Alexis Sanchez

[Bill]

1. Because they're Tarquin cnuts.
2. Because like the dippers they are congenitally unable to accept the new reality that City are a more attractive destination than themselves. In their heads it's still 1998 and St Thierry is still putting clubs like ikkle City to the sword in his sleep, and they can't wrap their heads around the fact that the sands of time have irrevocably shifted. That, and the Van Persie episode, is what underpins their idiotic determination to cling on to someone who doesn't want to be there. Think Pulp Fiction and Marcellus Wallace telling Butch to ignore the sting when the time comes to take a dive. "That's pride fucking with you", he says. "Well fuck pride." Trouble is of course, people like Wenger can't accept that.
3. As a result of 1. and 2. they will now engage in Operation Blame Deflection. By the end of this window they may or may not have sold Sanchez to us, but they will unquestionably have turned the lad into a greedy, grasping, traitorous hate figure, courtesy of their mates in the press. Raheem Sterling all over again.

Funny thing is I'm not even that bothered if he comes. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have him, but if it meant we went after Dembele or Mbappe instead I wouldn't lose any sleep at all

Good post mate. Agree all round.

 

[Blue Llama]

This concept of not strengthening your rivals by selling a player to them has another dimension. It also strengthens a rival if you sit back and don't disrupt their transfer activity for better players. Normally clubs don't do this but when their action is motivated solely by this every strategy should be available including preventing them from strengthening until they see the light.

 

[flb]

I'd be very surprised if they let him leave for free next year when they could get 50-60 million for him and reinvest immediately

Coupled with the fact they don't have CL revenue to offset calling his bluff , they could potentially be down £100m making him stay.

 

[Marvin]

In January he can effectively sign a document of intent to join City at the end of his contract with arsenal getting nothing.

I am not sure he can. If he wants to remain in England I think he has to wait until the final month of his contract. However in reality we all know that if Sanchez doesn't sign a contract, and Arsenal choose to keep him, then next season could be one long season of rumour and accusation at Arsenal (a repeat of last season)

 

[Marvin]

I'd be very surprised if they let him leave for free next year when they could get 50-60 million for him and reinvest immediately

They could easily decide to make him see out the final year of his contract on the basis that a club at this late stage is unlikely to be able to bring in a player who could score and create as many as he does. It depends on the players attitude and how his game progresses.

if I were Arsenal I would sell, if I were City, and I really believed a striker was needed, I'd be looking at younger players. Sanchez is a player for now - for both City and Arsenal, but not for 18 months down the line. From City's standpoint there are bigger demands in the short term, and better striking options in the long term. But City have clearly decided we want him so that's really irrelevant.

 

[LHarper]

Don't forget this:

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...sanchez-mesut-ozil-new-contract-a7803741.html

 

[kippax4ever]

It's not down to Sanchez, he's under contract.

Surely he could do a Bosman & buy out his last year off his contract(which wouldnt cost us nearly anywhere the 40/50mill),

 

[tonea2003]

They could easily decide to make him see out the final year of his contract on the basis that a club at this late stage is unlikely to be able to bring in a player who could score and create as many as he does. It depends on the players attitude and how his game progresses.

if I were Arsenal I would sell, if I were City, and I really believed a striker was needed, I'd be looking at younger players. Sanchez is a player for now - for both City and Arsenal, but not for 18 months down the line. From City's standpoint there are bigger demands in the short term, and better striking options in the long term. But City have clearly decided we want him so that's really irrelevant.

think their immenent signing of lacazette tells you all you need to know imo

 

[Citizen in Pakistan]

I cannot see arsenal not selling him. Its just a matter of how much they can squeeze out from us and i would love to see us play hard ball and not pay over 35-40. 50 m for player with one year on his contract is too much l would say. Not too forget he is already 28

 

[domalino]

We've already missed out on him 2 times.

The first time when he opted for Barcelona.

The second time when he went to Arsenal because the Sanchez moneyended up being the FFP fine imposed by UEFA. I stand corrected on that one.

This is our (and his) last chance to get him. Unless he stays for another season and leaves on a free.

If he is forced to stay, I think we'll buy someone like Dembele and we won't wait for Sanchez.