Jump to content

January Transfers 2019/20


sne

Recommended Posts

the dither brothers deano and jesus really have got soup in the laundry bag this time.

by keeping their powder dry and waiting till nearer the end of the window to sign a striker in hope of the price goes down will now certainly leave then searching through the waifs and strays

especially now manchester united need  strikers as well as spurs. due to rashfords injury.

we had a  golden opportuinity to get a coup such a piatek in before any of the big guns came sniffing, however as usual failure to get deals over the line has cost us.

It's just like when Gregory let Junhinio and Keane slip through the net. Forever in excrement creek!

  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

since we already have Drinky on loan from Chelsea then Giroud must be a permanent signing as we can't loan 2 players from the same club.

Can't see him doing that. Also as someone who is turning 34 this year what kind of deal would he demand and what kind of deal would we be willing to offer. 

Desperate times and I'd absolutely take him but it seems very unlikely since we already used up our loan option.

Maybe we can still cancel the Drinkwater loan :D 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, sne said:

since we already have Drinky on loan from Chelsea then Giroud must be a permanent signing as we can't loan 2 players from the same club.

Can't see him doing that. Also as someone who is turning 34 this year what kind of deal would he demand and what kind of deal would we be willing to offer. 

Desperate times and I'd absolutely take him but it seems very unlikely since we already used up our loan option.

Maybe we can still cancel the Drinkwater loan :D 

 

As he only has 6 months left on his contract I assume we are trying to sign him on a permanent 6 month deal which will, in effect, act in the same way as a loan.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, sne said:

since we already have Drinky on loan from Chelsea then Giroud must be a permanent signing as we can't loan 2 players from the same club.

Can't see him doing that. Also as someone who is turning 34 this year what kind of deal would he demand and what kind of deal would we be willing to offer. 

Desperate times and I'd absolutely take him but it seems very unlikely since we already used up our loan option.

Maybe we can still cancel the Drinkwater loan :D 

 

Presumably there is no reason he couldn’t sign a 6 month ‘permanent’ deal with an option for another year that he could trigger if we stay up. This would still leave him as a free agent in the summer if he wishes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, screwdriver said:

the dither brothers deano and jesus really have got soup in the laundry bag this time.

by keeping their powder dry and waiting till nearer the end of the window to sign a striker in hope of the price goes down will now certainly leave then searching through the waifs and strays

especially now manchester united need  strikers as well as spurs. due to rashfords injury.

we had a  golden opportuinity to get a coup such a piatek in before any of the big guns came sniffing, however as usual failure to get deals over the line has cost us.

It's just like when Gregory let Junhinio and Keane slip through the net. Forever in excrement creek!

Yep. That’s exactly how negotiation works. All their  fault!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, M_Afro said:

As he only has 6 months left on his contract I assume we are trying to sign him on a permanent 6 month deal which will, in effect, act in the same way as a loan.

Chelsea were asking for something like £6m from Inter.

Would be a pretty expensive 6 months if you also factor in wages.

Guess it's even more expensive to get relegated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Elton said:

Presumably there is no reason he couldn’t sign a 6 month ‘permanent’ deal with an option for another year that he could trigger if we stay up. This would still leave him as a free agent in the summer if he wishes.

Not a hope of him agreeing to this, at that age he will be looking for something a bit more secure then a 6 month deal with us having an option , 18month deal might get it over the line 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised Inter actually want Giroud given they have Lukaku (who's having a really good season) and Laturuo Martinez as first choice and Alexis Sanchez as back up. He's not going to play much more than at Chelsea.

Ultimately this is probably just agent stuff to get the move going again. If we really wanted him think we'd have pushed Chelsea harder earlier in the window.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, pete101 said:

Not a hope of him agreeing to this, at that age he will be looking for something a bit more secure then a 6 month deal with us having an option , 18month deal might get it over the line 

I actually said the option was his..

Not that a think we’ll sign him anyway. I don’t expect that at all unless he can’t find a more attractive option.

 

Edited by Elton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding a 6 month permanent transfer (not that he would agree to it), isn't there a rule about how many clubs can hold your registration in a 12 month period?

I thought it was 2 but I'm probably wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, sne said:

Chelsea were asking for something like £6m from Inter.

Would be a pretty expensive 6 months if you also factor in wages.

Guess it's even more expensive to get relegated.

And there lies the dilemma. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link

Seems I'm wrong. It's per season rather than per calender year. 

 

Currently, under the FIFA Transfer Regulations, a football player is only allowed to be registered with a maximum of three clubs in one season. This also applies regardless of what country that player has plied his trade in, whether that is in Europe, Africa or South America.

During this period, the player is only eligible to play official matches for two clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Kuwabatake Sanjuro said:

He is a player who could easily have another few years left, never relied on pace, looks after himself and has never been injury prone. If he insisted on a 2 1/2 year contract I'd have no problem with it.

I remember when Zola signed for Chelsea, I think he’d been hawked around a few club’s including us. I’m not sure exactly how old he was, but I’m sure he was the wrong side of 30 and nobody was particularly interested. Then Chelsea signed him, he became a legend and  he seemed to play there for years. Giroud could be our Zola signing. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DaveAV1 said:

I remember when Zola signed for Chelsea, I think he’d been hawked around a few club’s including us. I’m not sure exactly how old he was, but I’m sure he was the wrong side of 30 and nobody was particularly interested. Then Chelsea signed him, he became a legend and  he seemed to play there for years. Giroud could be our Zola signing. 

I’ve googled him, he was 30 when he joined Chelsea and was there for 7 years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â