We already paid part of the addons after reaching the Champions League semi final. I imagine his 40+ appearances last season paid some as well.Liverpool told the press they got thd full amount but they didn't.
Ten deals done in a similar manner defers payment of 50 milliion quid, some of which may never be paid if a player fails. By all accounts we have at least two now with Sterling & Sane. Maybe Stones is 3. That's just in one year. It's an enormous sum of money.
Are you deliberately missing the point mate?
They called our bluff re a final offer, and got a vastly inflated fee for a player no one else would touch with a barge poll at the figures quoted, and we were the only club he wanted to play for.
That precedent is what's coming back to haunt us with Stones now.
I recall early on Liverpool saying he wasn't for sale full stop.I don't know that we made a 'final offer' in either case. I know Liverpool told the press they wanted 50 mil & didn't get it.
A sensible post.There's clearly a lot of disgruntlement about this possible transfer and I have to say like most people I'm not all that keen about it either. The price, the fact that Stones has not looked a world beater, he made the most mistakes leading to goals last season etc.
But really there must be something about Stones that coaches/managers see. Moanrino last season, Pep this. We watch football week after week and know 90% of what happens but the reason they are top football managers is because they see that extra 10%.
Any price is irrelevant, we all love attacking players who score goals and cream ourselves over possible Sane and GJ, but today a defender who, for want of other things, has composure on the ball and pass accuracy, could help build far more successful chances for the team than many strikers, who are we to grumble?
Yes, if Stones was the last piece in the jigsaw, and money was no object, I'd agree, 5 million here or there just doesn't seem worth the hassle. Give the greedy barstewards what that want and tell them to "do one"A sensible post.
People posting that are so against paying £50m, yet think we should pay £40-45m, personally I can't see the difference, Pep wants him, so if he works out, what is £5m over 5 years ?
If we seriously want the lad, we'll pay what we have to in the end, that is how it works, and as a supporter I couldn't give a monkeys if its £40m, 45m, or 50m.
How do you know it was our final offer?Are you deliberately missing the point mate?
They called our bluff re a final offer, and got a vastly inflated fee for a player no one else would touch with a barge poll at the figures quoted, and we were the only club he wanted to play for.
That precedent is what's coming back to haunt us with Stones now.
Yes, if Stones was the last piece in the jigsaw, and money was no object, I'd agree, 5 million here or there just doesn't seem worth the hassle. Give the greedy barstewards what that want and tell them to "do one"
However, presuming that their isn't a bottomless pit of money available, and that we are working to some sort of budget, (of whatever size) I really do believe that there are other positions in more urgent need of strengthening than the centre back spot.
Two decent fullbacks and a young, strong, fast CM, to act as Merlin's minder and stop him getting kicked from pillar to post every week, are just a couple of examples that spring readily to mind
Because if we say "sod it" and pay the extra £5m, that tells other clubs who we may be buying from in future that if they hold out for whatever price they want, they will in the end get it. It's all a game of who blinks first, I think we'll win this one.A sensible post.
People posting that are so against paying £50m, yet think we should pay £40-45m, personally I can't see the difference, Pep wants him, so if he works out, what is £5m over 5 years ?
If we seriously want the lad, we'll pay what we have to in the end, that is how it works, and as a supporter I couldn't give a monkeys if its £40m, 45m, or 50m.