Alexander Isak - International C*nt

[duo]

9 minutes ago, Mike said:

They probably thought getting the loyalty bonus was a coup.

Liverpool would just add it to his signing bonus so he still wins

[GWN]

The Mackems knew 

 

 

Edited September 1, 2025 by GWN

[Facundo Ferreyra]

[stozo]

Just now, The Prophet said:

I'd also say this is the ownerships first real test on the transfer front.

 

Liverpool kept Suarez when he threw a wobbler.

 

Spurs kept Kane when he went on TV and stated he wasted to leave.

 

We've folded, signalling we're here to do nothing more than service the cartel. We've sent a message if you unsettle our player we'll do business on favourable terms. It's a total  capitulation.

Look at Villa. They've hit a PSR wall and they are dead this season. We've sold probably the best young winger in the league to Brighton plus an England international midfielder to Forest because we hit a PSR wall. If we want summers like this one with 4+ quality incoming purchases, we have to maximise our player sales. You can do that by selling a lot of players or by selling one very expensive player. We can all hate Isak but the reality is today is our last chance to cash maximum value on him. Not selling today would have been a massive gamble on him maintaining his value, and if he lost value then it limits our ability to buy players in future windows. 

[black_n_white]

The club recognise we need to get better at trading players. I do not resent the club for doing this business. Let’s just hope we reinvest and get a couple of real quality players with the money.

 

 

Edited September 1, 2025 by black_n_white

[kocunar]

Imagine being Ekitike right now. 

[duo]

3 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Well not quite, they also need to utilise a guy who is refusing to play and then hope to sell him for a high fee after that. Or write off £100 million plus. 

It's ridiculous to think he wouldn't have played once the window shut. Clearly he spooked PIF / Jamie with his threats but it serves him or his agent no purpose not to play.

[Kimbo]

1 minute ago, Facundo Ferreyra said:

You also need lots of money, and rules rigged in your favour help a lot.
 

[Andy]

1 minute ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Well not quite, they also need to utilise a guy who is refusing to play and then hope to sell him for a high fee after that. Or write off £100 million plus. 

 

Exactly. As I said yesterday, you don't become successful in business by letting your assets rot and lose value. There's also an argument that you don't become a successful football club that way too - all clubs but the very best have to be open to selling players now in the PSR era, it's the only way to grow. 

 

The club will have weighed all this up and made the decision they felt was best for them. They haven't just buckled and given in, it'll be a calculated decision. 

[vivastar69]

I really don’t understand why people are against this transfer. It must be done.

He had maybe six very good months where he scored in all the big games. Beyond that, he had many games where he completely switched off and looked like a player who didn't want to be here.

Howe would never let him near the team again with his attitude, and that wouldn’t change. He’s a little rat who only thinks about himself. The fact that some people want him back in the team and wearing the shirt is completely mind-blowing. We need to get rid of him and move on. I think the price of 130M is acceptable, because he is overrated, and hopefully that will become clear in the years to come.

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

7 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

I'd also say this is the ownerships first real test on the transfer front.

 

Liverpool kept Suarez when he threw a wobbler.

 

Spurs kept Kane when he went on TV and stated he wasted to leave.

 

We've folded, signalling we're here to do nothing more than service the cartel. We've sent a message if you unsettle our player we'll do business on favourable terms. It's a total  capitulation.

I think criticism of the ownership is fair, but Suarez and Kane are a bit apples and oranges as a comparison. The evolution of PSR has changed the way these things work. 

[GeordieToon]

Hope his Groin/Hip/Pelvic Injury's don't come back to haunt The Dippers. Oh Fuck it yes I do.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 minute ago, duo said:

It's ridiculous to think he wouldn't have played once the window shut. Clearly he spooked PIF / Jamie with his threats but it serves him or his agent no purpose not to play.

I don’t know either way but I’m just saying it’s a risk to be factored in. And we don’t just need him to play, we need him to play to his absolutely best. 

[The College Dropout]

2 minutes ago, stozo said:

Look at Villa. They've hit a PSR wall and they are dead this season. We've sold probably the best young winger in the league to Brighton plus an England international midfielder to Forest because we hit a PSR wall. If we want summers like this one with 4+ quality incoming purchases, we have to maximise our player sales. You can do that by selling a lot of players or by selling one very expensive player. We can all hate Isak but the reality is today is our last chance to cash maximum value on him. Not selling today would have been a massive gamble on him maintaining his value, and if he lost value then it limits our ability to buy players in future windows. 

We’ve not maximised this sale though. That’s the point. 
 

And we  are also signing players on a premium.  
 

This deal and the others we have made this summer are not great for PSR. 

[stozo]

Just now, duo said:

It's ridiculous to think he wouldn't have played once the window shut. Clearly he spooked PIF / Jamie with his threats but it serves him or his agent no purpose not to play.

I don't think he'd have gone on strike, but are playing him or Woltemade up front every week? To maintain Isak's value, he must be number 1 - which means Woltemade is effectively a backup, which is obviously not what we have bought him for.

