Lucas Hernandez

[BlueAnorak]

Just to confirm the hints above. It has been confirmed that the Atletico transfer ban has not been lifted:
http://www.espnfc.com/atletico-madr...transfer-ban-upheld-by-cas-until-january-2018

As such we can forget Lucas or Theo and Utd can forget Griezman.

 

[Akiva]

Just to confirm the hints above. It has been confirmed that the Atletico transfer ban has not been lifted:
http://www.espnfc.com/atletico-madr...transfer-ban-upheld-by-cas-until-january-2018

As such we can forget Lucas or Theo and Utd can forget Griezman.

People need to stop making this claim. The ban is on Ateltico Madrid registering players. It does not impact the ability of players to leave the club.

As it happens, we have an agreement with Atleti to wait until 2018 to get Lucas and it appears Griezmann has stepped away from the rags, not the other way round, for now. Still, the point remains.

 

[blueinsa]

People need to stop making this claim. The ban is on Ateltico Madrid registering players. It does not impact the ability of players to leave the club.

As it happens, we have an agreement with Atleti to wait until 2018 to get Lucas and it appears Griezmann has stepped away from the rags, not the other way round, for now. Still, the point remains.

They are hardly going to want to sell if they cant replace though mate so its a fair assumption to make.

 

[uwe rosler 28]

They are hardly going to want to sell if they cant replace though mate so its a fair assumption to make.

True but if clauses are triggered then athletico are screwed if the player wants out

 

[blueinsa]

True but if clauses are triggered then athletico are screwed if the player wants out

Of course but their players seem incredibly loyal and as looks like it, Griezmann for one has told the rags thanks but no thanks.

 

[Akiva]

They are hardly going to want to sell if they cant replace though mate so its a fair assumption to make.

Agreed, but if you trigger the buyout then Atletico has no say in the matter.

Hence, suddenly, the rags remember Ibra has been injured for two months is the bullshit excuse on the day Griezmann stepped back.

 

[BlueAnorak]

People need to stop making this claim. The ban is on Ateltico Madrid registering players. It does not impact the ability of players to leave the club.

As it happens, we have an agreement with Atleti to wait until 2018 to get Lucas and it appears Griezmann has stepped away from the rags, not the other way round, for now. Still, the point remains.

So you think Atletico will let a player leave if they can't get a replacement?
The answer is HIGHLY UNLIKELY unless they don't want him OR (the buyout clause is met AND the player wants to leave AND the player has access to the cash to buy himself out AND Atletico are not prepared to pay their player a bit extra to keep him for another season).
You may as well say it isn't going to happen.

 

[Bluearmy]

Of course but their players seem incredibly loyal and as looks like it, Griezmann for one has told the rags thanks but no thanks.

If A club were to come in for Griezmann and pay the release fee and he wanted to go there, Athletico couldn't stop the deal tho

 

[uwe rosler 28]

Of course but their players seem incredibly loyal and as looks like it, Griezmann for one has told the rags thanks but no thanks.

Totally agree they do seem loyal

 

[domalino]

Agreed, but if you trigger the buyout then Atletico has no say in the matter.

Hence, suddenly, the rags remember Ibra has been injured for two months is the bullshit excuse on the day Griezmann stepped back.

Your arguments there don't really relate.

1) Atletico have no choice about the transfer if United pay

2) Hence the excuse of needing a 9 for United.

In reality, what's happened is Griezmann has agreed not to go if they can't replace him for the ban

So the decision on the ban has called off the transfer.