount of bed wetting going on: - is there a minimum release clause - highly unlikely because surely that would have been mentioned or met. - has jack actively said he wants to leave? - no. It’s as simple as that folks.

If there is no release clause why the hell would villa sell him for 75m or even 100m - even if jack secretly wanted to go? if jack comes out publicly ala Kane then it becomes a different discussion but even then if there is no release clause we don’t HAVE to sell. Also, it’s not a figment of media imagination. This is all down to leaks on the city and agent side, agents trying to get the best deal (whether jack stays or goes) and journos trying to get clicks.

You can’t say no if no one has made a bid and where is the evidence that we’re negotiating with City? As for Levy I’m glad that our owners nor Purslow aren’t playing to the crowd - we’re just getting on with our plans for the season. If I was going to bet money on any player going to City it would be Kane and not Jack.

So it appears in all of the leaks from the agent and from city there is no release fee, no ridiculous bid and no mention of Jack pushing for the move. We appear to hold all the cards.

Let’s cut through all the click bait and all the crap. The simple question is whether there is a minimum release fee clause or not? If there isn’t a clause then Jack stays unless City bid a truly ridiculous amount - which they won’t. If there is a clause then he’s probably gone unless we somehow sell him again on the project.

Who is his agent and who else does he represent…..?

I suspect it’s more the impact of the Euros and Copa America. The big transfers will generally only happen when the international players come back from holiday and then the transfer chains will kick off. It’s going to be a crazy last few weeks in the window.