Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Source is De Telegraaf re 5 yr contract

 

Anita five years to Newcastle

 

From our special reporters

AMSTERDAM - Vurnon Anita (23) strikes this week the last folds with Newcastle United and signed a contract in England for five years.

 

"The clubs are out," said the midfielder of Ajax. "Newcastle pays a fixed amount of 8.5 million and bonuses," said Anita, who Ajax was a counter proposal for a contract until 2016 or 2017.

salary Ceiling

"But the salary that I wanted was above the new ceiling," he acknowledged. "Ajax is a beautiful club, where I've played since I was nine. So then your question, yes. But Newcastle is a big club, who last year very well done. They want to play football and that I want. "

 

Probs just guessing on that, don't think he'd have signed a contract yet.

 

http://www.telegraaf.nl/telesport/voetbal/ajax/12744687/__Anita_vijf_jaar_naar_Newcastle__.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having watched 4 games on a popular video website featuring Anita's every touch I can confidently say he isn't going to be a Tiote replacement. Their playing styles are very different. Anita plays the role I expected Cabaye to play last season, in that he gets himself space between the midfield and defence and makes sure theirs always a passing option in order to keep possession. Of course if we played Cabaye strictly in this role last season it would have hindered his attacking abilities, so I think Pardew expected him to do a bit of both which often resulted in Cabaye going missing in no mans land. Hopefully having a ball winning defensive midfielder (Tiote) and a defensive playmaker in Anita will give Cabaye more freedom in attack and will undoubtedly help us dominate possession more. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like we can only do one thing at once, it's an extra midfielder for strength in depth, not sure why you think it's one or the other

 

I'm not saying it's one or the other. I have gone on record saying I don't think we work to a transfer budget, but we try to get good deals when we see them even if this means our squad is unbalanced. This is my concern currently...

 

Do you really believe that the Anita signing is an opportunistic bargain?

 

That strikes me as frankly ridiculous if I'm honest.

 

Not that ridiculous like. He just turned down a new deal so he's kind of become 'available' now.

 

Obviously its not that simple and we've had an eye on him for some time like all our targets. We have a list of players and when someone's situation changes in a way that allows us to make a good value for money signing, we strike.

 

And that's fair enough, but there is no way that we sanction knee jerk bargains at the expense of the squad and positions that are more pressing.

 

I'd even question whether €8.5m plus future bonuses is that much of of a bargain in the first place. We want him for a reason, he will play.

 

If we can't do a deal we're happy with we'll happily leave gaping holes in our squad as has been proven before. We've gone the first half of last season without the striker we were after since Carroll left and the second half of the season without centre back cover even though we knew Saylor was out injured for the remainder of the season, gambling our excellent start of the season by relying on Colo and Williamson staying fit for the sake of a few million.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we'll be lucky to get Debuchy now like. Anita can cover at fullback, as can a number of other players already here. On top of that, we know the player wants to leave so we'll be just sitting hoping Lille give in.

 

It's the kind of deal I can see just fizzling out to nothing, with us mugs desperately hoping on deadline day that we go back for him. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we'll be lucky to get Debuchy now like. Anita can cover at fullback, as can a number of other players already here. On top of that, we know the player wants to leave so we'll be just sitting hoping Lille give in.

 

It's the kind of deal I can see just fizzling out to nothing, with us mugs desperately hoping on deadline day that we go back for him. :lol:

 

I still think we will get him or another full back.  They will be wanting Simpson out the door with only 12 months to go on his contract, I think he will be off as soon as we get a replacement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we'll be lucky to get Debuchy now like. Anita can cover at fullback, as can a number of other players already here. On top of that, we know the player wants to leave so we'll be just sitting hoping Lille give in.

 

It's the kind of deal I can see just fizzling out to nothing, with us mugs desperately hoping on deadline day that we go back for him. :lol:

 

Think that'll be a shame for us and a real shame for the player. French RB desparate to come to us and doesn't.

Sad times. :sad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we'll be lucky to get Debuchy now like. Anita can cover at fullback, as can a number of other players already here. On top of that, we know the player wants to leave so we'll be just sitting hoping Lille give in.

 

It's the kind of deal I can see just fizzling out to nothing, with us mugs desperately hoping on deadline day that we go back for him. :lol:

Like we can only do one thing at once, it's an extra midfielder for strength in depth, not sure why you think it's one or the other

 

I'm not saying it's one or the other. I have gone on record saying I don't think we work to a transfer budget, but we try to get good deals when we see them even if this means our squad is unbalanced. This is my concern currently...

 

Do you really believe that the Anita signing is an opportunistic bargain?

 

That strikes me as frankly ridiculous if I'm honest.

 

Not that ridiculous like. He just turned down a new deal so he's kind of become 'available' now.

 

Obviously its not that simple and we've had an eye on him for some time like all our targets. We have a list of players and when someone's situation changes in a way that allows us to make a good value for money signing, we strike.

 

And that's fair enough, but there is no way that we sanction knee jerk bargains at the expense of the squad and positions that are more pressing.

 

I'd even question whether €8.5m plus future bonuses is that much of of a bargain in the first place. We want him for a reason, he will play.

 

If we can't do a deal we're happy with we'll happily leave gaping holes in our squad as has been proven before. We've gone the first half of last season without the striker we were after since Carroll left and the second half of the season without centre back cover even though we knew Saylor was out injured for the remainder of the season, gambling our excellent start of the season by relying on Colo and Williamson staying fit for the sake of a few million.

 

I'll be seriously pissed off if we have to put up with another season of Danny Simpson, and I bet Hatem would feel the same.

It's such an obvious weakness for other teams to exploit

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like we can only do one thing at once, it's an extra midfielder for strength in depth, not sure why you think it's one or the other

 

I'm not saying it's one or the other. I have gone on record saying I don't think we work to a transfer budget, but we try to get good deals when we see them even if this means our squad is unbalanced. This is my concern currently...

 

Do you really believe that the Anita signing is an opportunistic bargain?

 

That strikes me as frankly ridiculous if I'm honest.

 

Not that ridiculous like. He just turned down a new deal so he's kind of become 'available' now.

 

Obviously its not that simple and we've had an eye on him for some time like all our targets. We have a list of players and when someone's situation changes in a way that allows us to make a good value for money signing, we strike.

 

And that's fair enough, but there is no way that we sanction knee jerk bargains at the expense of the squad and positions that are more pressing.

 

I'd even question whether €8.5m plus future bonuses is that much of of a bargain in the first place. We want him for a reason, he will play.

 

If we can't do a deal we're happy with we'll happily leave gaping holes in our squad as has been proven before. We've gone the first half of last season without the striker we were after since Carroll left and the second half of the season without centre back cover even though we knew Saylor was out injured for the remainder of the season, gambling our excellent start of the season by relying on Colo and Williamson staying fit for the sake of a few million.

 

Eh? That is an entirely different argument. :lol:

 

Yes we will abandon or wait on deals until they are right financially for us, even if it leaves us short temporarily. Again, fair enough.

 

But that has no bearing at all on whether we would go out and grab a player that doesn't fit into our plan for the squad just because he has a 60% off sticker on his bonce (which I don't think if the prices quoted are right, describes Anita in the first place). And I don't think buying Anita has any significant knock on effect whatsoever on any other deals that may be being worked on to address the 'gaping holes' in the team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The mere fact the Dutch media reckon Van der Wiel turned us down while were negotiating for Anita tells me that regardless of the fact Anita can play fullback we still want an fullback and a attacking one at that.

 

Whether we get Debuchy or not i don't know but i'm confident we will get a fullback in before the end of the window.

Link to post
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...