That seems to suggest what he means essentially Isak will go on strike.
3 Likes
Or at least put a 2nd bid in to know where we stand.
As ever we are always 2 or 3 players short. 2 fit CBs is a joke for a club our size.
2 Likes
Had we offered what they wanted then he would be a Liverpool player now.If that’s the price they want then it stands to reason if you offer what they want then you get him if he wants to join your club.
That doesn’t mean I think we should have paid 150mp,it just means had we paid it he’d be in our team.
I’d prefer not to sign him, definitely not at 150mp. Once we signed Ekitike I felt he could be our CF and would rather we go for a wide player to replace Diaz. If we were to spend a record fee on a forward I’d prefer Alvarez, who we probably could persuade Simeone to sell for 150mp.
They want 150,we offered 110,now we wait and see if a negotiation takes place.
1 Like
The club doesnt need to put in a second bid to know where it stands.
2 Likes
That assumes Newcastle are being honest about the £150m claim rather than just using it as a media control exercise later.
2 Likes
As in they paid what we wanted? Or they didn’t pay what we value him at therefore we don’t sell?
1 Like
As in implying they would entertain a bid from us at all.
Whatever our opening bid they can always use a higher figure in the media to justifly not selling, and its unlikely we submitted that bid without expecting to be asked to pay more than that sum, so something else has probably been said to Hughes and co to lead them to specifically say we will wait for Newcastle to invite us to bid again before we do so.
Also.
1 Like
Hes obsessed with bidding like its Football manager.
1 Like
You don’t think we should go for him?
Let him hand in a formal transfer request.
And then force Newcastle to get the price down.
150m for a player who doesn’t want to be in the club is madness.
1 Like
I think “I’m not playing for Newcastle again” is probably a formal transfer request.
5 Likes
More of an informal one tbh.
I think he’s pushing it as far as he can without forgoing the loyalty bonus he’d be due from a sale without formally putting in a transfer request.
3 Likes
Loyalty bonus would already be forfeit at this stage (as per @Kopstar )
2 Likes
Potentially. Newcastle would be entitled to take clear expressions (words or actions) of a desire to leave (/not honour the terms of his contract) as amounting to a transfer request thus disentitling him to loyalty based bonuses.
3 Likes
The ‘loyalty’ bonus is a joke at this point. They should stop putting them in contracts
3 Likes
If the club have identified him as the best choice, i’m all for it.
(My choice of gif was because i couldn’t find the clip where he negotiates with the lawyer over the taxi - i think this is from the scene just before it where he races Kevin Bacon)
1 Like
I’m sure our resident legal counsel can clarify this but I thought a signing on fee and a loyalty bonus was essentially the same thing.
EG. Player signs contact with a 5m signing on fee. This is paid in installments over the duration of the contract, and remaining payments are void should a player chose to terminate the contract. (Hence ‘loyalty’)
I can’t really see how Isak’s behaviour is anything other that a de facto transfer request at this point.
2 Likes
Any reason why Isak just dont buy out his own contract then LFC wont have to pay a fee and can give him the money back.
1 Like