Arsenal Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 12/13 MOD POST #232

greendom · 16-08-2012 11:40AM

darego wrote: »

looks like Koscielny could be injured. fantastic :pac: :pac:

Laurent Koscielny was forced to withdraw from the squad with a calf issue. from arsenal.com

Was that the French squad or the Arsenal squad? I'm hoping it was just a precautionary thing and he was withdrawn from the French squad

cson · 16-08-2012 11:47AM

gosplan wrote: »

There's always going to be wastage at a club - I don't see how Arsenal are so much worse than anyone else though.

This; even disregarding the oil clubs cos they can afford to burn it look at Berbatov at United and Cole at Liverpool. There are players phoning it in at every club, we're no different.

Mickeroo · 16-08-2012 11:53AM

greendom wrote: »

Was that the French squad or the Arsenal squad? I'm hoping it was just a precautionary thing and he was withdrawn from the French squad

Hopefully Wenger just sneakily pulling him out.

jmayo · 16-08-2012 12:04PM

gosplan wrote: »

Yeah, it was someone saying the club had done well this summer. You gave it the rolleyes so I assumed you think they've done terribly. I was just seeking clarification.

The roll eyes was for this bit

And even better you sell your best player and top goalscorer to one of your biggest rivals.

gosplan wrote: »

With due respect, I think it's cause we couldn't sell him to anyone else. And though I would have liked to see us not give in, with my rational hat on, I think he was always going to be sold this summer and he had to be sold. Not selling him basically would confine Giroud to the bench and Pod to the left wing for a year, and cost us 20 odd million plus another 6 or so in wages to have a potentially disgruntled player on the books.

I can't see many serious big clubs selling their best player to one of their biggest competitors unless they have signed an even bigger name.
Would Liverpool sell Suarez to united ?
Would City now sell Aguero to united ?

Looking at it financially it does make sense, but looking at it from footballing perspective you are giving one of your main competitors a leg up.
It is one thing selling to City or Chelsea who have endless money it would seem, but you are selling to a club that we might have some hope of matching.
I think that it just shows where the direction of the club has now headed.

gosplan wrote: »

Personally if he wants out, what I'd do is find the replacement first and then sell him. if we can't find a replacement this year then keep him and try it again in Jan or next summer.

That would make sense, but seeing the last few years I can see him being sold to Barca for less than market value and then no replacement being bought in.
Hasn't Wenger said he doesn't see the rvp money being used for transfers ?

gosplan wrote: »

Yeah but what can we do?? You have to sign players and to get good players you have to sign a fair bunch of them from abroad.

You have doubts about our two CF's but we got two of them for one position so that reduced the risk considerably.

This is Arsenal and injuries always occurr.

gosplan wrote: »

Mistakes have been made but we can't keep beating the club with the 'we signed Squillaci' stick. Yes, it's a continuing waste of money but signings don't always work out. Players don't always work out and Arsenal spend big money on players.

Yeah, but we have over 200 grand a week going out on has beens, never beens, and a few disgruntled near do wells.
That is what angers me.
squillaci is basically being paid over £50,000 a week for a couple of years for scratching his ass. :mad:
I think we have habit of offering too big a salary for unproven signings (foreign players who have never played in PL) and then you are stuck with these guys when they don't work out as they have no incentive to shag off.

Fuzzy_Dunlop · 16-08-2012 12:11PM

jmayo wrote: »

This is Arsenal and injuries always occurr.

Yeah so isn't it better that we now have two full international players who can play there rather than being completely reliant on one injury prone one?

Of course everyone would love to keep RvP because he's an exceptionally talented player but the way the club has dealt with it has been pretty much as good as you could expect considering everything that has happened.

KaiserGunner · 16-08-2012 12:12PM

Im just hoping that its a similar situation to when Vieira was sold, Vieira declined rapidly as a player once he left, apparently he had a niggly injury that couldnt be fixed and so was shipped out after years of speculation.

Im hoping that Wenger knows something about Van Persies health and that he is on the decline. Wishful thinking obviously,regardless of how financially selling him made sense, it doesnt make sense to sell him to Man Utd. We were catching up to them IMO, selling to a direct rival doesnt send out the right messages.

greendom · 16-08-2012 12:13PM

If you want to make a positive from it - Newcastle sold their no 1 striker to Liverpool and they finished above the Scousers in the league - hope springs eternal eh !

