As much as I admire the fact that a Chairman has publicly stood up to a player & seemingly quashed his demand to move. I can't help but think that he's painted himself into a corner here & whilst from a 'bollocks' perspective he's shown his metal, but from a footballing perspective, he's taking a massive gamble here. As he's relying on the player accepting he's staying & then giving his all on the pitch, as without that element, his argument makes no sense. I also think the comment about the time remaining in the window is ridiculous tbh, as there's the best part of a month left to recruit a suitable replacement.
He has to if he wants his big money move. If he doesn't perform due to this - who would buy him for the value we've put on him? He's basically shot himself in the foot, and now has to perform if he thinks a move to Madrid is on the cards at some point.
You keep saying this but it depends on a few things: An assumption that we'd cave and take the money. An assumption he was lying when he said it was for footballing reasons not financial. 40 million, 50 million he says it doesn't matter so if he's telling the truth he's just going to say no to Real. So not a corner, a business choice for a reason stated. An assumption that Real who have shown absolutely no interest will test us and test us with a 50 million offer. (Still short by 5) If he does backtrack then yes he will look bad but I see no evidence yet to suggest he will so be happy he's slapped the Arses and the Weasel
I would agree with you if we had several offers on the table and we're just refusing them all trying to keep hold of him. But - it's just Arsenal... So I guess we'd rather have him not playing at all than playing for them. I don't think that'll be the case though - look out for a "sorry, words were taken out of context" type apology and he'll play with us til Jan.
just have to hope Uruguay qualify as that could cause more problems than its worth as he wont be arsed then if he still is. his wages are mainly made up of bonuses ie playing, so not so much a loss there financially if he is determined to be a cock. the comment about suitable replacements in time, i am more inclined to think its we had targets but either quoted way more than the player was worth or they didn't want to come. if Uruguay qualify i can see him puting his head down and play for a move, problem may arise if they don't.
Again Tobes assumptions. The language used was "its too late to get someone in to replace him." Since there are an abundance of strikers available and as you say plenty of time the only logical reason left is that the transfer committee have reported that the targets they actually want are not available for whatever reason and no one else will do. I've always wanted that. Don't spend the money just to show you can replace a guy if the replacement just doesn't cut it or doesnt suit. That's an expensive PR stunt. One that FSG have already a bad experience of.
Hard to argue with your reasoning there, particularly when you take into consideration the fact that they got so baldy burnt with the panic purchase of Carroll. However, do you really think that armed with £50m there's not a single quality replacement anywhere in the World, that could be recommended by the 'committee', with a few weeks left? Not sure I can have that mate.
You say a few weeks, but I believe the seasons for various countries start sooner which makes it even more difficult to attract players because they then have to replace their player in a short space of time. In addition, knowing that we're now armed with £50m, it means we'll be forced to pay inflated prices.
Oh I'm sure if we saw their list we'd all name ten each they didn't and say WTF???? But they're paid to make those calls and of course Real have to offer it first to test the stance and the list lol. Keeping on the owners bit: they appear to be learning and sticking for better or worse to their approach. I can't argue with that until it fails. Imagine if it catches on and players don't get what they want all the time? Yeah I'll not hold my breath either.
Who would you deem a suitable replacement and would want to come for no CL or European football . Also the gamble on Suarez committing himself to playing this season, he has international concerns and also the move he wants next summer, Henry is taking a very calculated gamble, not painting himself into a corner if he will absolutely not let Suarez go, Henry did not come to those conclusions on his own at a meeting with rest of the yanks, Ayre and Rodgers would have had input for sure, he's clearly made the decisions based on more than poorly informed guesses. It suits Suarez ego to perform this year more than ever.
Very nice position from the owner, probably after the Torres-Carroll deal; don't dick us about, if you want one of our players then you deal early or not at all.
Are any of us naïve enough to be shocked if Suarez does go? Even after this statement? Surely everyone can see it for what it is, business posturing. I believe the Arsenal bit is true but I'm sure we'd be happy to do business with someone else. Maybe the press will question a turn around, just for the spite of it, but only simple people are going to fall for that. As far as Arse cocking up their transfers, does this not show more evidence of illegal tapping up? Having agreed personal terms with a player without even approaching the club?
Already seen them when we had the threesome but there's a clause in the contract thats prevents me talking until 3rd September
well if someone comes in and bids a hefty fee after Henry's comments it could be argued that's what he was intending in the first place Saying not for sale to up the fee
Of course Arsenal are completely dodgy with their transfer dealings. If they weren't based in London they would have millions in fines and a transfer ban by now. Even if our position turned out to be posturing (I wouldn't expect them to turn down a hugely ridiculous offer) it's a lot better than other clubs' boring transparent predictabe lies; "Rooney is not for sale... oh wait he's just gone, and now we've bought Baines and Fellaini, who were also not for sale..."
He did leave himself an escape route by saying that we won't sell for football reasons, because we haven't time to find an adequate replacement. So, theoretically, if someone came up with a deal that involved said adequate replacement, he could take it and say that the conditions of his statement still hold.
thats a point. i reckon we tried costa then failed and so have decided there's nobody else out there right now.
