STM

Well ok, from that stand point I get what you mean. I suppose the club simply dont have a policy of messy public statements. They rarely go well and they set a bad precedent IMO. A figurehead at the club doing a well timed interview would be more the ticket. Sadly none exist.

We are fully in control of the Isak situation. We arent selling. We haven't signed another striker, which is separate all together. Isak stays = Isak loses.

Who cares about narrative when we are actually controlling the situation?

The club not making a statement, is a much bigger statement.

We'd give him the wages he wanted for a year before selling him on our terms. Hes not interested in signing a new deal, he never was, hes interested in getting his move.

I genuinely feel like that when Liverpool signed Ekitike, they only partially retained an interest in Isak, at a certain price. Theres been nothing to suggest hes some sort of "top target" since they signed Ekitike. They could bid 150m for Isak and our board would likely accept, simply to wash their hands off him. But Liverpool want to lowball us and thats because they neither have finances nor the will to do a proper deal with us. Just makes Isak situation more bizarre. Hes twerking for a club who's only half interested.

They have. Hes using the contract stuff as his excuse. He could have a new contract today if he wanted one.

Neither has happened.

Id over pay. Id give them quite a few potential performance related add-ons to get it done.

We can't sell him. Its a simple as that. The club selling him now would be a disaster because of the precedent that it sets. Id sign Wissa and take that gamble until January. I dont care what Isak does with his time.

I dont know why people are obsessed with transfer requests, even if he requests a transfer, hes going nowhere. The principle is more important than money.

I think we know who's at fault and we wont be selling him cheap, ever.

How would Liverpool even have the balls to bid for him again after this?

Going nuclear just has the absolute opposite effect. The club are likely to see this and do everything the can to make sure Isak doesn't "win".

The fact he doesn't say specifically what was promised is rather telling... because he knows he will get caught in a lie.

Its more likely than him not playing at all for 12 months.

It basically says nothing. Does he honestly just expect us to let him go without a striker? What a cunt.

Stand-Larsen is class. I think we would love him. Its clear to me that we are no longer trying to sign 2 strikers. Isak will be staying.

I just dont see how we take a sides first choice striker this late in the window.

I dont think we will panic buy but in the last week of the window we will be prepared to hit the big red button that has Plan B (or plan G or wherever we are at) and start looking for a more fruity option like a Vlahovic on loan or an Ivan Toney or even a last minute big money move for Watkins. What's important is doing our prep work so we know what's available, so we can move quickly late on.

Im actually chill on this. The more we dont get a striker, the more Isak has to stay, which is the outcome i want. I'm not sure how it will pan out but I just dont want him getting his way. I know that leaves us in a pickle up front but what we cant do is panic buy. If we are going to panic buy, we might as well pay the extra whack for Wissa.

Are the championship comms following Leeds around?

This is a proper game this.

Not a link but a suggestion... Solanke. Not their number 1 striker anymore. Howe is a big fan. Hes 27, so still has good years ahead.

I expect us to refuse any offer without comment.