Why is it unlikely? Chelsea could buy him for €100m at the end of Jan and loan him back to AZ for the remaining 4 months of the season.
Transfer Rumours 2016/17 City Transfer Thread
- Thread starter originallambrettaman
- Start date
-
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
-
Why is it unlikely? Chelsea could buy him for €100m at the end of Jan and loan him back to AZ for the remaining 4 months of the season.
Stop bloody panicking!
If it's 1 or 2 then he'll definitely be signed going on City history!
If it's 3, I'm sure the signing is just a formality, just the timing of it, so to get it done, a loan, then Jan 1st 00:00 & 1 second, some ****er has to leave the new year party, dig out the fax machine, plug it in, blow the dust off, read the instructions, then by Jan 31st 22:59 59 seconds, we can ratify the deal!
Stop bloody panicking!
I think we're committed, it's a loan in name only.
Just for a bit of context on this, Inter and Man City agreed a loan to mandatory transfer for Jovetic for €14m. They both agreed it was a loan in name only, except he has been ****e. It turns out it's only mandatory if he plays a single game for Inter this season, hence they've said he won't play a single game for them this season and they tried desperately to sub loan him. The exact same happened with Inter loaning out Ricky Alvarez to Sunlan to the extent that neither side wanted him and he openly admitted he longer knew who owned him.
I'm of course not saying any of this will happen, but just some of these 'loan in name only mandatory transfers' don't always turn out to be the case.
I'm of course not saying any of this will happen, but just some of these 'loan in name only mandatory transfers' don't always turn out to be the case.
If it is the same as your example he'd have to not play a minute for us before January, in which case we wouldn't know if he was **** anyway. I think we wait and see but I'd think it's going to be a permanent deal, and worrying over it is pointless at this stage.
Jovetic was on loan at inter last season. The mandatory came in after 1 game this season. The point is this was never mentioned previously with both sides saying it was compulsory from the off.
I don't think people are worrying, they're hypothesising.
Since ours becomes permanent after 6 months it's a bit different clearly. Some seem to be worrying.
^^^^ this ^^^^
It's a perfectly valid question and one which I'm not sure of the answer to.
Bummers examples illustrate that it's not all cut and dried.
Its not over yet Syd can dig around this some more dont you worry. See you are worrying.
I was listening to this, this morning.
You must log in or register to see media
I'm worried now, but I won't be worried long.
I can`t see how we can bring anyone else in now that we have named our 25 man squad for the Premier League until January, unless of course there is something I`m missing.
I assumed the permanent in January was so the Chinese picked up the bill- Allams spent their £18m allocated on the other signings- nothing more to it than that?
My point was not that he hasn't made any good signings. However, in his 1st few years pretty much all his signings were bang on. Of course they were still a few duds but that happens. His signings got us up the 1st time and kept us up.
He just didn't seem to know how to build on that. The signings of our relegation year were very poor and our team spirit which had been so strong previously seemed to disintergrate.
I wasn't impressed with his signings last year particularly either. Not sure why he bothered signing Taylor, Maloney, Diomande or Kuciak