Guest Brian M Posted July 29, 2006 Posted July 29, 2006 The facts (just the facts, ma'am) before you vote... He's one of the best left backs in Europe. He's an England international. He's proven in the EPL. He already lives in London and won't need to acclimate. He's a player in his prime with many good years ahead of him. He wants to, and is actively seeking, a move to Chelsea (which may or may not count as a 'transfer request') He's got 2 years left on his contract. Some other information (hearsay, your honour) that may sway your vote... The less time left on your contract, the lower the transfer fee will be. Duff went to Newcastle for 5 million (a player in his prime and normally valued at 10 - 15 million pounds) because he only had 1 year left on his contract. Rio went to Manure for 30 million. Arsen*l are greedy f*cks and don't have to sell if they don't want to. (I've gone for: 20.1 million - 22.5 million)
Makelele Posted July 29, 2006 Posted July 29, 2006 I choese 17.6-20 as i am hoping that we do not get bullied here on the $$$, even though 17.6-20 is rather high...it would be a *steal* at the rate we get charged for players
Guest Posted July 29, 2006 Posted July 29, 2006 I imagine if SWP is worth 21 then Ashley Cole should be as well.
Guest Brian M Posted July 29, 2006 Posted July 29, 2006 I imagine if SWP is worth 21 then Ashley Cole should be as well. Interesting you should mention SWP, because it occurred to me that Arse were being tw*ts about the price, not so much to actually get double the money, but so that they could - at the 11th hour - suddenly say they want SWP to be included in the deal. And anyone who doesn't think this will / could happen, think back to Soxy...
Guest Brian M Posted July 30, 2006 Posted July 30, 2006 http://www.gunners4life.com/index.asp?a ... ferrer=rss
Makelele Posted July 30, 2006 Posted July 30, 2006 http://www.gunners4life.com/index.asp?arti...34&referrer=rss ha, some of them are being honest...
nick Posted July 30, 2006 Posted July 30, 2006 You always play more for English players. We generally seem to pay twice the "perceived value". is Essien worth 10m more than Carrick? I think that 15 is a fair price but we will end up paying around 30 unless we can secure somebody else.
morris Posted July 30, 2006 Posted July 30, 2006 I think that 15 is a fair price but we will end up paying around 30 unless we can secure somebody else. I think giving Arsene Wenger 30 million to play with is fcuking insane ! I'd rather we play Bridge and let em keep Cashley.
Pauly Posted July 30, 2006 Posted July 30, 2006 I think that 15 is a fair price but we will end up paying around 30 unless we can secure somebody else. I think giving Arsene Wenger 30 million to play with is f*****g insane ! I'd rather we play Bridge and let em keep Cashley. haha! welcome to the forum. i agree! Pauly ps. Jody Morris fan?
morris Posted July 30, 2006 Posted July 30, 2006 I think that 15 is a fair price but we will end up paying around 30 unless we can secure somebody else. I think giving Arsene Wenger 30 million to play with is f*****g insane ! I'd rather we play Bridge and let em keep Cashley. haha! welcome to the forum. i agree! Pauly ps. Jody Morris fan? hello mate - well Morris was a player name that had not been used
Guest Posted July 30, 2006 Posted July 30, 2006 I voted 17.6 - 20 million. I think (or at least im hoping) that when it comes to splashing the cash, we are/will be more careful when it comes to giving that money directly to rivals.
Guest Brian M Posted July 30, 2006 Posted July 30, 2006 hello mate - well Morris was a player name that had not been used So is Bogarde and Panuncci. But you don't see anyone stooping to using them... :?
Kenn Posted July 30, 2006 Posted July 30, 2006 I've chosen 15 - 17.5 million, but would not want the club to go above 18 million.
Guest Posted July 31, 2006 Posted July 31, 2006 and to prove that, here's a picture. I was going to add (but yes I forgot sorry) that hopefully Mikel was the exception to the rule as his was an extra-ordinary case.
yuliastar Posted July 31, 2006 Posted July 31, 2006 I cvoted for 22.6 million-25, because if we are dead-set on him that is what I have a feeling Arsenal will hold out for. Even though Cashley is the Judas in the camp at the moment, they are struggling with their defence a bit at the moment so keeping a defensive player until the right price is met will not be horrible. With our money, and knack of paying big for players, we will end up having to pay quite a bit to secure him. However, I am hoping that we are sensible and realize that we are wasting money when have a perfectly good LB and just scrap the whole silly idea. P.S. Super relieved to hear about the imminent Carlos move to Fenerbace, that is one potential disaster we avoided!
Butch Posted July 31, 2006 Posted July 31, 2006 When can we ever believe what we read in the papers? If I had to guess, I'd say the figure we have discussed with Arsenal so far is way below the 16 million being argued in the tabloids. I think that if we had really offered 16 million (the first time), we'd have offered too much, and Arsenal would likely have taken it. Eventually, I believe it would be in the 16-18 million quid region, or not at all. 20 million? Arsenal are having a laugh, and even if we really wanted him, I somehow doubt even Roman would fork out that amount for a left back. I don't think Arsenal are going to be able to keep him - bridges burnt and all that. Chelsea know this. Real Madrid? Hah - right! They are going to buy a 16 million quid left back! No, from my experience, the numbers quoted in the tabloids are almost always higher than the numbers agreed behind closed doors. Cheers, Butch
Guest abc Posted July 31, 2006 Posted July 31, 2006 lets face it , any media coverage regarding our finances where facts are missing will be inflated in order to keep the negative image up . its a given . bearing in mind the amount of lies that are printed in matters a lot more serious than premiership football. i havent said anything about the A . Hole saga because the rage has not subsided just yet and its mixed with nausea . i do not want this guy anywhere near a blue shirt . some people just should not be and he is one of them imho. i do concede that i felt the same about sparky but as far as players in their positions , the two cannot be compared . ashley ( retch ! ) is going to have to go some before he gets more than a polite clap. my ideal scenario would be kenyon picking up the pen to sign the cheque , hesitating and then saying we ve changed our mind . ash ( retch ! ) report for pre-season for your childhood dream team. tell dein to stick it ...
chelseahk Posted July 31, 2006 Posted July 31, 2006 1st opportunity cost is that Wayne Bridge will go! :?
yuliastar Posted July 31, 2006 Posted July 31, 2006 1st opportunity cost is that Wayne Bridge will go! :? If we believe the tabloids, he might! And I would be a lot sorrier about that then 20 million quid.
g3.7 Posted July 31, 2006 Posted July 31, 2006 qaz wrote: I was going to add (but yes I forgot sorry) that hopefully Mikel was the exception to the rule as his was an extra-ordinary case. here's another picture: frank sinatra himself would have been cheaper. p.s. whatever we pay for cole will doubtless be too much andprobably used to help arsenal more than cole helps us.
Englishman Posted July 31, 2006 Posted July 31, 2006 Arsenal currently have a massive debt burden, which I believe is heavier than the debt that almost destroyed Leeds. They have a manager with a gift for making bargain signings. We currently have a perfectly good left-back in Wayne Bridge. Ashley Cole is a Gooner and a t*sser and won't greatly improve our side and just isn't worth the reported ?20m fee. Or the hassle. Signing him could cost us a hell of a lot.
Recommended Posts