I’ve been trying to read between the lines all summer when it comes to our transfer business. Paying attention to what is and isn’t being said by fairly credible sources, considering our history and the principles involved, and trying to make some fairly reasonable assumptions.
In this case, my assumption is that Isak and Liverpool have an accord; that Newcastle is the obstacle; that they’d probably sell if they can source a replacement; that Liverpool feels strongly enough about Isak that they’re willing to wait to see if Newcastle will bargain.
The problem from Liverpool’s perspective is that they cannot control Newcastle’s piss poor ability to recruit. And they know if Newcastle cannot source a replacement, they will not sell Isak even if it means dragging him to matches.
If Liverpool sell Nunez/Chiesa, they’re left with three senior forwards - Salah, Gakpo, Ekitike. Even with the possibility that Wirtz can play up front, I don’t think you can go into September without adding at least one forward.
So how long to we wait to see if Newcastle can get their shit together before we start targeting others?
I think we will close the Isak deal. The biggest hurdle is Newcastle, and how they view themselves. At first they saw themselves as our rivals. They deservedly beat us in the Kangaroo cup (never mind the PSG hangover) and they qualified for the CL, so they see themselves as marching up the hill.
But hang on a minute!
We are the Premier League Champions, we pay more, we are globally so much bigger, we can expect to fight for the biggest prizes during the prime of Isak’s career and we have had an amazing transfer window to set us up for the next cycle.
Isak, rightly, wants to be a part of that.
We know the score. Newcastle, reluctantly, need/needed some time to get there. All the bile is part of the process.
I think it is all but done. What remains is for Newcastle to sign a striker, then for the fee to be agreed. Still a couple of hurdles, but we are closing in.
It is a great time to be a red! Isak we be ours soon enough.
Actually all the noise are coming from Newcastle, tabloids, the media, the ITKs, and fan forums like this. Not sure what the club has contributed to this “fiasco” but as far as the club is concerned, they made a bid, rejected and will bide their time before deciding on the next move. I am sure Isak is not worth the price of 150m. Not even 100m. But to me, the club wants him, the club is willing to pay a certain price for him and the club has a strategy to negotiate or even a hard stop if our valuation is not accepted. Let the club do its job, so far they have been quiet, so not sure where the fiasco is coming from except from the external noises that we are allowing ourselves to be affected by?
Whether he is ‘worth’ x amount or not is to some point the incorrect way to view it, imho, especially when it comes to football. Liverpool as an entire Club was sold for 300 million just 15 years ago and and since then we sold a player less than 7 years later for almost half of that and bought a player for 40% of that. In such a mad environment, it comes down to what a player is worth to both buying and selling club, is that amount doable, is that amount financially sustainable in the long run and how would it affect future business with regards to funds available and needs of the team.
As it stands, we are going to have to replace about 30 goals and 20 assists when Salah calls it a day here, that day is fast arriving whether we want to admit it or not and that’s a fuckload to replace, no two ways about it.
We can go oj about needing a CB more than we need Isak but I’d argue it would be relatively easier to replace Virgil two years down the line than look for a cheap and effective alternative
to Salah, in terms of numbers contributed to the team, in twelve months time. It’s a gamble to assume that:
It would be cheaper
There is someone available on the market
Cheaper + available means effective
I understand that Isak might not be effective either but all things considered, I think he’s more likely to be so than anyone else out there that is available.
The above post certainly shows the canyon of cash a Premier League team has become. However the owners still appear prudent in relation to cash, obviously a couple of slim transfer windows but still a premiership.
.
While it’s not my money I would have serious reservations about a player who would dump his team and mates, to push through a transfer.
There’s no way we can get all things done smoothly and quickly.
We’re doing some big business this summer, had a terribly unfortunate and rare event and part of our incoming moves also depend on players moving out, some of which also takes time.
We have less than a month left, so let’s see. Most of it is done and we might end up buying anything between 1 and 3 more players. I think we will get at least 1 more.
The whole “saga” thing with Isak doesn’t bother me (I do have questions whether it’s smart to go so big for two strikers who I struggle to see for now how they play together). Of course, ideally you want them in as early as possible, to have as much training as possible.
