Vidahost - UK Web Hosting
Vidahost - UK Web Hosting


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Maybe not the announcement but none the less some positive news about us and young players
  2. I guess in truth this should be posted in the youth or academy sections and whilst we haven't officially announced it on our site it appears we have signed a youngster called Ethan Ampadu from Exeter. This lad is 16 years of age and has already played in the league for Exeter debuting at age 15. He has already played 12 times for Exeters first team debuting at 15. Whats interesting about this lad is that he played in a game in the EFL cup against our youngsters last season. A game Exeter won and a game we went to. Ethan is a defensive midfielder and for me in that game he was the stand out performer. It was the first time I had watched him live but living as we do in the West Country have been watching his progress which has been staggering Already he is too good to play either for the youth or indeed the under 21s although I guess it's too early to loan him out but keep your eyes on this lad for he really has the potential to become the real deal.
  3. I rarely get wound up about a player leaving be it a first squad member or indeed a fringe player. We all have opinions about the quality of a player but we don't get to know the other issues that a manger or the club has to factor in It is reported that it is a general policy that if a player wants out they will not stand in the way. There was a little snippet in the press to the effect that Ake wanted almost guaranteed playing time so that may have been an issue. . Next we have no idea which players can and which can't easily take on board and indeed deliver what the manager expects.We have no idea how well they train, how well intergrate within the group, what the players wage demands are, what needs to be sorted in terms of FFP, what does the overall wage budget in relation to short term cost controls and so it goes on Nathan for me will carve out a decent career in football will he ever be a regular starter at the top 4 club? That's a real interesting one for whilst he is to a level I haven't seen enough to suggest he has the X factor and whilst so so many go on about bringing through players at the top clubs it is more often than not the exception rather than the rule that you have more than the odd one or possibly two starters that have come through the ranks.
  4. It's all to do with his age and the fact that he is going to sign for a club registered to the same FA . He wasn't able to sign a pre contract agreement indeed he couldnt officially talk to a club in England till after he was notified by Chelsea as to the terms of the new contract they were offering. This is something that has to be done by no later than 4 days after our last competitive game which was the FA cup final on 27/5. As I have said before Liverpool announced he was signing on 30/5 which by my calculations is only 3 days. I am struggling to see how Liverpool could sort all this out so quickly bearing in mind that Solanke was in Korea with the under 20s. Also when they signed Ings using this process they didn't make any announcement till 8/6 and then they included the words "subject to a medical" which in the case of Solanke is not the case this can only mean one of three things either he had already had a medical they aren't going to bother with one or they forgot to mention it. There is no doubt that Chelsea issued the noticeon time as compensation is being talked about by both Liverpool and Chelsea. As for what we will get for him I suspect it will be far more than the £3 million that's been floated and there will all be all sorts of add ons. That is of course supposes it gets to tribunal which I just have a feeling it won't.
  5. Not signed. He remains under contract with Chelsea till 30 June. He has agreed to sign for Liverpool when he becomes a free agent on 1 July.
  6. Now this just got interesting. It's now being reported(Evening Standard) that we are demanding over £10 million from Liverpool which they say has increased from our original demand of £8 million. It is claimed that the increase is down to potential following the U20 WC. I don't doubt that but I struggle to believe that is all the story and I wonder if behind closed doors something has been said regarding potential tapping up. What will for me confirm the position is if Liverpool let this go to tribunal or will a un disclosed fee be agreed prior to warts and all being exposed in from of what's called a transfer committee.
  7. I apologise for going on about this but we all know how often other clubs supporters go on about class but I thought it would be helpful to copy the rules and I would be interested in others opinions as to their take on what could quite possibly have been an illegal approach to Solanke. Before reading the extracts copied below from the current PL rulebook you need to factor in the following 1) We played in the FA cup final on Saturday 27 May. 2) Solanke could not , unless we authorised him to do so or issue the relevant form in advance, , before a certain period of time even talk to anyone.Yet they, Liverpool, announced he was signing for them on Tuesday 30 May. Ok the rule is the standard ruling. In effect most clubs players would have to be notified by Saturday 20 May. But as I said we were due to play in the FA cup final on 27 May So here's the rule V.17.2. On or before the third Saturday in May in the year in which the Player’s contract is to expire or, in the circumstances mentioned in Rule U.33, within four days of the last relevant F.A. Cup match, UEFA Champions League match, UEFA Europa League match or League Match in that year having been played, the Transferor Club must send to the Player Form 23 offerind him a new contract on the terms therein set out, which must be no less favourable than those in his current contract; There is mention of rule U33 . When you make an offer to the player to an out of contract player you have to send a copy of that offer again for most players that would be the 3rd Saturday in May but U33 is no more that linking th extension to clubs still involved. U.33 The date by which each Club is required by Rule U.32 to give confirmat to the Board shall be extended in the case of a Club which on the third Saturday in May in any year is still participating in the F.A. Cup, the UEFA Champions League or the UEFA Europa League or has yet to play a League Match. Thoughts?
