http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,12876_7044528,00.html Tottenham boss Harry Redknapp has admitted the club are unlikely to move for West Ham star Scott Parker in the transfer window. Parker is expected to leave Upton Park this summer as he seeks to stay in the Premier League following West Ham's relegation to the Championship. Aston Villa are believed to have made a £7million bid for Parker, while Chelsea have been strongly linked with a move for the England international as they seek cover for the injured Michael Essien. Redknapp has never hidden his admiration for Parker and the Spurs boss has been tipped to make a new move for the 30-year-old after seeing a bid to sign the former Newcastle man rebuffed last summer. However, Redknapp insists Spurs are unlikely to move for the England international due to the finances involved. "If you take into account the fee of around £8m, signing on fees and wages you're talking about a £30m deal," Redknapp told the Sunday Mirror. "There is no way the club would sanction a deal for a 30-year-old who would have no resale value at the end of his contract." Do you think its good or bad that parker wont be joining us? Or do you think its a stunt to lower the price tag?
I would agree. A loan would be the best for us, given Sandro's injury. I was under the impression that Wet Spam preferred a loan, anyway, as they feel that they can come straight back into the Prem, after one year.
One of West Ham's interchangeable owners suggested that the loan would carry a significant fee, though. That's even worse than just buying him, financially speaking.
If the Chavs decide they don't want him back, then Villa seem to be the only other interested party. And,they want to buy him. A loan may be what the Spammers want, but what about the player himself??
Too dear and not really good enough IMHO. Playing in a Wet Spam side would make Bentley look good. As for a loan fee, the loan system is designed to get a player game time and the club a player.Why would we pay?
