Jump to content

Transfer Talk Topic


My Blood Is Blue

Recommended Posts

Just now, Ham said:

It was reported everywhere that the new offer was the same as the highest paid midfielders at the club = Enzo and Moises.  

Where are you getting 50% from?

Never, ever that money that you think. And from far more reliable places then you got yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Ham said:

It was reported everywhere that the new offer was the same as the highest paid midfielders at the club = Enzo and Moises.  

Where are you getting 50% from?

*It was reported everywhere by journalists who regurgitate word for word what the club wants in return for access. 

Edited by Bison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bison said:

*It was reported everywhere by journalists who regurgitate word for word what the club wants in return for access. 

Not sure Ornstein is considered a Chelsea mouthpiece. 

1 minute ago, east lower said:

It’s not Sky Sports, like yours.

Why so mysterious? Who's your source? 

 

Screenshot_20240819_182447_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20240819_182519_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20240819_182650_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20240819_182802_Chrome.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

Of course it is - selling Gallagher is about freeing up pure profit to spend on incomings.

We are choosing to sell to Atletico and spend that cash on Felix.

Therefore, my statement, "We forced Gallagher, a key player last season, to leave partly in order to sign a player our previous manager didn't want" is absolutely true.

We could not agree a contract with him because we offered him a contract only to protect him as an asset to sell in a couple of years while we offer 8 and 9 year contracts to players who have done nothing for us in comparison with him.

He also didn't want Palmer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Ham said:

Not sure Ornstein is considered a Chelsea mouthpiece. 

Why so mysterious? Who's your source? 

 

Screenshot_20240819_182447_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20240819_182519_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20240819_182650_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20240819_182802_Chrome.jpg

Must be true then, except it’s not. Hash and re-hash. Our sources say etc, etc wonder how many times you’ve disregarded the same sources?

But why so curious 🧐 If you don’t like the information, just disregard it Inspector.

Edited by east lower
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Ham said:

It was reported everywhere that the new offer was the same as the highest paid midfielders at the club = Enzo and Moises.  

Where are you getting 50% from?

It was a 2 year deal which basically screams you’re not in our long term plans but we must protect our asset. 

The club wanted shot of Gallagher and anyone who says otherwise is being disingenuous.   If he didn’t have 1 year left on his deal, we all know he would currently be getting the Sterling / Chalobah treatment.

I like Felix as a player but this is another absolutely pointless signing whilst our GK remains Sanchez and Guiu remains our number 2 striker. 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Rob B said:

It was a 2 year deal which basically screams you’re not in our long term plans but we must protect our asset. 

The club wanted shot of Gallagher and anyone who says otherwise is being disingenuous.   If he didn’t have 1 year left on his deal, we all know he would currently be getting the Sterling / Chalobah treatment.

I like Felix as a player but this is another absolutely pointless signing whilst our GK remains Sanchez and Guiu remains our number 2 striker. 

I wasn't challenging whether the club wanted Gallagher to stay. I was disputing the financial offer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, east lower said:

Must be true then, except it’s not. Hash and re-hash. Our sources say etc, etc wonder how many times you’ve disregarded the same sources?

But why so curious 🧐 If you don’t like the information, just disregard it Inspector.

You're saying you have a source that's much more reliable than Ornstein and many others but refuse to say who it is. Sky Sports was just one of those articles I posted. 

Why should anyone believe you that he was offered half what Caicedo and Enzo were offered if you won't post a link or release your source?

Also, what is your problem? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ham said:

You're saying you have a source that's much more reliable than Ornstein and many others but refuse to say who it is. Sky Sports was just one of those articles I posted. 

Why should anyone believe you that he was offered half what Caicedo and Enzo were offered if you won't post a link or release your source?

Also, what is your problem? 

Don’t believe it then and don’t play the victim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

Of course it is - selling Gallagher is about freeing up pure profit to spend on incomings.

Agreed, but he is leaving because he has a year left and will not sign whatever we have offered.

Better to sell now for £34m than £0m in a year.

He is not leaving because we wanted Felix. Felix wasn't even on the radar a week ago and Gallagher was still leaving then.

If the Felix deal fell through, Gallagher would still be leaving.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joao Felix? I’d rather have Felix The Cat.

