maqroll Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 It's possible that Lambert was about to contact Vlaar's agent, but read about their complaining to the press and decided to let them dangle for a while. I get the feeling Lambert is not one to be trifled with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic_bouma Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 no idea why so many are getting on the clubs back over this.... we've always said that Lerner and Villa act impeccably when dealing with other clubs... and now just because we don't make an offer in the week after talking to a player we are acting awfully and Lerner is the bad guy again.... there are so many reasons why we might not have offered yet..... as for the idea that Lerner is withdrawing funds already well thats a load of balls as well... Lambert has signed 2 players for pittance... its remarkable how much any bit of news can swing moods from positive to negative and vice versa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 If PL thought we needed him we would of tied him up ages ago. We have the money, if the budget was that small he wouldn't of spent 3 mill on a youngster who wont develop for a year or 2. Either PL has tried to buy time, assess current defenders on this tour, and its backfired. or a better CB has become available. Who is this youngster you speak of? 23 yr old Matt Lowton? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciggiesnbeer Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I never trust the side that does the leaking to the press. If Ron Vlaar wants to get all Whelan on us then good riddance I say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozvillafan Posted July 23, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted July 23, 2012 no idea why so many are getting on the clubs back over this.... we've always said that Lerner and Villa act impeccably when dealing with other clubs... and now just because we don't make an offer in the week after talking to a player we are acting awfully and Lerner is the bad guy again.... there are so many reasons why we might not have offered yet..... as for the idea that Lerner is withdrawing funds already well thats a load of balls as well... Lambert has signed 2 players for pittance... its remarkable how much any bit of news can swing moods from positive to negative and vice versa Too true. In every negotiation with a player there are agents and other clubs to deal with. These 3rd parties can behave extremely poorly regardless of how professional your approach is. I'm happy that in the majority of our dealings we act in a fitting manner and out of the press. The downside is that the silence leads to too many "ITK's" postulating and spouting absolute dribble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted July 23, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted July 23, 2012 I'm with sonic_b Typical VT, just assuming the worst when anything happens. Maybe the club has acted poorly over this. But considering how we normally act with transfers, extremely well, I'm inclined to give us the benefit of the doubt. As Sonic said, there's any number of reasons why this has taken so long, or won't happen. Maybe we're simply looking at someone else? Maybe after all of this it was just a "chat" that they had and nothing more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I'm going to hazard a guess that Vlaar & his agent got greedy on wages **** him, move on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raver50032 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 All these attempts to justify Villa's behaviour in this transfer saga are a bit laughable. Villa have looked poor the way they have conducted things and it reflects badly on the club. How? club have hardly made a mention of this signing. most of talk coming from Feyenoord endSo you think it's OK to invite a player, his agent and father for a discussion about a transfer, send him away with the impression a move is imminent and then not even bother to contact him to tell him the deal is off or to explain the reason for their silence? Wow, an interestingly quirky view of business ethics. Exactly. I can't believe people think that would be the right way to go about dealing with clubs and individuals. The thing is, we only know Feyenoords side of the story. Not our side. Maybe we should just wait with the judging untill we do? Why would the club and player lie? Why would Vlaar tell the press he wants to come but lie about villa having no contact? It makes no sense. that fact it makes no sense is a clue that you're asking the wrong questions Yep. And why do people lie? Well, I've never figured that one out yet, really, as I try as much as possible to stay away from it. But people do lie sometimes for different reasons. And it's quite possible they don't lie this time. But it's at least for me impossible to know whether they do or not. I don't know the full story. And maybe Vlaar and Feyenoord hasn't told the full story either. They wanna look good in everyones eye just as much as anyone does. Dave Whelan - Wigan Athletic anyone??? Hello Dave - you ponce... :shock: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I may be completely wrong, I've said a few times on this thread that I really hope I am. But we are talking about our club that cancelled an interview with mclaren because of fans being unhappy and then went and made one of the worst managerial appointments any premiership team has ever made. I don't think it's ridiculous to question wether the club are still making poor decisions given the information we have so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Condimentalist Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I think Vlaar may have