16-08-2012 12:17PM

I really don't see what people expect the club to have done differently once Van Persie released his statement. Would City sell a player to United? of course not, they have no need to worry about finances. Would Liverpool sell Suarez to United? Leaving aside all the individual player's history if they were offered around 40 million I bet they'd sell. Arsenal's choice was simple, get 30-odd million now or get nothing, spend another 4-5 million on wages all for a player who undermined the club massively.

gosplan · 16-08-2012 12:23PM

jmayo wrote: »

I can't see many serious big clubs selling their best player to one of their biggest competitors unless they have signed an even bigger name.
Would Liverpool sell Suarez to united ?
Would City now sell Aguero to united ?

Liverpool would do what we just did, yes. City probably wouldn't because they don't need to worry about things like money.

I don't think you're giving the situation around the transfer the weight it deserves though.

As said before, if Arsenal sold Song, who has three years left on his contract, to United, I would completly flip.

KaiserGunner · 16-08-2012 12:23PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I really don't see what people expect the club to have done differently once Van Persie released his statement. Would City sell a player to United? of course not, they have no need to worry about finances. Would Liverpool sell Suarez to United? Leaving aside all the individual player's history if they were offered around 40 million I bet they'd sell. Arsenal's choice was simple, get 30-odd million now or get nothing, spend another 4-5 million on wages all for a player who undermined the club massively.

Yeah but do you not think that the club should make a stand against these players? Modric wanted to leave Spurs last season and they didnt sell, Wayne Rooney at Man Utd did similar to Van Persie and was rewarded with a fat new contract. Basically any of our players if they want a move away just have to undermine the club and then they get what they want.

For the record I thought we did get a good price for him considering that he only has a year left on his contract, his age and injury record. But him being sold to Man Utd is the sickening part of it. I would have rathered we let him go on a free than that. The amount of quality players that we have sold to our direct competition in the last few seasons is staggering. Its amazing how we are still competing and staying in the top 4, is a testament to Wengers managerial qualities. But we need to start competing at the very top again otherwise we will be stuck in limbo.

16-08-2012 12:31PM

KaiserGunner wrote: »

Yeah but do you not think that the club should make a stand against these players? Modric wanted to leave Spurs last season and they didnt sell, Wayne Rooney at Man Utd did similar to Van Persie and was rewarded with a fat new contract. Basically any of our players if they want a move away just have to undermine the club and then they get what they want.

Rooney was away but for the massive money. Keeping RVP on with double or triple the pay after that statement would've been undermining for the club as far as I'm concerned.
Yeah Modric wanted to go and played brilliantly to begin with but I don't recall ever fading away so much over the course of a season. It was easier to hang on to him because of how long was left on his contract.

For the record I thought we did get a good price for him considering that he only has a year left on his contract, his age and injury record. But him being sold to Man Utd is the sickening part of it. I would have rathered we let him go on a free than that. The amount of quality players that we have sold to our direct competition in the last few seasons is staggering. Its amazing how we are still competing and staying in the top 4, is a testament to Wengers managerial qualities. But we need to start competing at the very top again otherwise we will be stuck in limbo.

I'm pissed at him going to United too but it's him I'm pissed at. He showed his true colours with that statement and while a few of the anti-Wenger or anti-board people swallowed it most saw it for what it was.

BTW, is Vermaelen on Twitter? I just want to tell him what I heard van Persie saying about his mother.

gosplan · 16-08-2012 12:32PM

jmayo wrote: »

Yeah, but we have over 200 grand a week going out on has beens, never beens, and a few disgruntled near do wells.
That is what angers me.

You can't be perfect in the transfer market. Name me decent club that is wasting less money than us.

It pisses me off too. It pisses me off that there's rubbish players that we can't sell picking up their weekly wage till their contract runs out. It pisses me off that when they're not rubbish, they end up angling for a move away.

But what can you do??

Sine last summer, we've signed Mert, Jenk, Santos, Arteta, Ox, Gerv, Pod, Giroud, Park and Santi. To me that's a pretty success rate. Obviously we have to see how Santi, Giroud and Pod fit in but you can only sign people on what they've done, not how their career at the club is going to go.

Soups123 · 16-08-2012 12:35PM

KaiserGunner wrote: »

Yeah but do you not think that the club should make a stand against these players? Modric wanted to leave Spurs last season and they didnt sell, Wayne Rooney at Man Utd did similar to Van Persie and was rewarded with a fat new contract. Basically any of our players if they want a move away just have to undermine the club and then they get what they want.

