I can't believe you really think it would be a good idea to buy players in the hope your player signs for someone. Yeah good stuff, so if a fee can be agreed, if he passes a medical, if he agrees personal terms, if all those things go through we will definitely get our money back for the signings we make. What a sensible idea that is.
Player wants out. Three clubs interested. Yeah not sure we should be too worried about that player 'signing for someone'. You really do seem to have a very limited understanding about how these things work, or seem to think that Hull City operates in an alternate plane where everything works differently to the 19 other PL clubs, who for some reason or another according to you, can operate the way the rest of us seem to think Hull should be able to.
When three clubs have submitted bids.. If all three are happy to pay 10m for him then we should be considering the fact that perhaps we're not asking for enough.
He has not passed his medical yet. That's why Marco said he didn't want to talk about it anymore until he had officially left
It regularly disappoints me that we turn on players so readily when they leave. They're always either '**** anyway' or a **** for leaving. For some reason hardly anyone seems to want to talk about the state of the club with regard to players leaving. It seems obvious to me that that's the biggest reason a player would want to leave City right now. Yes the contract issue is a thing for Snodgrass, but if we were competing and building a squad, as we have done in previous years, people wouldn't want to leave for another bottom half team, just as they didn't in previous years. We'll still be favourites to finish bottom, because we're so massively ill-equipped for the Premier League. Silva has done incredibly well to get the performances he has done so far, but it'll be something of a miracle if he can keep that up to the extent that we stay up with the current squad. Remember we were ace under Phil Brown at first too. As someone else said, Snodgrass owes us nothing. We'd be relegated already and probably on course to do a Derby if it wasn't for his contributions already this season. The club isn't taking the Premier League seriously, so we can't expect players to stay here and accept a relegation on their CV just out of blind loyalty. They'll be pissed off that the club got into such a state for no good reason. We got promoted with a brilliant squad, it should have been our best chance yet to establish ourselves in the PL, but we ****ed it all up in the summer just for the sake of spiting Steve Bruce because he'd called Ehab a ****. Ehab was prepared to mess about with the club to this massive extent just to show SB who was boss; of course players are going to be pissed, and who can blame for them if they seek a move? Diame told the Hull Daily Mail this was the reason he left. I'd be very surprised if it was any different for Livermore and Snodgrass. Livermore in particular has all his ex-Tottenham mates here and they've both always seemed happy and settled. It's no coincidence that they're suddenly leaving now. Every time Silva speaks he has a dig about transfers. He always says how unusual it is to only have 15 or 16 players and we need more. Not just a couple but 4 or 5. He wouldn't keep highlighting the need for funds so publicly if he was confident of getting those funds already. He must be as baffled as everyone else about what's going on.
You do have to take in to consideration that it's being reported he wants high wages and a long contract. This will limit the amount that clubs will spend as they will have to take it in to consideration as part of the package, and there is also the risk that he won't actually agree terms.
West Ham are paying 15m for Hogan. If they're happy to spend that much on an untried striker, paying half that for Snodgrass is ridiculous.
Then the move falls through and the debt to Allam house/the bank grows by £20m and everyone moans. Can't win can they.
I do find it amazing that there's this fixation on the very small chance of the worst case scenario happening. It's the excuse that's been used for years for why we never sign players to more than a 3-year deal when most other clubs sign players to 5/6-year deals "Oh but if they get crocked then we're stuck with them" "Oh we could go down and get stuck with massive wages". And we still end up screwed anyway but also seem to lose all our players because we let contracts run down.
If we've somehow got 10m from West Ham compared to 7.5 from Burnley then that's certainly sounding better. Can't imagine why they would give us an extra 2m more than Burnley though.
Sydney, were operating at budget. Good business practice is to spend within your means, or if you're going to gamble then borrow against what you can afford. Players fail medical, clubs and players change their minds at the last minute, it happens.