Just when this shitshow of a club couldn’t get worse, they prove that they’ve totally lost their minds.

Wouldn’t surprise me if they sold Palmer to accommodate another lightweight weakling primadonna who isn’t suited to the PL.

🤬🤬🤬🤬

Edited by Chelsea_Matt
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, east lower said:

Don’t believe it then and don’t play the victim.

There's nothing victim-like about me pal. 

Don't worry. I won't make the mistake of interacting with you on here again.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, McCreadie said:

Agreed, but he is leaving because he has a year left and will not sign whatever we have offered.

Better to sell now for £34m than £0m in a year.

He is not leaving because we wanted Felix. Felix wasn't even on the radar a week ago and Gallagher was still leaving then.

If the Felix deal fell through, Gallagher would still be leaving.

Because what we offered is a short-term deal to protect the asset to sell in a couple of years. Of course he would have taken a longer deal like everyone else.

I'm not sure Gallagher would leave if Felix fell through - he wouldn't go to Spurs and Atletico is the perfect club for him. Are there any clubs still interested in him that he would go to?

In a way you're arguing against yourself - it looks like Omorodion fell through and we panicked and went for Felix. Of course I cannot prove that, but it's what it looks like. 

I am not saying we sold Gallagher precisely in order to buy Felix. I am saying we sold Gallagher to free up funds and spent it on Felix - you are being a bit pedantic mate 🙂

Edited by Max Fowler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Bison said:

Doubt it. Dewsbury-Hall has 3 goals in 60 Premier League appearances. A 21 year old Gallagher scored 8 on loan at Palace.

If we didn't sign Maresca as manager would Dewsbury-Hall have ever been on the club's radar? No disrespect to the player but we all know the answer to that. 

Yep. Or… They are doing all they can to cement our place as a midtable club. KDH fits the bill. Perhaps part of the master plan?

2 hours ago, thevelourfog said:

Absolutely insane we're buying a player we didn't take up an option on a year ago so in order to fund the sale of another. Reflects terribly on us specifically, but also says a whole lot about football more generally and none of it good.

It does, doesn’t it? 

2 hours ago, Blue Orca said:

Well, we are going to find out as it looks like he will be playing a part this season unless we sign a main forward. 

We sure will. Mark my words, Guiu is years away from making a meaningful contribution. 

2 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

It's an easy excuse to blame the state of football. As an example, City sold Palmer because he wanted to leave and wasn't getting minutes. We forced Gallagher, a key player last season, to leave partly in order to sign a player our previous manager didn't want.

It's a unique situation.

It’s certainly is unique. We are the worst run football club in Europe. Imagine taking a recent CL winner and doing everything in your power to make it a midtable side? That is essentially what they are doing. I have no idea how they think this will yield success. 

1 hour ago, McCreadie said:

No we didn't. 

Gallagher is leaving because we cannot agree a contract with him and he is in his last year. End of.

Whoever else we end up signing, Omorodion, Felix etc is nothing to do with Gallagher leaving. It is to do with making a deal with Atletico.

If Gallagher was going to Spurs and we didn't want any of their crap players, he would still be leaving.

If you believe that, you’ll believe anything. They have openly tried to shop him around for the best part of 18 months. Any contract offered was solely to protect their asset. No intention of having him play a key part this season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to see what THEY are trying to do,,hands on with two puppets on a string but not knowing anything about the game?..Solely Business focused allowing two somewhat questionable "experts" chart the course and my worry trying to run the Club based on the NFL etc model,because it works over here?,,or a totally different blue print we are not privy to?

I'm as bewildered as everyone as I watch MY club, whilst always something of a whimsical entity,,even under RA,,,being totally demolished with no clear idea of what will emerge from the rubble....mindful of some of the social and construction failures of rebuilding bomb damaged London and "Urban Renewal: etc

OG memory..moved to Basingstoke as part of the London Overspill project.about 1970 ...local young lady friend sadly asking what had happened to her town,

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

 We forced Gallagher, a key player last season, to leave partly in order to sign a player our previous manager didn't want.

I read that as “we forced Gallagher to leave partly in order to sign Felix”

Is that not what you meant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...