Who would you buy from potential relegation clubs?

[Disgruntledgoat]

You've really got a thing about West Ham, haven't you?

Diop is a quality player in a bad team. Ake is the same. Both have admirers at the top clubs. In fact, both Chelsea and United were willing to pay £40m for Diop in the summer according to credible sources. Ake will 100% leave Bournemouth for a top six club in the summer.

As I said in my post, Haller and Rice are better players than they've showed. I don't think that's a controversial opinion. The likes of Gueye and Wijnaldum have stunk the place out in relegated sides in recent seasons and gone on to do well. I'm not sure if either will step up to play for a top six club but they are better than the bottom half of the Premier League.

Chelsea were willing to pay 40m for him despite having a transfer ban and being unable to sign anybody?

 

[Dougie]

Sarr looks a talent and in a position we do need. Plus will annoy Watford again haha. Brooks looked a good player. Few others but will have to pay over the odds. Definitely a market we should be looking at tho to increase quality options on the pitch or the bench.

 

[Deleted member 38674]

United were so willing to drop 40m on him that they went out and spent double that on a better player at the same position?

Sometimes clubs have shortlists of players, mate.

It helps if one becomes harder to acquire than another.

I’ve got a thing about West Ham because this whole forum has a thing about them. Every single season since 2016 without fail, they get smoke blown up their arse by everyone on here and have everyone flapping that they’re going to surpass us, and it’s all just absolute hot air. You were one of the worst culprits of this in the summer, which is why I keep bringing you up in the West Ham thread.

West Ham have consistently under-performed this year, I think that's fair to say. I don't think, for the quality of players they have, it's appropriate that they are where they are.

 

[ValBlue]

Ismalia Sarr and Doucoure, watch Watford heads fall off
Seriously though that Sarr does bits

 

[Disgruntledgoat]

Sometimes clubs have shortlists of players, mate.

It helps if one becomes harder to acquire than another.

So on this shortlist they had one player they were confident of being able to acquire for 40m and one that ended up costing them 75m... So unless Maguire is rated by them as a player twice as good as Diop, then why did they not just spend less?

And how were Chelsea going to spend 40m on him in the summer?

 

[Deleted member 38674]

Chelsea were willing to pay 40m for him despite having a transfer ban and being unable to sign anybody?

Unable to 'register' anybody. They can sign players whenever they want. They signed Pulisic and Kovacic around the transfer ban too.

 

[Papa Shango]

Neal Maupay
Bernardo
Max Aarons
Jack Grealish
Tyrone Mings
Douglas Luiz
Sebastien Haller
Ismaila Sarr

Would all interest me to various levels if the price was right.

 

[Disgruntledgoat]

Unable to 'register' anybody. They can sign players whenever they want. They signed Pulisic and Kovacic around the transfer ban too.

They signed Pusilic in January. They signed Kovacic as the clause to make the loan permanent was agreed before the transfer ban.

So there's no way they could have spent 40m on Diop in the summer.

 

[Deleted member 38674]

So on this shortlist they had one player they were confident of being able to acquire for 40m and one that ended up costing them 75m... So unless Maguire is rated by them as a player twice as good as Diop, then why did they not just spend less?

And how were Chelsea going to spend 40m on him in the summer?

I don't know that they were confident of landing him for that fee. But it's fairly obvious that clubs have shortlists.

If United preferred Maguire to Diop, it might not have been a decision of 'who's the cheapest'. It rarely does at that level, anyway.

There were numerous reports from credible sources citing that both Chelsea and United had gone as far as submitting offers for him.

In any case, my overall point is that he's a player that's well liked by the best managers and the best teams. It wasn't long ago that Mourinho called him a 'Monster' and congratulated the scouts who identified him.

 

[Deleted member 38674]

They signed Pusilic in January. They signed Kovacic as the clause to make the loan permanent was agreed before the transfer ban.

So there's no way they could have spent 40m on Diop in the summer.

Yes, they could. They just couldn't have re-registered him until January, which is precisely what happened with Kovacic.

You're really splitting hairs here, mate. I thought you were better than this.

 

[Disgruntledgoat]

Yes, they could. They just couldn't have re-registered him until January, which is precisely what happened with Kovacic.

You're really splitting hairs here, mate. I thought you were better than this.

I'm really not better than this.

I am concerned I don't understand how player registration works, however... So, Kovacic was allowed to sign for Chelsea because his loan from Real included a clause to make it a permanent deal, which was agreed before the transfer ban and his registration as a Chelsea player never lapsed.

Mateo Kovacic: Chelsea sign Real Madrid midfielder for £40m

Chelsea sign Mateo Kovacic, who spent last season on loan at Stamford Bridge, from Real Madrid - despite being under a two-window transfer ban.

www.bbc.com

If he wasn't registered until January, how could he play in the first half of the season?

 

[Deleted member 38674]

I'm really not better than this.

I am concerned I don't understand how player registration works, however... So, Kovacic was allowed to sign for Chelsea because his loan from Real included a clause to make it a permanent deal, which was agreed before the transfer ban and his registration as a Chelsea player never lapsed.

Mateo Kovacic: Chelsea sign Real Madrid midfielder for £40m

Chelsea sign Mateo Kovacic, who spent last season on loan at Stamford Bridge, from Real Madrid - despite being under a two-window transfer ban.

www.bbc.com

If he wasn't registered until January, how could he play in the first half of the season?

I'm not sure where you've seen that there was a clause in the loan agreement. I stand to be corrected but there wasn't as far as I can see. The deal that initially took Kovacic to Chelsea was only a loan, which was later negotiated to a permanent arrangement.

Crucially, the player was registered a Chelsea player before the ban. Chelsea then, as per the statement they made at the time, 'came to an agreement with Real Madrid for the permanent transfer' of the player. They were then able to sign the player during the ban.

As he had already been registered a Chelsea player, before the ban, they were able to complete the signing without registering a new player. In truth, they were always allowed to complete signings. A transfer ban does not prevent the signing of players, more the registration of players.

Many clubs have signed players during bans and then left the player out on loan before later registering them when they are legally allowed to do so again.

 

[bag a yoko]

Glenn Murray

 

[Philw]

I'm not sure where you've seen that there was a clause in the loan agreement. I stand to be corrected but there wasn't as far as I can see. The deal that initially took Kovacic to Chelsea was only a loan, which was later negotiated to a permanent arrangement.

Crucially, the player was registered a Chelsea player before the ban. Chelsea then, as per the statement they made at the time, 'came to an agreement with Real Madrid for the permanent transfer' of the player. They were then able to sign the player during the ban.

As he had already been registered a Chelsea player, before the ban, they were able to complete the signing without registering a new player. In truth, they were always allowed to complete signings. A transfer ban does not prevent the signing of players, more the registration of players.

Many clubs have signed players during bans and then left the player out on loan before later registering them when they are legally allowed to do so again.

@Disgruntledgoat unfortunately Keiran is correct here...

Edit: Similar to what Barcelona did with Turan (?) a few seasons ago. Bought him during their 'ban', and he couldn't play until Jan when they were allowed to register new players again.

 

[john jako]

I liked him at Genk, but it's a huge step up to the Premier League that he's in the process of making. I think he'll come good but he isn't there yet. Next season a big one for him.

He well could end up being boss mate. How much did Brighton sign him for? If he has a good end to the season and they go down, his value will still go up. That bloom the owner of Brighton isn’t short of cash.