Saints January transfer window thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
I Sorry I Ruined The Party said:
Yes.

Refusing a transfer request for Shaw is simply denying him the chance of pursuing an opportunity. I have no idea how this shows any loyalty on the part of the player, who has been given no choice. Or on the part of the club who is refusing the transfer because it doesn't suit THEIR interest.

I keep saying it. If you want to demonstrate how loyal you are to the player then you would accept all transfer bids and match the highest one. That's telling the player he means more to you than any other club. Simply refusing to allow a player to leave doesn't demonstrate anything.
Click to expand...

Except that you want him to stay, that you value him as a player, that he might be in your long term plans, that it is players like he, that is going to be placed alongside him, that are going to make this club the most successful that it has ever been, that it is his chance to make real history with this club, and not just be another number in a glamour club, that.... oh blimey, need I go on..?

Doesn't demonstrate anything..? Have you no imagination at all..? Did I miss the irony or something..? :)
 
Yes. You missed the entire point.

If I had Eden Hazard playing for me at $.01 a week, you can bet that I would turn down a $50 million offer for him. Does that really tell Hazard I'm "loyal," or that I value him as a Southampton player? No, it just says I realize I've got a great deal here, and I'm going to capitalize on it even if it doesn't exactly help Eden Hazard.

If I were to say "Hey, Eden. I realize I am paying you $.01 and you are worth at least 10,000,000 times that amount so I'm going to give you a raise. In fact, because you've already given up so much for the club I will better any offer on the table." THAT is showing loyalty.

To me, loyalty would be telling players like Forte, Sharp, Lee, Hooiveld, De Ridder, etc. who have always given their best that they can stay on the current contracts as long as they wish or that we will happily move them wherever they want to go (if they wish to go) and make up whatever difference in wages might occur. That is showing a player that you value their contributions to you. But pretty much most people are quite happy to shove those guys out the door ASAP.

This loyalty issue only comes up when we are talking about desirable players. And no one asks Shaw what he wants. Or .Cortese for that matter. Shaw probably wants to stay and is quite happy here, but I'm sure he'd like to opportunity to decide for himself, instead of the club deciding for him.

You don't want Shaw to go because if he does it doesn't fit YOUR image of what the club should be about. In other words, you are not asking the club to be loyal to Shaw. You are asking the club and Shaw to be loyal to you. Don't get it twisted.
 
Ignoring the Luke Shaw issue but talking generally. Players sign contracts and that work both ways. They are presumably happy with the terms when they sign...it gives them set wages (plus add ons) for a set number of years. They may miss out on a better offer later, but they also get paid for those years if unable to play through sickness or injury. I bet we'd like a contract like that...no 12 weeks sick pay for them. During that time, the chairman can turn down offers for the player (unless something is written in the contract) but the player does not have to make the move. Seems fair to me.
 
I Sorry I Ruined The Party said:
Yes. You missed the entire point.

If I had Eden Hazard playing for me at $.01 a week, you can bet that I would turn down a $50 million offer for him. Does that really tell Hazard I'm "loyal," or that I value him as a Southampton player? No, it just says I realize I've got a great deal here, and I'm going to capitalize on it even if it doesn't exactly help Eden Hazard.

If I were to say "Hey, Eden. I realize I am paying you $.01 and you are worth at least 10,000,000 times that amount so I'm going to give you a raise. In fact, because you've already given up so much for the club I will better any offer on the table." THAT is showing loyalty.

To me, loyalty would be telling players like Forte, Sharp, Lee, Hooiveld, De Ridder, etc. who have always given their best that they can stay on the current contracts as long as they wish or that we will happily move them wherever they want to go (if they wish to go) and make up whatever difference in wages might occur. That is showing a player that you value their contributions to you. But pretty much most people are quite happy to shove those guys out the door ASAP.

This loyalty issue only comes up when we are talking about desirable players. And no one asks Shaw what he wants. Or .Cortese for that matter. Shaw probably wants to stay and is quite happy here, but I'm sure he'd like to opportunity to decide for himself, instead of the club deciding for him.

You don't want Shaw to go because if he does it doesn't fit YOUR image of what the club should be about. In other words, you are not asking the club to be loyal to Shaw. You are asking the club and Shaw to be loyal to you. Don't get it twisted.
Click to expand...

I respect your opinion. It's complete bollocks, but I respect it.
 
Loyalty is a funny one. Take Matty. Was he "loyal", or did he just happen to find himself in a situation that suited him and his lifestyle. And did the club keep him out of loyalty or because he was the best player in the country!?
 
Lff said:
Loyalty is a funny one. Take Matty. Was he "loyal", or did he just happen to find himself in a situation that suited him and his lifestyle. And did the club keep him out of loyalty or because he was the best player in the country!?
Click to expand...

They kept him because of his skill, nothing to do with loyalty. Football is ultimately (from a club perspective) a business. There's very little room for sentimentality.
 
fran-MLs little camera said:
Ignoring the Luke Shaw issue but talking generally. Players sign contracts and that work both ways. They are presumably happy with the terms when they sign...it gives them set wages (plus add ons) for a set number of years. They may miss out on a better offer later, but they also get paid for those years if unable to play through sickness or injury. I bet we'd like a contract like that...no 12 weeks sick pay for them. During that time, the chairman can turn down offers for the player (unless something is written in the contract) but the player does not have to make the move. Seems fair to me.
Click to expand...
true. if a player wants to be notified about bids or be able to discuss terms, those can be enabled with clauses in the contract and it's all above board.
 
Lff said:
Loyalty is a funny one. Take Matty. Was he "loyal", or did he just happen to find himself in a situation that suited him and his lifestyle. And did the club keep him out of loyalty or because he was the best player in the country!?
Click to expand...
So loyal that he was going to move to Spurs but then his girlfriend didn't want to move to London...
 
People must be bored with the amount of random crap being said on this thread. <laugh>
 
Beefy said:
People must be bored with the amount of random crap being said on this thread. <laugh>
Click to expand...

I haven't read the last few pages, and I don't think it's possible for me to get so bored that I would resort to that. I'm just going to assume that actually there are no solid rumours of any sort.
 
Joe said:
I haven't read the last few pages, and I don't think it's possible for me to get so bored that I would resort to that. I'm just going to assume that actually there are no solid rumours of any sort.
Click to expand...

Think we could see a loan in but nothing else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back