[Yorkie]

Just now, Andy said:

 

Exactly. As I said yesterday, you don't become successful in business by letting your assets rot and lose value. There's also an argument that you don't become a successful football club that way too - all clubs but the very best have to be open to selling players now in the PSR era, it's the only way to grow. 

 

The club will have weighed all this up and made the decision they felt was best for them. They haven't just buckled and given in, it'll be a calculated decision. 

 

I can't believe this is the minority voice tbh.

 

It all comes down to Eddie Howe for me. If he's still in the building then my assumption is that the club have operated in their best interests, or at least done everything they can to do so. He'd be out the door if it was anything else.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

2 minutes ago, Shays Given Tim Flowers said:

I think criticism of the ownership is fair, but Suarez and Kane are a bit apples and oranges as a comparison. The evolution of PSR has changed the way these things work. 

And the fact we’re selling Isak at peak value really, even if it’s a bit below the reporting max price. 

[Jesse Pinkman]

Isak is a little twerp 

 

 

Edited September 1, 2025 by Jesse Pinkman

[The College Dropout]

1 minute ago, Shays Given Tim Flowers said:

I think criticism of the ownership is fair, but Suarez and Kane are a bit apples and oranges as a comparison. The evolution of PSR has changed the way these things work. 

Again the window fails on this. The Isak deal covers the value of Nick W and Elanga basically. 
 

We are signing players on a premium typically as we prioritise PL experience. 
 

And then we’ve not sold Isak on a premium. 
 

 

[Matt]

Just now, Vinny Green Balls said:

I don't see how it does since the window hadn't shut. Other huge players were compelled to stay after throwing tantrums. Plenty of precedent for getting the players to continue to play for the club for at least a season. Is this so remarkably different from them? 

 

I'm racking my brains but I don't remember the last time a player held out this long from even training with a team. I'm not sure how we 'get him' to play, and if he did, would he not just threaten to play badly? It's a dismal situation but one which only comes about when the player is question is an absolute scumbag. Look, we're never going to know exactly what has gone on, but I think the club has sacrificed a reasonable chunk of change to prevent the standoff blowing up even further. 

 

Gerard was of course one case where he was strongly persuaded by non-football actors to stay put.

 

[Conjo]

19 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

 

I'm critical because:

 

1) they sold to a league rival, which is completely incongruent to their stated aims.

2) they sold below their stated value. Even Brentford and Wolves have shown more backbone than that.

3) we've sold him before a second striker is through the door. We're going into the final day of the market with £130 million in our pocket and a decent liklihood we're going into the season with one, unproven striker up top.

 

 

To be fair, for balance, although I feel the same as you 1) Liverpool were the only club interested, 2) it's a bit different turning down £50-55m compared to £125-130m. Fully onboard with 3) though.

[Doctor Zaius]

Just now, The College Dropout said:

We’ve not maximised this sale though. That’s the point. 
 

And we  are also signing players on a premium.  
 

This deal and the others we have made this summer are not great for PSR. 

 

This is it like. 

 

We wanted 150 and a replacement, we've allowed them to pay 125 and we've got no replacement. 

 

I refuse to accept that the club didn't have a choice. They did. It may have been a calculated decision (made by who?) but it's a poor one. 

 

The club specifically said that we'd only sell if our conditions had been met. Laughable really.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 minute ago, Jesse Pinkman said:

Isak is a littler twerp 

Pass it on. 

[Geogaddi]

Shite from the club this , selling him on the last day below his value without a second striker . We should have just sold him weeks ago. The cartel be back next summer as well for Sandro and Tino and we be bending over backwards to sell them it seems . 

[dinotheprehistoricgeordie]

What a shit start to the day. I am very aware I'm far too emotional about all of this, but we have been bent over and fucked here. 

 

I'm pissed off about the price they got him for two reasons.

1. The club set a price, then buckled, for no reason I can see. 

2. The final fee doesn’t reflect the player’s quality. Isak is one of the top strikers in world football. Given the scarcity of elite strikers and the inflated prices we’ve seen for others, we should have commanded a significantly higher fee.

 

I'm generally pissed that we’ve effectively rewarded both Isak’s and Liverpool’s behaviour. Now we’re left with a young striker who, while promising, is still largely unproven. Throwing him in at the deep end immediately would be Man U levels of player management.

 

If we end up spending the Isak money on one or two subpar replacements, it’ll be incredibly frustrating. We desperately need a Premier League-proven striker, and right now, we’re in a lose-lose situation. We could have held firm and sold him in the winter or summer window. He would have played for us again—just like Kane and Suárez did in similar situations. He had no real alternative unless he wanted to derail his own career.

That would’ve given us time to properly prepare and line up a suitable replacement, rather than scrambling like we have all summer since he threw his toys out of the pram.

 

In conclusion, fuck Isak (genuinely hope his acl explodes), fuck Liverpool. I hope our fax machine explodes and we do a de Gea.