Jump to content

Douglas Luiz


LondonLax

Recommended Posts

Not sure why so many put so much credence into the story anyway, he had a very good end to the season, but overall his season wasn't so good that a team that wants to challenge for the title and to be the best in Europe is going to want him. That's  not to say he can't reach that level, but he has to prove it first.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Nigel said:

Why would we offer him a new contract when he will be gone in 12 months?

To convince him to stay if City did want him back then?  I don't think this idea that he would have to move if City meet his release fee can possibly be true (or legal).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great news - if true. Now just playing devil's advocate here - but didn't ol Percy tweet we triggered Watkins' £18m clause - only to tweet again saying no such clause actually existed? Don't get me wrong, bloody hope he's right.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, VillaHatesMe said:

 

A new contract sounds like a good move.

I wonder if that would take him past the expiration of the buy back clause?

That clause is a bloody nuisance. I have no idea what the ramifications of it are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was the BBC that originally tweeted that Watkins had a release clause, Percy just added that to what he'd heard about us being interested in Watkins, which is understandable as normally you'd expect the BBC to only print something like that if they were sure it was true.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Is Percy the reliable one?

That's great news. Couldn't bear the thought of this supposed new and improved Villa side next season without Dougie in it.

Yup doesn't get much wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

That clause is a bloody nuisance. I have no idea what the ramifications of it are.

They are sure to play it if he continues his form. Most likely not to use him but to extract full value from the clause: they threaten to exercise it knowing we want to keep him, if the trigger is £35m (next season) and he looks a player we end up paying them an additional £15m or similar to buy out the clause at risk of losing him to City trading him on. I think they even suggested it at the time, something like “the clubs could work to remove the clause” which really means pay more.

I really dont think he will advance so much as to be a Man City level player in another season, but I could be wrong.....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â