  8. Just some further thoughts. The earliest date it seems that Solanke could have any discussions with Liverpool would have been Sunday 21 May. Bear in mind he was away with England in Korea so would have to be given permission to speak to Liverpool which is possible but and here's the biggie there is no way he would have been given, mid tournament to leave the group and have a full medical and quite simply I can't see any PL club investing what will be several million on a player without a full medical.
  9. I alluded to this in my earlier post as it was pretty obvious that the timelines didn't quite add up. As for him not joining LFC that is not worth wasting any time disputing he is going there. As for us if we really do have grounds for a complaint then what happens from this point on gets interesting. People talk about us having a history of tapping up but it's nothing compared to LFC In 2008 they were fined 20k having tapped up Zige, then they had two issues in 2008 Gareth Barry and Robbie Keane bot didn't result in PL action but somehow both complaints " went away" then in 2012 they had to issue an apology to Fulham over Dempsey . In 2017 they were found guilty of tapping up a Soke youth player and only last week the VVD and the apology made to Southampton Now I don't forget things and my memory of tapping up and Liverpool goes back to 2005 when they were said to be making a complaint if eveidence was found that we had made an approach to Gerrard. So for me if there is any evidence re Solanke then let's make a complaint
  10. Rarely do we get to know the breakdown of the financial terms of the loan deals but to suggest that the policy is just about getting a fee down the line is far from the whole story quite often on top of either their full wage or part off there is also a fee which in the case of many players is their amortised value.All monies received in this respect appear in the player trading account. In other words transfer fees received. I am not quite sure those running the club would quite as easily dismiss the odd million or two coming into the coffers & I suspect they would argue that in relation to the Oscar transfer they did indeed squeeze that extra £5 million out of the buying club . I suspect also they feel that the whole loan player project enables the club to test players in a competitive environment and yes many won't make the grade but some will . How else can they be tested in truly competitive matches? The project is not just self financing it also forms an important and welcomed additional income stream Its important to remember that players contracted to Chelsea are paid, in accordance with FA rules though Chelseas payroll. That means even though say Tammy was on loan at Bristol City all of his wages are paid by Chelsea. One of the benefits with that is with little impact you can sell a player or two on from the loan army releasing their wages and should there ever be any FFP issues in terms of the overall wage growth which is limited to £7 million per annum the club have room to manoeuvre should the need arise. Another important consideration is that all the costs of the academy are discounted for FFP purposes. In accounting terms for say Atsu we paid £3.5 million for him in 2013 on a 5 year contract. In 2017 his amortised value ( a players value decreases over the period of his contract) would be £700k so selling him for £6.5 million is actually a profit of £5.8 million. We have some very clever cookies working at Chelsea. When everyone was suggesting we would fail FFP we didn't that wasn't luck it was because they know the numbers, know how to work their way around rules and regulations and as that famous advert says " every little helps"
  11. No the man was 60 years old not his partner,
  12. We were out shopping today and had to give a double take when we saw a chap, must be in his mid 60,s walking around the shop with a full England kit on boots and all. Don't think there were any health issues but really really odd to see
  13. Outs two others need to be addedAtsu and Cuadrado. Yep both were on loan but both were still contracted to us. Think quite a few of those out on loan will be saying bye this window.
  14. It terms of value I suspect there is not a lot different between what we will get for Solanke and what we had to pay City for Sturbridge. Liverpool won't want to pay much at all but I suspect that the initial fee will be around £3-£3.5 million but there almost certainly will be add ons based on first team appearances probably £500 k after 10,20,30 &. 40 games. add another chunk should he make a full international appearance and indeed a % of any subsequent transfer fee. In the case of Sturbridge we finally paid £8.5 million. I suspect Liverpool are spinning the sum that the compensation panel will set but as we know from when they signed Danny Ings they ended up paying far more than they had hoped and whilst the numbers were different the terms of the award was very similar to the Sturbridge ruling One thing intrigues me is if the club gave Solanke permission to speak to Liverpool. When a club wants to retain a player they have to within 7 days of the clubs last competitive match confirm in writing that they want to keep the player and on what terms. I have never know a club issue these letters earlier than the last match. Until DS had that letter he can not speak to any other club unless his club agree to him holding discussions.
  15. Here's one totally from left field. Valdes has been let go by Middlesbrough. Seems to be preparedto sit on the bench and has it seem accepted not be guaranteed as number 1 at both Man Utd and Borough very experienced at the top level