Whether it takes us 3 days or 3 months to get a player in, the absolutely most important thing is that it’s the right player and the right move for us. But that’s just my opinion.
What if that player was told he would be part of an exciting future, with major signings due? And that his personal terms and conditions would be improved? When this hasn’t materialised, he finds out a club that can match his ambitions, professionally and personally want him to sign?
Loyalty is of no importance in football at the moment. If it was, we would be snarling at the club for selling Nunez. A fan favourite, loved by his teammates. Instead we see his sale as integral to our next business. I think Diaz showed little loyalty in his move to Bayern. PL chanpion, again, loved by the fans. But he left and in some quarters its acceptable that he has thought of his career above the club. Nothing about him making eyes at Barcelona and settling for second best.
Alas, the days of Phil Thompson et al are gone. We have to embrace the commodity of the modern player. If Isak signs its because the club wants him. That will do for me.
Some of the stuff around the Isak potential move to us looks a bit off - not that any of us are close to it and really know - but to my mind, I put it down the the business of football, and not any particular lack on the part of the player.
I don’t see him as abandoning his teammates of letting them down or whatever. He is an ambitious, top level striker, who wants to achieve all that he can. Clearly he feels there is a better option for him than Newcastle, and there has been plenty of reporting on a new deal not being offered as expected, due to their PSR issues.
There is a pecking order in football. Like it or not, but that’s how it is. And if a club higher up the food chain likes one of your players, it usually ends with a move. Newcastle are a big club and they can do exactly that to many other teams. But there are teams above them. We had years of it watching some of our big stars depart. It is unpleasant, so I understand the fan reaction.
But after the denial - anger - bargaining - depression stages are navigated, you have to accept it. And accepting it means you take the dough, reinvest, and improve that way, because if you keep building it up successfully fewer and fewer clubs can touch your players.
This is from the other day but I found something in the piece and wondered if it may play a part in a transfer such as Isak potentially moving to us. @Kopstar if you are reading.
"A ruling by the European Court of Justice last year in a case involving former Chelsea midfielder Lassana Diarra may also be in the minds of all parties.
The court found aspects of FIFA’s transfer rules contrary to EU law, and appeared to remove or at least reduce the deterrents to players wishing to unilaterally terminate their contracts without just cause.
World players’ union FIFPRO believes the ruling means any compensation owed to a player’s former club in the case of the player terminating the contract without just cause would not be based on any transfer value or on transfer fees paid, but instead on the residual value of their contract."
If player transfers start to play out like this, it will be huge. They can leave, and they only have to compensate the club for the remainder of their contract? In the case of Isak the fee at this stage would be less than £30M.
Wages would presumably skyrocket further, and the amount of movement will increase too.
Maybe the ramifications of the Diarra ruling haven’t really been tested, because clubs don’t want to deal with the harsher dog-eat-dog world it will create in football?
Yeah, I posted a similar article on this point a few days ago.
Basically there remains a lot of uncertainty. Not about the player’s ability to unilaterally terminate at this point in their contract but about the compensation payable.
What’s self evidently true, however, is that the compensation cannot be more than the player’s transfer value (as determined by independent assessment if necessary) but the process isn’t efficient.
It could easily leave Isak in limbo without a club between transfer windows.
However, the very possibility of such action ought to provide downward pressure on his valuation in the current discussions.
If he can unilaterally cancel his contract, surely he is then free to sign with a new party. Any compensation owed then becomes something to be determined at a later date? Or can the club entitled to compensation block his registration pending agreement/payment of compensation?
Makes Chelseas’ 7 and 8 year contracts look more savvy by the day. Surely clubs like ours should be moving to something like 5 + 2 +1 style option contracts - possibly even triggerable by a player as well as club if certain targets are met - as a minimum so that some value is protected?
Who decides the transfer value and how do they arrive at their decision though?
Example: How does an independent assessment calculate the transfer value of Steven Gerrard to Liverpool? Or how does the value of someone like John Terry’s value to Chelsea be calculated
This is how I was thinking. Doesn’t it potentially stop clubs playing hardball with their own players who want out.Does it give players like Isak more power if they decide an interested club has offered their club a reasonable amount, ie Liverpool have offered a record British fee(120mp),accept it or I’ll leave for 3 times my yearly salary.
