Transfer discussion thread

[SM]

Was alright off the bench pre-world cup. Scored a couple good goals in the champions lesgue. Got injured in Qatar and hasn’t played since.

Didn't he come on against Fulham? And in the NLD come to think of it, he was the one getting in Ramsdale's face.

 

[Magma]

very snide of them

 

[Bojan KantKick]

I'm not sure you understand how accounting works haha if you think this is unique to football.

Why should it be done on a cash basis not an accounting basis? Much more open to manipulation.

I think the issue a lot of people have with what Chelsea are doing is that it goes against the principles of FFP (whether you agree with them or not). It is/or should be designed to protect clubs from getting into financial distress. Finding loopholes that could result in a lot of clubs getting into financial distress goes against the principles for FFP.

I don't think it is unreasonable to fix the initial amortisation period for transfers to the lesser of 5 years or the players contract length.

 

[SM]

I think the issue a lot of people have with what Chelsea are doing is that it goes against the principles of FFP (whether you agree with them or not). It is/or should be designed to protect clubs from getting into financial distress. Finding loopholes that could result in a lot of clubs getting into financial distress goes against the principles for FFP.

I don't think it is unreasonable to fix the initial amortisation period for transfers to the lesser of 5 years or the players contract length.

Just seems a strange time to make that change since the rule since inception has allowed clubs to extend the amortisation period if a player signs a new deal. It's nothing new.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Didn't he come on against Fulham? And in the NLD come to think of it, he was the one getting in Ramsdale's face.

Probably. Conteball at 6am does see you doze off from time to time.

 

[jd2010]

Didn't he come on against Fulham? And in the NLD come to think of it, he was the one getting in Ramsdale's face.

Yeah he can't get a proper look in. Son in woeful form and Conte refuses to drop him. Makes the Danjuma signing even more strange. We've signed another Son backup, and the better Son backup can't get enough minutes as is.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Yeah he can't get a proper look in. Son in woeful form and Conte refuses to drop him. Makes the Danjuma signing even more strange. We've signed another Son backup, and the better Son backup can't get enough minutes as is.

Erm…Richarlison is Kane’s backup.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

Just seems a strange time to make that change since the rule since inception has allowed clubs to extend the amortisation period if a player signs a new deal. It's nothing new.

I think it is a direct response to a club putting a transfer policy in place to get around the spirit of the regulation. I don't have a problem with that. This is not uncommon in the accounting world either. Some bright spark thinks of a way to get around the current tax laws, profit from this for a short period, then the loophole is closed. There are quite a few unintended consequences which will arise from Chelsea's strategy which are not good for the game and will put clubs into financial distress.

An example I know well is dividend washing which went on for about 3-6 months IIRC. Deloitte gave us the advice, we advised clients who profited, then the loophole was closed.

 

[jd2010]

Erm…Richarlison is Kane’s backup.

I know we've had a disjointed season, but if Richarlison is the Kane backup and not the Son backup we might be doing it a bit wrong?

 

[jd2010]

Also why would we spend 60m on a Kane backup and then play Kane for 99% of the minutes we've played this season?

 

[Toffee Lion]

View attachment 1593570

View attachment 1593571

View attachment 1593574

View attachment 1593575

I know we've had a disjointed season, but if Richarlison is the Kane backup and not the Son backup we might be doing it a bit wrong?

Is that showing Richy on the right? Surely not?

Dude is a left winger. Not a striker or right winger.

 

[jd2010]

Is that showing Richy on the right? Surely not?

Dude is a left winger. Not a striker or right winger.

Nah it's on the left with Kulu on the right. Reads left to right when showing the XI using google, stupidly!

 

[SM]

Is that showing Richy on the right? Surely not?

Dude is a left winger. Not a striker or right winger.

Nah they're on the other side of the centre circle, so they're basically running 'down the page'. So keeper would be above them not below.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

View attachment 1593570

View attachment 1593571

View attachment 1593574

View attachment 1593575

I know we've had a disjointed season, but if Richarlison is the Kane backup and not the Son backup we might be doing it a bit wrong?

We’re both sort of right.

Conte in September - “We signed Richi because to exploit the best work of this team and to try to support the three strikers. When you have Sonny, Harry Kane and Deki last season, behind a player like Lucas who is now injured and a big problem for us, we tried to sign a player that was able to play in all of these three positions.”

 

[jd2010]

We’re both sort of right.

Conte in September - “We signed Richi because to exploit the best work of this team and to try to support the three strikers. When you have Sonny, Harry Kane and Deki last season, behind a player like Lucas who is now injured and a big problem for us, we tried to sign a player that was able to play in all of these three positions.”

We signed him because he can cover both roles. But we then have this crazy pecking order where Kane literally plays every minute of every game & Son is almost at the level even when out of sorts. Difference there is when we are winning the Richarlison>Son move gets made. And when Richarlison was in form there was that 1 game where he started with Son on the bench, then we went Son>Richarlison and he scored 3 of his 4 goals for the season in 20 mins!

Now Son who is playing at more of a Bergwijn/Lucas level is undroppable in Conte's eyes whilst Brazil's starting forward sits on the bench. And then we go and get a Villereal squad option to play that same position.

 

[wadistance]

Fresneda coming, now this. Good bit of winter work

 

[joop]

Surely Hackpo is the easier nickname since that's how it's actually pronounced.

I thought it was actually pronounced Gakpo?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

We signed him because he can cover both roles. But we then have this crazy pecking order where Kane literally plays every minute of every game & Son is almost at the level even when out of sorts. Difference there is when we are winning the Richarlison>Son move gets made. And when Richarlison was in form there was that 1 game where he started with Son on the bench, then we went Son>Richarlison and he scored 3 of his 4 goals for the season in 20 mins!

Now Son who is playing at more of a Bergwijn/Lucas level is undroppable in Conte's eyes whilst Brazil's starting forward sits on the bench. And then we go and get a Villereal squad option to play that same position.

Intentions at purchase and use in the first 6 months don’t have to be aligned.

 

[SM]

I thought it was actually pronounced Gakpo?

Nah it's with an H, Dutch thing.

 

[joop]

Nah it's with an H, Dutch thing.

Ah yep I guess like Van Gaal it makes sense.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Nah it's with an H, Dutch thing.

It's not a dutch name though. Be like saying Benoit is not Ben wa, it's Ben oyt in an English country.

 

[joop]

It's not a dutch name though. Be like saying Benoit is not Ben wa, it's Ben oyt in an English country.

Maybe it’s a soft G, Yakpo.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Maybe it’s a soft G, Yakpo.

Ah yes like the soft J in Jogging.

 

[joop]

Loan with obligation to buy if we stay up is the only way I see this happening.

 

[SM]

It's not a dutch name though. Be like saying Benoit is not Ben wa, it's Ben oyt in an English country.

Dunno, just know most places I've heard people talk about him they've said it's pronounced Hak-po. They could all be wrong I guess.