got a little too excited in the first place. There was certainly a marked discrepancy between his comments about a 'dream move' and Lambert's about 'just a chat'. I really think Collins is the key to this. I don't think we're running with a sell to buy policy overall but I think for the sake of team harmony, for the risk of being lumbered with 5 centre halfs, for the position of the wage bill and for the risk of Collins' value decreasing as it'll be well known that he'd be surplus, I think we'll be waiting until some firmer interest in him materialises before we really move forward signing a central defender. Whether or not that will still be Vlaar remains to be seen. The irony, of course, is that we may end up waiting for MON, and we all know what that means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I remember when we were linked with mcleish and people laughed at others for jumping to conclusions.What's your point? :? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romavillan Posted July 23, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted July 23, 2012 I remember when we were linked with mcleish and people laughed at others for jumping to conclusions.What's your point? :? yeah mcleish situation doesn't really compare. this is a bit more like OGS, get them over, they have a chat, they love it, gets leaked to the press, they publically say they love it and we are left in a tricky position if we didn't want to tie it all up straight away. if no photos had come out of this little tour, then he wouldn't have been forced to publically say he wanted to come. once he says that and we don't move for him then he's going to be pissed off, the club he plays for is going to be pissed off too. doesn't mean we have to come out and make a statement about it though. to be honest, if PL really wants him, we could prob go and get him when he's back from teh states. not a big deal, not the only CB in teh world, shows PL is lookin for the right type of players imo. move along, nothing to see here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiz Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 If, as I suspect, Villa are, treating him and his club, as you treated Norwich then no wonder the deal fell down. Pee Lambert off and he'll walk even after a short time in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 If, as I suspect, Villa are, treating him and his club, as you treated Norwich then no wonder the deal fell down. Pee Lambert off and he'll walk even after a short time in charge. well Feyenoord didnt breach Vlaar contract so no comparison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irreverentad Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 If, as I suspect, Villa are, treating him and his club, as you treated Norwich then no wonder the deal fell down. Pee Lambert off and he'll walk even after a short time in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 from urban dictionary Wiz a moment of stupidity. this is named after wizardguy on the fablemod.com forums who posts too much and posts questions that have been answered already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaForever1970 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 But we are talking about our club that cancelled an interview with mclaren because of fans being unhappy and then went and made one of the worst managerial appointments any premiership team has ever made. I don't think it's ridiculous to question wether the club are still making poor decisions given the information we have so far. Proof of the Mclaren thing please, as once again its a rumour that gathered pace as a stick to beat the club with? People dont question the good things the club gets right, no club gets everything right and wrong as in life nobody is perfect. Yet Villa and their owners have to it seems! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TezzRexx Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 If, as I suspect, Villa are, treating him and his club, as you treated Norwich then no wonder the deal fell down. Pee Lambert off and he'll walk even after a short time in charge. Can you please sign off all your posts using this image please? I still think it's based on Hutton's transfer more than anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feyenoord Posted July 23, 2012 Author Share Posted July 23, 2012 Vlaar´s agent Arnold Oosterveer has spoken out about the Villa saga and he has said the following. ´´Vlaar´s transfer was put on hold by the Villa board at the very last moment. They made it clear to Paul Lambert that he had to sell players first before Vlaar could come in´´ ´´Aston Villa never informed us about this situation prior to coming to Villa Park. If they had informed us, we would have never come to Birmingham in the first place and let Villa do their business first´´ ´´Ron never thought that this transfer could collapse. He was told by Paul Lambert that he would be an integral part of the new team and one of the most important players. From my understanding, Paul Lambert also never thought that this transfer would collapse at the last minute´´ ´´Ron is a big calibre player, this is not how you treat any calibre player´´ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted July 23, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted July 23, 2012 If, as I suspect, Villa are, treating him and his club, as you treated Norwich then no wonder the deal fell down. Pee Lambert off and he'll walk even after a short time in charge. Nah. Feyenoord are, you know, an actual real club, with history and stature and that. I imagine we've showed them infinitely more respect than we would show a small time, nothing club like Norwich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts