Jump to content

January Transfer Window - 2022


MaVilla

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, Stoobs said:

When opposition has ball, he always just positions himself so that they can’t play simple pass through the lines. Very subtle. When he gets ball, even with opponent round him, seems to have all the time in the world. Don’t think he has given it away all night. He is never going to win you a game on his own, not that type of player but every team needs someone of that ilk on the park. Let the match winners get on with it. 

With you on this, although admittedly I've probably only seen him play between 7/8 times in full, but I've always been impressed by him both for Finland and Rangers whenever I've seen him. As you allude to he's the kind of midfield player that doesn't really shine statistically but doesn't really put a foot wrong and is often involved in anything good that his side does.

Not saying that he specifically is the answer to Villa's midfield problems but a player in his mould would certainly help as we don't really have any 8s that look after the ball, can keep the play ticking over and allow other players to have those moments of individuality. I suspect McGinn would look an awful lot better were he playing next to Kamara in midfield, for instance.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Kuwabatake Sanjuro said:

Has looked very dangerous attacking from left wing back in the last 2 games for Wales though. Belgian keeper made a world class save to stop him scoring again tonight.

edit: Here

 

 

7 hours ago, Kuwabatake Sanjuro said:

Has looked very dangerous attacking from left wing back in the last 2 games for Wales though. Belgian keeper made a world class save to stop him scoring again tonight.

edit: Here

 

He’s class for wales at right back,  no different to right footed  Ashley Young playing at rb or Cancleo , Trippier I could go on for ages

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, ender4 said:

Not sure which figure you are referring to.

So Grealish was bought for £0 and sold for £100m, so £100m profit in the year for FFP purposes.

Buendia was bought with general funds that we would have spent. 

We can speculate that Ings and Bailey were bought with Grealish money for roughly £60m total. but if on 4 years contracts, then that counts as £15m during the year. Plus say £15m extra annual wages for the 3 new players. 
 

So £30m extra FFP spend for the year. 

That left us an extra £70m positive in the year for FFP purposes (excluding the £7.5m annual fee for Buendia that we were going to spend anyway).

I hope that makes sense.  I don’t think I’ve explained it that well though lol

Don't forget that HMRC takes about 20% of the 100m for Jack.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said:

Don't forget that HMRC takes about 20% of the 100m for Jack.

Nah, the transfer fee would be ex VAT.

City will have paid us £120m inc VAT.  We will pay the £20m to HMRC and City (as a business) will claim it back.  The VAT money won't hit the accounts and will just sit as a receipt and liability.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wainy316 said:

Nah, the transfer fee would be ex VAT.

City will have paid us £120m inc VAT.  We will pay the £20m to HMRC and City (as a business) will claim it back.  The VAT money won't hit the accounts and will just sit as a receipt and liability.

I am not referring to VAT. There is 20% tax on selling home grown players as we have made a profit on them. We only get 80m of the 100m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lapal_fan said:

If we want a left back we should just go an spunk everything on Theo Hernandez :wub:

I can already imagine the complaints that he cant defend but pops up with 10 goals and 10 assists 😂

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Craigy1874 said:

No they won't as we will have losses brought forward to offset against profits for that accounting period.

We have a tax liability on the sale of Jack. That is the law. If we have other losses to write off against that profit that is irrelevant. We still have a 20m tax bill for Jack and if we use other tax losses we can’t use those to offset other costs. The bottom line is Jack nets us 80m and not 100m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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