Jump to content

West Ham Lose The Plot


LancsVillan

Recommended Posts

Surely they are simply being prudent by waiting to see if a) others come in for him and B) if we up our bid to get him before the window shuts

If that was going to happen Jon, I think it would have happened already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another Hammer here, but fear not I'm not going to repeat what other Hammers have already said, infact I have a different point of view...

I'm in the minority amongst Hammers who are extremely dissapointed NRC is leaving. It's true his passing ain't great and he hasn't got a great shot, but he's incredibly powerful, makes some excellent runs and is strong in the tackle, Vieria-esque in many ways...He had a terrible first half to last season and most of their fans base their entire dislike of him on that + some of his agents comments. He has been an excellent player for West Ham in the rest of his 3 and a half seasons for us.

Moreover, I'd like to offer an alternative explanation for why West Ham are being so stingy in the transfer price. I believe it's Magnusson's response to the Darren Bent affair, during which we were essentially held to ransom. Magnusson has IMO interpreted this as the way the market is now working and thus responding to a transfer bid for our player accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moreover, I'd like to offer an alternative explanation for why West Ham are being so stingy in the transfer price. I believe it's Magnusson's response to the Darren Bent affair, during which we were essentially held to ransom. Magnusson has IMO interpreted this as the way the market is now working and thus responding to a transfer bid for our player accordingly.

But West hamd signed Scott parker about 2 weeks ago for £7m? How can egghead expect more than that for NRC?

All of the above comments are really based on speculation which is notoriously bad at this time of year, without any direct quotes from egghead or MON or Randy then fans from both sides are just guessing really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have nothing against the Villans, respect your History and like your manager - all I ask in return is that you don't fall for this McCabe instigated bollox about West Ham.

Thank you, I can't be quite so generous about West Ham, but I suspect you'll do well this year.

Who is McCabe ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok deleted two posts, one by Dicanio10 who was obviously on a wind up plus one further post that quoted it

the West Ham fans that have thus far posted sensibly are quite welcome to continue as long as the posting remains of a similar nature

But can we also keep this On-Topic and that is about the NRC situation, no rambling off on how West Ham deserve to be relegated - theres a 100 page topic for that already in the off topic forum - Bicks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any meaningful 'generally accepted valuation' when it comes to player value - I think 12m would be top of the market (but easily conceivable if one of the top four were interested), but in my opinion 7m is a couple under par. Frankly with all the new money swirling round the Premiership there is no clear value for a young English player with Reo-Coker's credentials. Now more than ever players are worth what the market will stand.

Surely accepting a bid for a player (even an unsettled one) which a club considers below his potential market value, when there is no immediate pressure to do so, is a much worse way to do business?

Yes, I agree there's no objectively correct value, it's a case of what someone will pay. I just mean that most commentators speak of him as being in the £6-8m bracket, and would think of £12m as too high, with reference to what other players go for.

Sticking out for what you think is his potential market value is one tactic, I suppose. But in a situation where potential buyers will also be looking elsewhere, the selling club has to be careful not to drive away several potential purchasers and be left in a buyer's market. O'Neill has made it clear that he won't pay silly money for anyone, there's not reported to be a queue of suitors, the player clearly wants away and the club wants rid of him; these things all suggest that sticking out for a very high price is a tactic which is more likely to backfire than succeed.

I take the point made elsewhere that the valuation may just be another lazy journo making things up, but I think that caveat applies to anthing at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm the bored guy at work talking about Villa on a couple different forums! Thanks for the shout out PB. (However I'm not the guy worrying about our signings, In Martin I Trust). Can't wait for the friendlies in North America, hopefully we have some signings before then....would make my summer!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's some issues getting mixed here, aren't there - the Tevez "punishment" (which in itself has got confused, IMO) and NRC's "price".

On the price - it's fairly straightforward - we want him, and are prepared to offer around 7 million or so.

West Ham want to sell him and get as much as they can for him - by refusing the first offer, they're acting normally. If they get an extra million, out of us, or someone else, then that's good work from them. If they don't, then they end up with an unhappy player, paying his wages and not playing him. But he is a decent player, and he'll end up leaving I guess.

On the trend for bringing the unrelated Tevez thing into it - well it's irrelevant to NRC, but there's so much self interest in it, that it's interesting.

SHeff U and the other clubs that were in danger of relegation obviously had huge self interest in getting W. Ham relegated - it boosted their chances of staying to collect 30 million quid.

Sheff U, as the ones who lost out are the one making the noise. Co-incidence? I think not.

Sheff U have a self interest in trying to get W.Ham down, as much as W.Ham do in keeping it as a financial penalty.

It's just that media opinion, keeping a story going has emphasised one side of the story more - it's a better headline "club fights injustice" is better than "nothing more to say here, move along".

Whether the punishment or the reasoning was right is kind of lost somewhere.

A third party had some element of control over two of their players, which came to light when Maschereno was transferred to Liverpool. West ham's old board had apparently lied about it. The new board were more honest.

There's no precedent. A points fine might have been better, but the Premier League's commission bottled it.

People say they did so hoping W.Ham would go down anyway, but if that's the case, if they thought W.ham would go down, then they might as well have taken points off - it would have made no difference. In fact, if they had gone down, a financial penalty would have been worse, harsher. But no-one mentions that.

Personally I think they got off lightly, as it turned out, but not drastically so, though I accept outside Upton Park, that's a minority view.

I don't like that they seemingly lied and decieved the Premier League on the registrations. I don't like their old board one bit. I do feel sorry for their fans, who like us had years of an unpopular chairman and have since been taken over by a foreign investor.

I'd be gutted if a (hypothetical) Ellis failing left Randy and us lot to suffer. Who of us lot wouldn't?

Having been whacked in the face in the "bad days" by a West Ham fan, I've no affection for them - fans make a big difference to the way I feel about clubs, but I do agree that W.Ham are the current dogs to be kicked by "opinion".

It's the silly season though. West Ham won't get 12 million, they won't get relegated and Martin O'Neill won't spend Randy's money carelessly.

If anything the board will have to encourage him to spend it, I think.

Plenty of fish in the sea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that egghead is trying to instigate a bidding war for NRC but they are having no luck as Villa seem to be the only club interested. West Ham are trying to play the waiting game hoping some other club (spurs?) enter the bidding and raise the price.

I'd say be wary, very wary, of Citeh in this situation.

new manager, money to spend, midfield to strengthen, good player available to highest bidder it seems.

one caveat though - NRC does not have to sign for the highest bidder. WHU can agree a fee with whoever but if NRC is adamant about joining Villa then WHU are going to have to either bend on the price or keep an unhappy player.

It really is a mexican stand off situation involving at the moment WHU, AVFC and NRC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one caveat though - NRC does not have to sign for the highest bidder. WHU can agree a fee with whoever but if NRC is adamant about joining Villa then WHU are going to have to either bend on the price or keep an unhappy player.

West Ham seem to have been unlucky in perhaps having been at the bad end of this situation on two occasions, both when trying to buy a player (Bent) and now when trying to sell one.

Time will tell I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a Villa fan I am amazed that we are finding the approach that West Ham are taking as surprising. They have a potentially valuable asset and have every right to try and increase the competitive tension. I would have hoped that we would have done a bit more of this but we always seem too nice in our dealings e.g. Vassell for £2m at the same time as Morrison left Bloose for Palace at £2m, Crouch for £2m without a sell-on clause, J Lloyd on a bosman etc.

I think and hope that we will get him as he is a proven premiership performer in that DM role and there aren't too many of those left and available??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â