Alexander Isak - International C*nt

[Nucasol]

Sticking up for “PSR maintaining the competitive balance of the Premier League” - competitive balance meaning only two clubs have won the league since 2016/17.

[Shadow Puppets]

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

More than happy for Isak to sit in our reserves until next summer personally. I wouldn't sell to Liverpool period rewarding the blatant attempts at unsettling our players 2 summers in a row isn't it my MO. 

 

As for Elliot, he's a mid player cartel cast off who will end up turning in 6/10 performances for Fulham. 

We’ll have to agree to disagree on Elliott. I like him.

 

“Rotting in the reserves” is about the worst possible outcome to all of this. We don’t have a player and we don’t have any money, and probably a team morale issue in the background to contend with.

 

As far as I’m concerned, he wants to go, and someone is likely going to offer £135m for him. A few hypotheticals to throw out there…

 

1) we turn down a big offer, he signs a new contract, he reintegrates with the squad, bangs in 20 goals… we’ll still go through the whole charade again next summer.

 

2) we turn down a big offer, he sits in the reserves. No money, no player. Pointless and damaging to morale.

 

3) we turn down a big offer, he gets an injury or a loss of form / his hearts not in it. We go through all of this next summer but with less money involved.

 

4) we sell him now for £135m+, and reinvest in the squad. Even if we don’t replace him with a “big name” immediately, we could feasibly build out the squad substantially.

 

5) we sell him now for £135m+, replace him with Sesko and replace Wilson with Wissa, and move on.

 

Options 4 and 5 are, to me, the most appealing. This whole charade has burnt too many bridges.

 

Ideally I wouldn’t want it to be Liverpool, but it’s going to be, so I’m not really sure what the point in arguing about it is.

 

 

[gdm]

9 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

More than happy for Isak to sit in our reserves until next summer personally. I wouldn't sell to Liverpool period rewarding the blatant attempts at unsettling our players 2 summers in a row isn't it my MO. 

 

As for Elliot, he's a mid player cartel cast off who will end up turning in 6/10 performances for Fulham. 

If we can get Sesko I’d keep Isak on the bench until he proves he’s committed to the team & his team mates. Next summer there could be a bidding war psg, Madrid, Liverpool. Doesn’t make sense just to sell him to Liverpool 

[RUHRLYASLEEVESUP]

8 minutes ago, Nucasol said:

🚨OLIVER HOLT IS A TOTAL NONCE ALERT 🚨 

 

https://archive.ph/0CMwC

 

Check out the chops on this one. Another pop at us “Saudi fanboys”.

He writes for the daily mail who were desperate to entice Middle Eastern money for an aggressive buyout of their main rival FGS

 

 

 

Edited July 29, 2025 by RUHRLYASLEEVESUP

[r0cafella]

Just now, Shadow Puppets said:

We’ll have to agree to disagree on Elliott. I like him.

 

“Rotting in the reserves” is about the worst possible outcome to all of this. We don’t have a player and we don’t have any money, and probably a team morale issue in the background to contend with.

 

As far as I’m concerned, he wants to go, and someone is likely going to offer £135m for him. A few hypotheticals to throw out there…

 

1) we turn down a big offer, he signs a new contract, he reintegrates with the squad, bangs in 20 goals… we’ll still go through the whole charade again next summer.

 

2) we turn down a big offer, he sits in the reserves. No money, no player. Pointless and damaging to morale.

 

3) we turn down a big offer, he gets an injury or a loss of form / his hearts not in it. We go through all of this next summer but with less money involved.

 

4) we sell him now for £135m+, and reinvest in the squad. Even if we don’t replace him with a “big name” immediately, we could feasibly build out the squad substantially.

 

5) we sell him now for £135m+, replace him with Sesko and replace Wilson with Wissa, and move on.

 

Options 4 and 5 are, to me, the most appealing. This whole charade has burnt too many bridges.

