Jump to content

The embargo means we lost this lad


Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said:

 

Having an agreement with the selling club isn't the same as writing the cheque and sitting the lad down and getting him to sign a permanent deal though.

You would hope though the buying club would have factored the transfer fee into their current years budget. Well any other club than us would have done.

 

Blades sign Norwood with a view to permanent in January do you think they have allocated how much the fee is going to be, or do you think they will just wing it and hope for the best come January

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

Gutted

He would have really helped us a lot right now

 

If we flip it mate, Embargo means more of a chance for Ash Baker, Thorniley, Dawson, Borukov, Hunt etc...and by giving them a chance, it may encourage the next David Brooks to pick blue instead of red.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, room0035 said:

You would hope though the buying club would have factored the transfer fee into their current years budget. Well any other club than us would have done.

 

Blades sign Norwood with a view to permanent in January do you think they have allocated how much the fee is going to be, or do you think they will just wing it and hope for the best come January

 

 

Perhaps they had factored it into the budget.

And someone said "I know you've got £800k, but we're not going to let you spend it because you've broke some little rules we have"

 

I don't really know what the blunts get up to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, room0035 said:

You would hope though the buying club would have factored the transfer fee into their current years budget. Well any other club than us would have done.

 

Blades sign Norwood with a view to permanent in January do you think they have allocated how much the fee is going to be, or do you think they will just wing it and hope for the best come January

Difference is...

 

Norwood deal is we loan him now and then make it permanent in Jan (Just to get around the Window shutting early)

 

Our deal for Venancio was we loan him now, and IF we want to buy him, we can for X amount.

 

Two totally different deals. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Skyline said:

Difference is...

 

Norwood deal is we loan him now and then make it permanent in Jan (Just to get around the Window shutting early)

 

Our deal for Venancio was we loan him now, and IF we want to buy him, we can for X amount.

 

Two totally different deals. 

Don't you be using facts on room0355.

 

It confuses him.

 

But yeah, it is a shame we couldn't bring back Venancio.

 

Suppose that was one of the biggest indication we were flipped.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given we are still playing at the back, he would have been a perfect fit on the right of a back 3. It would also release Hutch in defensive midfield to replace the struggling Joey.  We would have looked a much more solid side.  To think weve splashed £4m on JVA and we couldn't get a deal done for Venancio for £800k due to FFP! Fukinel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, bigash_swfc said:

 

If we flip it mate, Embargo means more of a chance for Ash Baker, Thorniley, Dawson, Borukov, Hunt etc...and by giving them a chance, it may encourage the next David Brooks to pick blue instead of red.

 

 

Sorry to be pedantic, but David Brooks isn't a Sheffield lad. United picked him up from Manchester City when they released him.

 

Just in case them lot try to claim he's one of their own if he ever makes it big.

 

lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

That's why I said rumoured. At the time the rumoured fee was 4 million. 

 

Either way I bet it was over 2 million. 

No it wasn't, it was never rumoured to be that.

At the time of the signing it was reported in the Dutch press the fee was, with add-ons, €2.5m. Equally in the British press it was reported as, with add-ons, £2.5m. I think it's safe to say that one of the potential add-ons was a promotion clause, so it wouldn't be an unfair guesstimate that the initial transfer fee was within the region of 2 million pounds/euros. Half of the 'rumoured' fee that was fabricated by Rocket on here. Also worth noting that he originally started the misstruth around late autumn last year and he started with £3m before increasing that fee incrementally up to £4m by spring. He even tried saying it was £4.5m a couple of times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Costello 77 said:

Without any facts or links!!

There is something about jva that makes me think he'll come good.

 

He's gone up in class...and I think he'll be coached to championship standard.

Me too , but we don't have time for this , nor do we have a Bielsa, Terry Burton etc (see lack of top loans).

 

To think, we coulda got Harry McGuire from Hull's reserves a few months before Van for £5 million (which smells Doyen with their Dutch contacts). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, fred mciver said:

Me too , but we don't have time for this , nor do we have a Bielsa, Terry Burton etc (see lack of top loans).

 

To think, we coulda got Harry McGuire from Hull's reserves a few months before Van for £5 million (which smells Doyen with their Dutch contacts). 

Yeah cos Maguire would have chosen us over Leicester wouldn't he 

.

They also paid 12m for him, rising to 17m. We had no chance lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Birley Owl 1867 said:

Yeah cos Maguire would have chosen us over Leicester wouldn't he 

.

They also paid 12m for him, rising to 17m. We had no chance lol 

He was so desperate in Hull reserves he nearly went back to Blades.

 

And he's 1 of about 5 now top stoppers that Chansiri's mob missed - Mawson to Barnsley for 70k, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, room0035 said:

You would hope though the buying club would have factored the transfer fee into their current years budget. Well any other club than us would have done.

 

Blades sign Norwood with a view to permanent in January do you think they have allocated how much the fee is going to be, or do you think they will just wing it and hope for the best come January

 

Perhaps they with held it due to being in a different financial year to the original loan. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hookowl said:

 

Perhaps they with held it due to being in a different financial year to the original loan. 

We originally agreed to pay something like £2m which when they could have got him for £800k would have been stupid. Now we know whats going on with the club i have no problem with what the club has done. Just wish we had been told at the time instead of being led to believe that we were trying to sign him.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

Dkt5euVXoAArF3r.jpg

Gutted


He would have really helped us a lot right now

I’m happier with Hutchinson in the back three to be honest, but perhaps would have provided cover for Sam’s inevitable injury/ red card.

Link to comment
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...