For the record I thought we did get a good price for him considering that he only has a year left on his contract, his age and injury record. But him being sold to Man Utd is the sickening part of it. I would have rathered we let him go on a free than that. The amount of quality players that we have sold to our direct competition in the last few seasons is staggering. Its amazing how we are still competing and staying in the top 4, is a testament to Wengers managerial qualities. But we need to start competing at the very top again otherwise we will be stuck in limbo.

they did exacty what we did with Henry, Veira & Cesc asked for one more year, with Nasro and RVP it is different as 1 more year means giving them away

greendom · 16-08-2012 12:39PM

Soups123 wrote: »

they did exacty what we did with Henry, Veira & Cesc asked for one more year, with Nasro and RVP it is different as 1 more year means giving them away

And Modric didn't seem to do a whole lot last season. If they'd sold him a year ago chances are they would have got more money for him. Holding onto a player who doesn't want to be there is not always the best thing to do.

Soups123 · 16-08-2012 12:41PM

greendom wrote: »

And Modric didn't seem to do a whole lot last season. If they'd sold him a year ago chances are they would have got more money for him. Holding onto a player who doesn't want to be there is not always the best thing to do.

Agreed a bit like the last seasons of Cesc and Henry

emergingstar · 16-08-2012 12:47PM

Song to barca supposedly done 15m

Soups123 · 16-08-2012 12:49PM

emergingstar wrote: »

Song to barca supposedly done 15m

where you seeing that

Bounty Hunter · 16-08-2012 12:50PM

there is almost never a like for like situation in things like this. Modric for example had many more years left on his contract allowing them to make a stand on the issue unlike Arsenal with RVP and he wasnt as Injury prone and therefore more likely to reproduce his previous return for the club in another year. Spurs actually got a CL place if not for Chelsea winning the thing too and im sure most Spurs fans would have been very happy with 4th if it meant losing him for less money the following year especially if it meant losing him to a team outside England. This is something Arsenal would have preferred too but not for 10m less nor would RVP be interested for far less wages than he will get staying in England.

I might be wrong but Wenger didnt say the money wouldnt be used for signings but just that it wouldnt be for a forward replacement cos he already signed 2. Really hope you guys dont lose Song unless at the very least Sahin signs on loan but tbh that is looking less likely now. Even getting in a more defensive minded CM like M'Villa wouldnt seem ideal as it would mean even more new players adapting to the team at the same time although in the long term if his attitude wasnt a problem it could be an overall improvement for Arsenal.

dvemail · 16-08-2012 12:51PM

One of Sahin or M'Vila must be coming our direction if this is the case. We can't afford to play the whole season without a DM.

Mickeroo · 16-08-2012 12:51PM

Soups123 wrote: »

where you seeing that

goal.com have it: http://www.goal.com/en-ie/news/3919/exclusive/2012/08/16/3311103/arsenal-ready-to-give-green-light-for-15m-song-move-to?source=breakingnews

don't know how reliable they are though tbh. pretty depressed now if this happens too i have to say

2ndcoming · 16-08-2012 12:52PM

KaiserGunner wrote: »

Yeah but do you not think that the club should make a stand against these players? Modric wanted to leave Spurs last season and they didnt sell.

In fairness this isn't a good example, Spurs turned down 40m for him last year, achieved nothing of note last season and are now selling him for 27m, including his wages last season that must have cost them at least 15 or 16 million.

On VP players come and go, if even 2 of the 3 new signings make a big impact in the first couple of months it will be a case of "the king is dead, long live the king".*

*Although of course, we all now the REAL king is alive and well, playing a bit of soccerball in the States for New York Red Bulls til he gets to come home again for Christmas.

Paully D · 16-08-2012 12:52PM

FutureGuy wrote: »

Saying RVP is leaving for money is pretty unfair. If he was, he'd be playing at City or Chelsea. He wants a PL medal and probably feels that United offer the best chance of this combined with weely starts. Never read anything about RVP forcing a transfer to United either.

I quite like Manchester United (and Arsenal, by the way) so I'm not looking to start an argument as I know how quickly these things can take off, especially after this sort of transfer, but I don't know why Manchester United seem to escape the money tag when players move there. It always seems to be labeled as ambition, or desire to win things, whereas if the same players moved to City or Chelsea it would be for the money. Yet Manchester United have had one of, if not the highest wage bill for the vast majority of the Premier League years and continue to spend a huge amount of money on players and wages.