 

Ideally I wouldn’t want it to be Liverpool, but it’s going to be, so I’m not really sure what the point in arguing about it is.

 

 

Won't be no going through this next season. If we are properly managed (we aren't) then we will have a replacement brought in this summer and stick to our guns next summer for a sale to someone else. 

 

We aren't in a hurry he's got 3 years left to run. His price also won't change that much regardless too. 

 

Worse case scenario is playing in the sand for Alex as I'm told Saudi is full of it. 

 

Bending over to a player who has thrown a strop and to a club who've engineered this shouldn't be an option. 

[SUPERTOON]

The biggest non negotiable for me is not selling until we have a replacement through the door. We are a joke if not, and will make us look even worse than we currently do.

[Shadow Puppets]

Just now, r0cafella said:

Won't be no going through this next season. If we are properly managed (we aren't) then we will have a replacement brought in this summer and stick to our guns next summer for a sale to someone else. 

 

We aren't in a hurry he's got 3 years left to run. His price also won't change that much regardless too. 

 

Worse case scenario is playing in the sand for Alex as I'm told Saudi is full of it. 

 

Bending over to a player who has thrown a strop and to a club who've engineered this shouldn't be an option. 

In an ideal world I’d agree. But I don’t think anything you’ve said there is realistic or in any way likely to happen.

[Shadow Puppets]

1 minute ago, SUPERTOON said:

The biggest non negotiable for me is not selling until we have a replacement through the door. We are a joke if not, and will make us look even worse than we currently do.

I’d agree with that.

[gdm]

Just now, Shadow Puppets said:

We’ll have to agree to disagree on Elliott. I like him.

 

“Rotting in the reserves” is about the worst possible outcome to all of this. We don’t have a player and we don’t have any money, and probably a team morale issue in the background to contend with.

 

As far as I’m concerned, he wants to go, and someone is likely going to offer £135m for him. A few hypotheticals to throw out there…

 

1) we turn down a big offer, he signs a new contract, he reintegrates with the squad, bangs in 20 goals… we’ll still go through the whole charade again next summer.

 

2) we turn down a big offer, he sits in the reserves. No money, no player. Pointless and damaging to morale.

 

3) we turn down a big offer, he gets an injury or a loss of form / his hearts not in it. We go through all of this next summer but with less money involved.

 

4) we sell him now for £135m+, and reinvest in the squad. Even if we don’t replace him with a “big name” immediately, we could feasibly build out the squad substantially.

 

5) we sell him now for £135m+, replace him with Sesko and replace Wilson with Wissa, and move on.

 

Options 4 and 5 are, to me, the most appealing. This whole charade has burnt too many bridges.

 

Ideally I wouldn’t want it to be Liverpool, but it’s going to be, so I’m not really sure what the point in arguing about it is.

 

 

We owe money on Isak and Soceidad have a sell on % the reinvest in the squad will be not much more than an Isak replacement. Fuck knows who that’ll be 

[Menace]

I agree with SP - what's the point in him being around? There is absolutely no guarantee clubs will bid the same amount next year (if they even bid this year). He's handled this like a complete idiot, so let him go.

[Smal]

5 minutes ago, Shadow Puppets said:

We’ll have to agree to disagree on Elliott. I like him.

 

“Rotting in the reserves” is about the worst possible outcome to all of this. We don’t have a player and we don’t have any money, and probably a team morale issue in the background to contend with.

 

As far as I’m concerned, he wants to go, and someone is likely going to offer £135m for him. A few hypotheticals to throw out there…

 

1) we turn down a big offer, he signs a new contract, he reintegrates with the squad, bangs in 20 goals… we’ll still go through the whole charade again next summer.

 

2) we turn down a big offer, he sits in the reserves. No money, no player. Pointless and damaging to morale.

 

3) we turn down a big offer, he gets an injury or a loss of form / his hearts not in it. We go through all of this next summer but with less money involved.

