Jump to content

Christian Benteke


Kwan

Recommended Posts

I think the cup performance was , for him , the provebial straw and I , for one , would not hold it against him .

 

He was part of that performance, and most of the other players played better than him.

Bear in mind that he is supposed to be the main man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he'll go to Chelsea and we'll get Bamford.

I'd be pretty happy with that, but not if Bamford was a loan.

Despite our recent struggles, I still don't like the idea of us developing players which will more than likely return back to their parent club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Duvan Zapata would be a good replacement if we could get him.

Why would he leave Napoli for us?

 

He's more of an impact player for them as back up for Higuain. If he can be the main man, at a premier league team he's obviously going to have a serious think about it isn't he. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would Bamford come to us?

It's unlikely, but I don't think it'd be a huge shock if he did.

Chelsea didn't rate him highly enough to sit on their bench last year, and he's currently only performed well in the Championship for Middlesbrough. So Jose getting rid wouldn't be out of character, and Bamford might even view it as a step up from Middlesbrough (if he's not going to get a game at Chelski).

Also, there's the Sherwood factor. Younger players are going to be more enthusiastic to go to a team with him in charge, hoping that he'll do for them what he (supposedly) did for Harry Kane / Bentaleb / Mason etc.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Would Bamford come to us?

It's unlikely, but I don't think it'd be a huge shock if he did.

Chelsea didn't rate him highly enough to sit on their bench last year, and he's currently only performed well in the Championship for Middlesbrough. So Jose getting rid wouldn't be out of character, and Bamford might even view it as a step up from Middlesbrough (if he's not going to get a game at Chelski).

Also, there's the Sherwood factor. Younger players are going to be more enthusiastic to go to a team with him in charge, hoping that he'll do for them what he (supposedly) did for Harry Kane / Bentaleb / Mason etc.

 

 

 

:huh:  :huh:  :huh:  :huh:  :huh:  Well you'd bloody hope so wouldn't you?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would suggest that when the club meet with his agent he is told that there is a new offer on the table from the club. That we will not sell for 1 penny less than the release clause figure in his current contract and that if he is leaving we want the deal done before pre-season starts so we can find his replacement. If he wants his client to leave then he needs to work on that basis or he can wait till January where the release clause will still stand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Arsenal did activate a release clause in Luis Suarez’s contract last summer when they made a £40m plus a pound offer for the Liverpool striker, but the Reds’ hierarchy rejected the bid because “contracts don’t seem to mean a lot”.

That is the view of Liverpool owner John W Henry, who has revealed that the club refused to allow the Uruguayan to leave the club and are now reaping the benefits, with the 26-year-old agreeing a new four-and-a-half year contract to remain at Anfield.

The Gunners thought they had activated a clause that would allow them to negotiate a move for Suarez, who was pushing for a move away from the club after they failed to secure European football at the end of last season.

And Henry confirmed his belief that they were in a position to reject the approach as “apparently these contacts don’t seem to hold”, despite the view that it was a breach of contract or as Suarez put it at the time the club had reneged on their word.

Speaking at the MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference over the weekend, Henry also said in a filmed panel discussion that Liverpool will qualify for the Champions League and have an outsiders chance of winning the Premier League this season.

“Luis Suarez is the top scorer in the English Premier League which is arguably the top soccer league in the world,” said Henry.

“And he had a buy-out clause - I don't know what degree I should go into this - but he had a buy-out clause of £40million - more than 60 million (US) dollars. So Arsenal, one of our prime rivals this year ... they offered £40million and one pound for him and triggered his buy-out clause.

“But what we've found over the years is that contracts don't seem to mean a lot in England - actually not in England, in world football. It doesn't matter how long a player's contract is, he can decide he's leaving.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/transfer-news-release-clause-in-luis-suarez-contract-was-activated-by-arsenal-but-liverpool-owner-john-henry-reveals-club-ignored-it-9164948.html

 

How we need to answer Liverpool if they meet his clause ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm amazed it wasn't taken out of their hands. I'd have thought if the buyout clause was met then all Arsenal would have needed to do would be to negotiate terms with Suarez's agent and completely leave Liverpool out of the equation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think it was more down to Suarez himself
 
Suarez is quoted in his new autobiography by Spanish newspaper Sport as claiming that his proposed move to Arsenal, who attempted to trigger a £40 million-release clause in the striker’s contract, would have been a huge mistake.
"It would have been a big error that I would have made had it not been for Steven Gerrard," he said. "We spoke about this when I went to Melwood [Liverpool's training ground] to pick up my things at the end of the summer and he said: 'You did the right thing, you waited until the best moment.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Would Bamford come to us?

It's unlikely, but I don't think it'd be a huge shock if he did.

Chelsea didn't rate him highly enough to sit on their bench last year, and he's currently only performed well in the Championship for Middlesbrough. So Jose getting rid wouldn't be out of character, and Bamford might even view it as a step up from Middlesbrough (if he's not going to get a game at Chelski).

Also, there's the Sherwood factor. Younger players are going to be more enthusiastic to go to a team with him in charge, hoping that he'll do for them what he (supposedly) did for Harry Kane / Bentaleb / Mason etc.

 

 

 

:huh:  :huh:  :huh:  :huh:  :huh:  Well you'd bloody hope so wouldn't you?!

 

I think he means "might" as in he might think that as opposed to viewing it as a step down from Chelsea.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm predicting there will not be quick end to this and I think he'll still be here by the end of the window unless its on our terms. I just can't see many clubs lining up to drop £32 million in one chunk on.

 

I think Man Utd will be shopping in a completely different part of the transfer market - I'd predict Benzema. They need a starting striker.

Chelsea are the big question marks for me. Would they spend exactly the same amount that they did to get Costa for a backup striker?

Arsene Wenger seems to have a lot of faith in Giroud and is very stubborn. He also has Walcott and Welbeck.

Man City already have enough strikers unless they sell on Dzeko but again, I'd imagine they'll be in a different part of the transfer market.

 

That leaves 2 teams for me. Spurs and Liverpool. Can either of them afford the buyout clause upfront?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â