KaKa

1 minute ago, loki679 said:

 

Nobody is whining.

Kimbo was definitely whining.

1 minute ago, loki679 said:

All people have said is that we need a striker and a RW.  Your histrionics do nobody any favours.

Yeah, we all know we need those though.

What does whining about that everyday acheive?

3 minutes ago, Sean said:

I don't think they wanted to not have any attacking additions by this point, they've been unable to get any is the reason we are where we are at the minute.

Well that's the way transfers go sometimes. Won't be the first or last time. 

If I had to guess I'm pretty certain we'll get at least two in before the window closes and they'll be players that make an impact.

5 minutes ago, loki679 said:

 

Nobody has said that.

For whatever reason they have found it easier or more straightforward to build from the back, and they've done a hell of a job of it, and have spent a ton of money doing so. I think your post brushes over that.

It's proven more complicated to get the calibre of players they want further up the pitch, and so seemingly they are choosing to go right down to the wire with it, but seemingly that is not good enough for people, despite the fact we've started the season well.

Think it's a bit cheeky to be honest.

1 minute ago, MrRaspberryJam said:

 

Think you've misread his post.

Nope.

3 minutes ago, loki679 said:

 

Nobody has said that.

Just wait till the window closes before all the crying man.

They've built a team strong enough to not be completely useless until then.

So if they want to wait till the end of the window to have a full scope of what is available then let them do so.

1 minute ago, loki679 said:

 

That's not really a valid point.  It's not about how much money has been spent, it's about which areas of the team need strengthening and which are ok.

 

Defensively we weren't too bad last year but if you go back through the threads the one consistent note is that our attack lacks depth and quality, particularly at striker and RW. 

Now it's not about how much money has been spent ... some of you lot are incredible man. You really are.

So the players we spent that money on were all just a waste of money and didn't make a difference to the team. Righty ho.

4 minutes ago, Kimbo said:

You’ll be lucky to get one of those the way things are going.

Yes, things are so awful aren't they.

We've only spent £145 million on the team this year, and have started the season without a loss or a goal conceded after two games. God help us!!!

3 minutes ago, MrRaspberryJam said:

 

Different owners then though!

Chelsea are never asking £55 million for Gallagher. They didn't even pay that for Sterling.

1 minute ago, Holmesy said:

The market will open up in the final two weeks. Most teams will have completed their business and know which players they want to keep, which they're happy to get rid of and which ones are determined to leave themselves in order to get first team football. We've never been active at this end of the market so it'll be interesting to see what happens.

Gordon can see Everton are sinking already, Chelsea's fringe players are getting nowhere near the first team, we're unbeaten in two - things that can potentially influence transfer activity are changing by the week

This exactly. I think there's a number of players that we're interested in that clubs were waiting till after a full pre season to determine if they'd be made available or not. We will move in these final two weeks and get players in.

2 minutes ago, gdm said:

I get the feeling from that article and the stories of going to bid for Ramos we are looking at Chelsea players to loan not buy 

The stories of going to bid for Ramos and also now of going to bid for Gallagher are interesting.

If the deals are structured favourably we may be able to do both. Otherwise it might be one or the other. Alternatively, like you say perhaps Gallagher would be an initial loan with an obligation attached.

4 minutes ago, MrRaspberryJam said:

 

He's much better than Gordon imo and £40m is what Chelsea offered Everton. I think it'll take at least £55m for Chelsea to entertain us for Gallagher. (based on nothing but a hunch)

£55 million is in the region of what Leicester are asking for Maddison. Cannot see Chelsea asking that for Gallagher at all.

Chelsea typically tend to let players they aren't intent on keeping leave for fairly reasonable prices.

Tomori left for around £25million last summer and Abraham for around £35 million.

3 minutes ago, gdm said:

Neither can we if we are bidding for Ramos or any other striker for that matter 

That's a different conversation altogether.

7 minutes ago, McCormick said:

Price, Kante injury, home-grown quotas and the fact that he could be a Chelsea starter after a few years.

We don't know what Chelsea's price is yet.

Kante may well be injured but Chelsea are not being hesitant about going for more signings this summer, and so they would just go and replace him and Gallagher if they sold him.

They are pretty strong on home grown quotas regardless with the likes of Mount, James, Loftus-Cheek, Chalobah, Sterling, CHO etc.

As far as Gallagher being a starter after a few years, apparently he's eager to push forward after his loan last year that saw him get into the England team, and he wants to push for a World Cup place. Can't see him going from that to sitting around for two years, while Chelsea continue to recruit flashy names from all and sundry.

I think we'll be in with a good chance tbh. The rumoured bid from us of £40 million would be a very strong offer.

3 minutes ago, Magpie said:

If Gallagher does go anywhere he'll go back to Palace 

That's not how it works. They can't afford him outright.

If we bid for him and Chelsea accepts we'll sign him.

10 minutes ago, Rich said:

Gallagher would be perfect for us, but I just can't see it happening.

How come?

Why be smug about this?

Seriously tempting fate with something like this coming our way to a player we'd really all hate to see get injured.

4 minutes ago, Flip said:

 

I'd stay well clear. Looked the real deal when he first came to Barcelona, but fell off a cliff. 

Yeah, such a shame. Really liked the look of him early on.

Might be a loan option late on if other moves don't materialise. If so, hopefully he finds his previous form.

18 minutes ago, Flip said:

 

 

How about you shut up? Lets speak it into existence 

 

We were linked with Arthur Melo today along with West Ham.

What's your thoughts on him and how things have gone at Barca and then Juve?

Just now, Heron said:

Sorry, I was referencing the diving and simulation in their game. 

Ah, right. That's true actually. Never see any of that carrying on in the Women's game.

No idea why that is such a big thing in the men's game, it's incredibly embarrassing.

29 minutes ago, Heron said:

The irony like is that the lasses don't tend to do any of this shit. 

Um ... to be fair women do love a good male bashing session if we're being honest. Just catch any of their daily talk shows man. Some awful stuff on those shows. 

9 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

 

For. Goodness. Sake.

1 minute ago, triggs said:

Why do Chelsea want him? He definitely wouldn't play

Tuchel seems to dislike all of their back up options in those winger positions i.e. CHO, Pulisic and Ziyech.

I wonder if sometimes the rumours about players moving are leaked to the media without knowledge of the club involved and then the papers just throw in random clubs names. 

1 minute ago, madras said:

Carney should have replied " if it's a man's game why do they roll about like spoilt children when someone just looks at them ?"

It would be a fair point too.

To be honest a lot of the behaviours in the game are very childish.

The back in the day angry shouty player running around charging into players recklessly is childish, as is the current day falling about all the time nonsense.

Souness thinks his days were more 'manly' but I completely disagree. At least nowadays players are less likely to suffer serious injury.