 

4) we sell him now for £135m+, and reinvest in the squad. Even if we don’t replace him with a “big name” immediately, we could feasibly build out the squad substantially.

 

5) we sell him now for £135m+, replace him with Sesko and replace Wilson with Wissa, and move on.

 

Options 4 and 5 are, to me, the most appealing. This whole charade has burnt too many bridges.

 

Ideally I wouldn’t want it to be Liverpool, but it’s going to be, so I’m not really sure what the point in arguing about it is.

 

 

none of these mention how we’d be selling a player to a direct rival who could score 30+ goals a season for them for the next 7 years

[r0cafella]

2 minutes ago, Shadow Puppets said:

In an ideal world I’d agree. But I don’t think anything you’ve said there is realistic or in any way likely to happen.

It's all realistic, but again it depends on us having a backbone. If we are willing to get dog walked by Liverpool and the player then absolutely. 

 

We hold all of the cards and do for another 3 years, your suggestions involving folding them, mine assert our control over the situation and let the world know we aren't a wee club in the north east

 

 

[Nobody]

If the thought of him banging in fucking loads of goals (including at St James) for Liverpool doesn't make you feel absolutely sick I don't know what will. 

£135m is a joke of a fee, it barely buys us two new players in today's market, it's far from the transformative fee it should have to be for us to consider selling. 

[Robster]

May be it's fanciful, but I'd love us to do what we can to show Liverpool that we won't be pushed around and won't bow down to their shitty bullying tactics.

If that means having an unhappy Isak for a season, so be it. 

[gdm]

1 minute ago, Menace said:

I agree with SP - what's the point in him being around? There is absolutely no guarantee clubs will bid the same amount next year (if they even bid this year). He's handled this like a complete idiot, so let him go.

Again and replace with who? 

[Shadow Puppets]

Just now, Smal said:

none of these mention how we’d be selling a player to a direct rival who could score 30+ goals a season for them for the next 7 years

My order of preferences…

 

1) we keep him, he somehow signs a new contract as is actually committed to it.

 

2) we sell him abroad now.

 

3) we sell him to a PL team now.

 

4) we keep an unhappy player, lowering morale, when we could have accepted a big money offer and moved on.

[SUPERTOON]

Just now, Robster said:

May be it's fanciful, but I'd love us to do what we can to show Liverpool that we won't be pushed around and won't bow down to their shitty bullying tactics.

If that means having an unhappy Isak for a season, so be it. 

Don’t see why it’s fanciful tbh, we literally have all the control in this situation imo.

[Coffee_Johnny]

19 minutes ago, Fak said:

 

Sounds like his stance has softened a bit. 

He is, as ever, just being realistic. I wouldn’t read too much into such comments. (Impossible as that seems at the moment). 

[Menace]

1 minute ago, gdm said:

Again and replace with who? 

 

If the player has kicked up a fuss weeks/months prior and the club has no replacement lined up what does that say about us really? I'd personally go for Toney for a year.

 

 

[Fak]

2 minutes ago, Coffee_Johnny said:

He is, as ever, just being realistic. I wouldn’t read too much into such comments. (Impossible as that seems at the moment). 

 

He's basically confirmed Isak's gone.

[Shadow Puppets]

2 minutes ago, gdm said:

Again and replace with who? 

I already told you who. Sesko + Wissa, or Wissa and another £30m-£40m signing as stop gaps until we can get out shit together.

[gdm]

1 minute ago, Menace said:

 

If the player has kicked up a fuss weeks/months prior and the club has no replacement lined up what does that say about us really? I'd personally go for Toney for a year.

 

 

Can’t afford his wages. Anyone else ?

[Menace]

How can we not afford his wages when he's owned by our parent club for fuck sake

[r0cafella]

Just now, Menace said:

How can we not afford his wages when he's owned by our parent club for fuck sake

He's a none starter. He makes double our highest earner and coming back to the UK Will trigger a massive tax bill for him. 

[Menace]

Even if they cover his wages?