Nathan Ake

[Coatigan]

This is one of those discussions that ends up where it started and everyone looks puzzled and wonders if they should go around again :-)

After lunch maybe.

 

[Keeper!]

It’s just back to it’s not black and white stay or go.

It's football, nothing is black and white but it's also very obviously a mutual parting.

 

[DeBlueLou]

I understand the reality of a player deemed not up to standard by a manager.

A player who did not get game time despite Stones, Laporte , Dias and Walker all injured, a 36 year old with no legs playing as a makeshift CB in front of Mr Ake.

A world cup on the horizon and a hugely reliable ITK telling us on here that Ake was informed by the Dutch, he needs to be playing regularly to play in the World Cup.

That all adds up to player and club parting very amicably, saying all the right tings in public but leaving for the benefit of all parties.

sigh

So you agree that no one told Ake they wanted him to leave and it’s for akes own reasons. Cool. Moving on.

 

[Keeper!]

So you agree that no one told Ake they wanted him to leave and it’s for akes own reasons. Cool. Moving on.

That all adds up to player and club parting very amicably, saying all the right tings in public but leaving for the benefit of all parties.

 

[Calv_from_the_frog]

Ake's reason for wanting a move, as much as anything else, may probably be that LvG has said that players not playing for their club sides won't be selected for the Dutch national WC team.

That's the main thing that I see here (rather than any deeper desire to move).

And with Rudiger gone, Chelsea need a left-sided CH (even if Ake is nowhere near the same quality as Rudiger).

 

[Coatigan]

A world cup on the horizon and a hugely reliable ITK telling us on here that Ake was informed by the Dutch, he needs to be playing regularly to play in the World Cup.

That all adds up to player and club parting very amicably, saying all the right tings in public but leaving for the benefit of all parties.

You are totally right. It does.

What it doesn't add up to, is Pep actively wanting Ake out.

 

[Keeper!]

You are totally right. It does.

What it doesn't add up to, is Pep actively wanting Ake out.

 

[Cobwebcat]

It's football, nothing is black and white but it's also very obviously a mutual parting.

There was something a Brighton fan posted on here a few days ago that Bloom had once said and I thought it summed things up well. I can’t remember it exactly but it was something like…

There are only 3 or 4 clubs in the World who have a handful of players that are not for sale at any price.

I used this extreme example a few posts ago but say a club offered City £300 million for KDB and also offered to double his wages. Would both parties at least consider the offer? Would it mean anyone was unhappy? Would it mean City wanted KDB to leave or KDB was unhappy?

Players get offers from elsewhere all the time via their agents. It means a mutual parting might happen given certain circumstances but if they aren’t met everyone carries on as before.

If a club wants a player out they normally ask his agent to look for another club and tell him the player is unlikely to play again.

The two situations are very different.

Edit: Sorry I posted before I saw your big pencil. Ooooerrr.

 

[waspish]

I get the feeling that city will except €40m

 

[Cobwebcat]

I get the feeling that city will except €40m

You realise that means City would accept anything except €40m

I knew exactly what you meant I’m just bored I think. This transfer forum is like some sort of drug drawing me back hoping for the same hit I got when Haaland agreed to come or chasing KDB’s plane….only to find I’m reduced to this.