Depends on why it is we actually want Long. If it is for ability to potentially play wide, work rate and speed then Wickham would not be someone we want as he has none of those points. Sunderland are also doing a Danny Ings with him and demanding the high end of what would be considered reasonable value (£8m) for him even with only 1 year left on his contract. You can tell they are pushing it if West Ham have pulled out. And they are apparently desperate for a striker (although not desperate enough to gazump us here...)
Can you not see what's happened here (in all seriousness) - Les - The Not-606 crowd were moaning all last season about not having a 'plan B' Ron - Oh, okay. Well we have the big striker thing that they're used to. How about a pacy hard working striker? Les - Makes sense. Here, I'll phone Man Utd...... Les - No joy. They said we could have Javier, but Javier says no. Ron - Ings? Les - One sec.... Les - Nope. Ings says yes, Burnley say no. Ron - And he's not striking? Or saying "2 years a great journey DESTROYED in one phone call?" Les - Nope. Seems he's not a spectacular ****. Ron - And the board said no? I thought players had all the.....oh never mind. Any other options? Les - Hmmmm......we could get Shane Long? Ron - Oh....err....yeah.....umm.....okay, **** it. It'll keep the Not-606ers happy as it will offer an option. Les - Course it will...... Or something like that. It's not the best solution. but hey-ho. Conor Wickham is basically a younger Pelle, so no. He's trying to bring in an option. That's good with me.
Not necessarily - as I suggested they would want to show how it is a good deal for them so could potentially have announced the 12m even if they are not guaranteed to receive all of it I believe something similar was mentioned about Osvaldo last year, where there were lots of installments, but the full amount was announced as the sale price by Roma I'm just wondering whether the fee really is cut and dry 12m. Or 8-10m spread installments (like all transfers) with extras for goals, appearances etc. I don't think we will ever know as Saints will announce as "undisclosed". As for club twitter accounts being reliable - I believe our one said Chambers missed a pre-season match due to illness when he was actually having an arsenal medical
Installments don't matter because the money is leaving either way - much like our "£27m in unpaid transfer debts" wasn't actually a problem. I'd expect it's likely around 8m potentially rising to 12.5m (which is still far too much) but I'm certain it is, in some way, worth up to £12.5m unless the Hull twitter wants to get themselves in trouble.
I can't see anything on Hull's Official Twitter page about the fee, or anything to do with Shane Long?
Point being that 8m guaranteed is not too bad considering his previous fee and the current market. And if he meets the clauses to trigger the full amount he will, quite likely, have been worth it And it is 12.5 now? Sound like the Hull twitter has added an extra 0.5 throughout the course of the day today from the widely reported figure
A Hull fan posted it in here earlier and I took his word for it but you seem to be right, I can't see anything either. Apologies.
Not for one second. But what is consider a bad deal is up for debate. I do not believe however than Southampton are writing out a cheque for 12m to be cashed tomorrow. If it is then it is a great deal for Hull! Out of interest do Hull fans think it is a good deal? Or a bad one? And what would you consider a bad deal for him to be? I am interested who the potential replacement is, and whether Hull will suffer as saints have (including from Hull) with other clubs knowing they have the money to spend
In the interest of perspective (was considering a new thread): Ulloa - 8m Ings - 8m (rumoured price) Wickham - 8m (rumoured asking price) Deeney - 10m (rumoured / Watford's asking price) McCormack -11m Shane Long - 12m Borini - 14m What we learn is any striker who has played in an English league seems to be commanding a crazy price. Premium for league and in most cases home grown status. Wickham, Borini and Ings have more potential (but it is just that, potential. Just because they are young it doesn't mean they will get better - look at players like Jeffers over the years). The majority above have only had 1 or 2 seasons where they have scored a lot of goals (e.g. Ings and McCormack last season). And in almost all cases they were in leagues lower than the premier league (apart from maybe Ulloa for Almeria but I cannot find the stats). Some of the above (e.g. Wickham and arguably Borini) have never had a great goal-scoring season People keep talking (including pundits on radio and TV) about 15-20 goal a season striker. These are rare and rarely consistent so clubs have to make gambles. Consistent 15-20 goal premier league strikers are players such as (including from the past), Shearer, Henry, Van Nistelrooy, Van Persie and Cristiano Ronaldo. Even Drogba only managed it twice So I am not sure what the people lambasting the Long fee think can be bought for 10-12m (that is not a complete gamble from overseas like Osvaldo). The answer, it would seem, is not a great deal....
Andriy Yarmolenko -- 24 years old, considerable experience in Europe and as an international, can play wide and up top -- is apparently available for the same money. 12m can buy you a great deal, if you aren't self-limiting to players in the UK.
Why the hell would we leak the fee when we have to sign a replacement for Long? Good idea, lets alert all Clubs how much we've got to spend so any Club can hike their price up. Makes no sense whatsoever.
Most Hull fans consider this good money for Long. Although he is a good player and fans do not want him to leave, most agree that £12M is an offer not to be refused. Also most agree that Brucey would not have agreed to the deal without having a replacement lined up. He is a canny buyer who players look up to and during his time at Hull has turned some great deals ( although a German one did let him down)
It was only a guess. Your reasoning is solid though. In that case I have no idea how the fee would have got out if neither club really wants it known. Leaks somewhere though...
