Teasy

Afar I was responding to you're claim that Ashley is refusing to spend money. I have no interest in discussing what our transfer policy should be, only making the point that money is clearly available and that not signing a player does not mean money wasn't made available. That was the whole point of my initial post about transfers often being very long and difficult processes. Well actually yes there is, despite some people continually ignoring the facts for some strange reason. We've had confirmed bids for numerous players so far, totaling somewhere around £40 million (not to mention the many rumoured bids). Money has been made available, amazing as this may sound to you we didn't say to the likes of Modric "sign for the Spuds, we can't afford your fee, we've only made the bid to fool the Newcastle public you know..".

How many times does it have to be said that transfers don't just happen because you want them too. Its usually a long slow process of negotiation (the transfers of Jonas and Guthrie being the exception) and they can often fall through. Look at Modric, Woodgate and Aimar, we made firm offers totalling £32 million for the three of them and got none of them. Meanwhile we've offered £9.5 million (exactly the fee asked for apparently) for Coloccino and the c*** at Depor now wants even more, so that may also end without a signing. Some people seem to have this idea that every day we don't sign a player is a day that Mike Ashley has wisheld money, its nonesense! You can't just stick £50 million in the hands of Keegan/Wise/Vetere ect and say "Right I want £50 million worth of players tomorrow".. fine point that teasy - the alleged stories about the luque deal (if true) highlight what happens when you don't set your stall out BUT there must come a point where our valuation of a player vs the selling clubs valuation has to give...if the coloccini stuff is true then the whole things on hold for less than 1m GBP right? do we pay that extra or face the prospect of not bringing in a new quality CB we obviously appear to rate? Well one thing I definitely don't think we should have done is agree to the extra money straight away. I mean we made an initial offer, they told us to increase that offer a certain amount and we did that only for them to ask for even more. That's taking the piss and immediately adding the extra just makes us into mugs. Having said that if the difference between us really is £1 million and there president really is being honest this time then I think it'll be resolved.

I don't need to look at the Robbie Keane deal, I can look at Jonas or Guthrie for a quick deal, as I said they happen but the idea that every deal will happen like that is idiotic. I can't be bothered to argue wether our club should have to accept paying silly money for players or not. I don't think they should at all but if you believe we should be that desperate then that's up to you. None of that changes the fact that money is available, there's no evidence what so ever that Mike Ashley is refusing to spend is there?.. which was the point of my post, a point you just completely ignored.

Missing the point entirely there.

Your wrong!! FFS its Blackburn you idiot, its Blackburn!!

Anyone but Blackburn... er, I mean its Blackburn.

So very little then, the way ObaStar goes on you'd think they'd completed the signing of Arshavin not just been linked with him

Since when are they signing Arshavin?.. If, and that seems like a massive if, they signed Arshavin along with Bently and had kept Keane and Berbatov then I'd say they'd look very impressive and could definitely compete with the top 4. However Keanes gone and Berbatov will still almost certainly leave, that's there strike force gone. They seem to be replacing one team weakness with another this transfer window.

To be fair he was still much better then just consistently good even after the injury. But I know what you mean, he was a far better player to build a team around before the injury.

How many times does it have to be said that transfers don't just happen because you want them too. Its usually a long slow process of negotiation (the transfers of Jonas and Guthrie being the exception) and they can often fall through. Look at Modric, Woodgate and Aimar, we made firm offers totalling £32 million for the three of them and got none of them. Meanwhile we've offered £9.5 million (exactly the fee asked for apparently) for Coloccino and the c*** at Depor now wants even more, so that may also end without a signing. Some people seem to have this idea that every day we don't sign a player is a day that Mike Ashley has wisheld money, its nonesense! You can't just stick £50 million in the hands of Keegan/Wise/Vetere ect and say "Right I want £50 million worth of players tomorrow"..

He's 29 years old, great fact checking there.. wish the story was true though. Selling Duff for £6 million would be akin to turning water into wine.

Agents love to pretend Newcastle want there players don't they.. its so easy for them now that nobody inside the club is confirming or denying any transfer rumours.

No instead he can say to them "Let me go now for 12 million Euro's like you agreed originally or next season I promise I'll envoke Article 17 and go for one years wages (1.6 million Euro's if his reported salary is correct). Also like how they're using that fountain of knowledge The Mirror as their source

Here we go, the first possible negative has been jumped on.. Seems to me he's calling the clubs bluff. They're pretending they don't need to sell the player to get more money for him and his agent is basically saying "well if you don't need to sell you must have plenty of cash, so you'll have no problem offering what Newcastle have offered us". He knows fine well they're fucked financially and can't afford to double the players wages..

What makes you think Ashley is holding back funds? Is it the signing of Guthrie and Jonas? Or maybe the combined £40 million bids (that we know of) for the likes of Modric, Woodgate, Aimar and Coloccini? If we don't spend money today then that means Ashley didn't make any available today?, is that it? You only have to think about it for a short while to realise it doesn't work like that.. BTW the club was worth only £100 million when Ashley paid over the odds for it.

It must be the way he tells em..

To be fair. Which he never did, well done stupeedo

Nine years playing in Europe and 27 starts for his country..

Has Faye played that role under Keegan? Can't remember. Don't think so, just hoping with more time seeing Faye in training and the addition of someone to take Faye's place in defence (hopefully) he might try him there.

I was thinking he'd replace Taylor originally, until someone mentioned the possibility to playing Coloccini and Taylor at the back and moving Faye into defensive midfield.

Common Jol, give us your take on the Coloccini transfer, you have to know about it being ITK surely?

Wouldn't say that Keane is worth Crouch + £9 million like

Yeah if he was 24 then I could see £20 million at a stretch, but for a 28 year old! Next you'll see people being offered 20k appearance bonuses man. No that would be more like if the Spuds wanted £20 million and Liverpool gave them £15 million plus £5 million based on apearances. I'm sure you'd call them crazy for not just paying the £20 million up front "£5 million just because he plays games for them, mental!"

I don't think he's had a better season then Warnock (how could he with the way Allardyce fucked him about). I just think he's got better attributes and with a full pre-season and consistent starts he'll probably be the better player.

Enrique is nothing special yet like. Warnock is probably better. Enrique's the better player IMO and I think he'll show that this season with a full pre-season behind him and consistant first team starts, he's also four years younger then Warnock. No problem with signing Warnock as long as he starts off as the second choice left back.