What a load of totally tedious bollocks!! To repeat, for those that are a little slow on the uptake. If, and when, I hear from Modrics'own mouth - not some "exclusive" from the press, that he wants to leave - then I will believe it. Before then, you can argue all you like, it's still speculative, unfounded, sensationalism, with no grounding in proven fact.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...in-Chelsea-for-Champions-League-football.html In the first line it says "in an exclusive interview"
Fair play mate, but it doesn't mean it's not legit. The fact is Modric has had enough time to come out and say the quotes were made up, but he hasn't.
Well we have to consider the context How many men would say they wanted to change employers while on their honeymoon
To say that Wegner is 'a little bit French' would be a total lie, as Wegner is actually a German name. Arsene Wenger however is totally French. So by your logic saying that Wegner is a 'little bit French' makes you are a liar. Or did you make a slight mistake? In which case, again according to your logic, would still make you a liar.
I've only seen the Mail claiming it as an exclusive tbh, ------------------------------------------------------- I see, so this is how it works now is it, when a player feels its the right time in his career to change clubs....the first thing they do, is not talk to either club involved, but ring a National newspaper!! ...even for a wum attempt, really really poor.
Smart. I don't know if you managed to listen to the interview with Redknapp recently when he was talking about this transfer saga, but in it he said that these days, the old club to club communication was now the third in the chain of events in a transfer. It's now usually the agent, the player and then the club last who know what the intentions are. So it's entirely plausible that Modric and his agent may have engineered this initial move, which the papers have lapped up, without Spurs' having any prior knowledge.
No, Modric didn't know anything about the bid until Chelsea made it public, then he probably asked his agent what to do. I'm sure that then the agent advised him to go public with a newspaper as he felt that was the best way of encouraging Chelsea to come back to Spurs with a higher offer which they would accept.
None of those players are currently at the level that Modric is at and it would take them time to adjust to playing in this country. We'd clearly take a step back as a team while this happened and once they had adjusted, matured and proved their ability to play here, we'd be back in the same situation that we're in now with Modric. Yet you're suggesting that we should sell one of our best players to someone else because it appears that he wants to leave. Which is it?
Are you particularly tired, SNIOM? I only ask, as you appear to be rambling and making very little sense. What 'supplementary alternatives' are you talking about? Why would we want to switch players around and take risks when we don't have to? Van der Vaart really wasn't a risk, either. How well we do will depend on future performances? Er, yeah, of course it will. What's your point? Sorry, but that last comment was just a mess.
40k with a big rucksack and a tent? That's what the help are for! If man had been meant to camp, then we wouldn't have invented houses. We would need to switch things around a bit if Modric leaves, as I can't really see any direct replacement being available. That's why we should try to avoid selling him. Why was van der Vaart a risk? If he'd have been offered to every team in the division for £8m, then at least 75% of them would have ripped Real's arm off. Why would future performances improve immensely if we've sold at least one of our best players?
And we stand to gain quite a bit of money by selling our unwanted squad players, so it's not necessary to sell the ones that we want. Are you recommending selling Fabregas?
Who defines what a player is worth? If we sell Modric for even £40m and it unsettles Bale, van der Vaart and Sandro, then we'll have ballsed up our whole midfield. Totally not worth it. So if you sell Fabregas, Clichy and Nasri, then what? You may be able to bring in players of similar ability or even promote the likes of Wilshere, Gibbs and Ramsey, but it's unlikely that you'll be challenging for the title seriously next season if you do. Is that acceptable to you or is it another two steps back and one forward?
And what would we do with those top class players, Lilds? Wait a couple of years and see if they work out and then... sell them on, according to your logic.
"People forget that it is the club who get the final word in a transfer and not the player." "What's the point of holding players against their will?" See the problem with those statements, SNIOM? The power is with players at the moment. They know that it's very hard for teams to keep them if they want to leave. If we sell Modric, then it sends out a poor message to the rest of the team. Why wouldn't they consider their futures with the club, if we don't show any ambition?
Rumours will continue just as long as there is football. My philosophy is not to worry about things I cannot change so I remain cool but you can't help but be interested and the bloody papers know that. So the made up stories will continue and I will continue to wait and see.