So yeah, in my opinion you're right that he has gone as he'll have a better chance of winning bigger trophies, but I'd say that if he had gone to City definitely and to an extent Chelsea (although that move was never going to happen) but, at the end of the day, the money is another big reason regardless of whether he had gone to City, Chelsea or United.

Soups123 · 16-08-2012 12:56PM

Mickeroo wrote: »

goal.com have it: http://www.goal.com/en-ie/news/3919/exclusive/2012/08/16/3311103/arsenal-ready-to-give-green-light-for-15m-song-move-to?source=breakingnews

don't know how reliable they are though tbh. pretty depressed now if this happens too i have to say

There less accurate than the rags, however I'm always nervous, theres never smoke without fire. Too many reports now of meetings etc.

$15m is a shocking price though

KaiserGunner · 16-08-2012 12:57PM

2ndcoming wrote: »

In fairness this isn't a good example, Spurs turned down 40m for him last year, achieved nothing of note last season and are now selling him for 27m, including his wages last season that must have cost them at least 15 or 16 million.

On VP players come and go, if even 2 of the 3 new signings make a big impact in the first couple of months it will be a case of "the king is dead, long live the king".*

*Although of course, we all now the REAL king is alive and well, playing a bit of soccerball in the States for New York Red Bulls til he gets to come home again for Christmas.

In fairness to Spurs thats a £13m hit in a season but as Bounty Hunter said they got fourth which usually gets champions league football, which would be worth more than £13m, they were just unlucky that Chelsea won a penalty shootout. Any other year and they would have felt it was worth it. I see your point though and especially since Nasri and Van Persie only had a year left on their contracts.

emergingstar · 16-08-2012 12:58PM

Wenger wouldn't sell song unless he had a replacement lines up

Mickeroo · 16-08-2012 12:59PM

Paully D wrote: »

I quite like Manchester United (and Arsenal, by the way) so I'm not looking to start an argument as I know how quickly these things can take off, especially after this sort of transfer, but I don't know why Manchester United seem to escape the money tag when players move there. It always seems to be labeled as ambition, or desire to win things, whereas if the same players moved to City or Chelsea it would be for the money. Yet Manchester United have had one of, if not the highest wage bill for the vast majority of the Premier League years and continue to spend a huge amount of money on players and wages.

So yeah, in my opinion you're right that he has gone as he'll have a better chance of winning bigger trophies, but I'd say that if he had gone to City definitely and to an extent Chelsea (although that move was never going to happen) but, at the end of the day, the money is another big reason regardless of whether he had gone to City, Chelsea or United.

Agreed, they're giving him 200,000 a week ffs. City et al didn't want him it seems, United were his only option at this stage I also think he has less chance of starting more often there too since they have a tonne of strikers.

I've heard quite a few United fans giving out about the transfer actually. Saying RVP is a a big signing to keep the fans quiet but not the actual signings they need. Their defence and midfield is looking pretty dodgy for the season in fairness, man for man Arsenal actually have a stronger squad if they stay fit (apart from up front).

RVP hasn't joined a united team at the top of their game, he's not garaunteed trophies there at all in the next couple of seasons imho.

Mickeroo · 16-08-2012 01:01PM

emergingstar wrote: »

Wenger wouldn't sell song unless he had a replacement lines up

True, but it all depends on who he thinks the replacement is. If its Coquelin, Diaby or Frimpong then we're in trouble.

wandatowell · 16-08-2012 01:04PM

15 mill for song??? Must be bullsh!t

He's worth 20 to 25 easily

Sgt Pepper 64 · 16-08-2012 01:07PM

2ndcoming wrote: »

In fairness this isn't a good example, Spurs turned down 40m for him last year, achieved nothing of note last season and are now selling him for 27m, including his wages last season that must have cost them at least 15 or 16 million.

On VP players come and go, if even 2 of the 3 new signings make a big impact in the first couple of months it will be a case of "the king is dead, long live the king".*

*Although of course, we all now the REAL king is alive and well, playing a bit of soccerball in the States for New York Red Bulls til he gets to come home again for Christmas.

No, thats a false rumour about the 40 million offer from chelsea that was put around.

I'm not so sure they did.
I heard we only actually bid £28 milliion for him

The £40m bid was obviously made up- SSN reporters put the words in Redknapp's mouth and he agreed that he'd 'heard' that Levy had turned down a £40m bid ... Only problem was that he'd 'heard' it from the SSN reporter talking to him.

Marty McFly · 16-08-2012 01:07PM

Arsenal Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 12/13 MOD POST #232

Comments