Riyad Mahrez

[Lancet Fluke]

Hi guys, Leicester fan here and I come in peace. From a Leicester perspective what I can tell you about Mahrez is that his 95 million price tag will not be lowered in the summer whether he goes on strike or not, our owners are very rich and very stubborn. I reckon you have Liverpool to thank for that price tag after how much they sold Coutinho for, and statistically speaking Mahrez is better than Coutinho anyway. Our owners are aware of this information, hence the large price tag. These are people who preferred to loan a fringe player in Slimani to Newcastle for free when they had a chance to sell to West Ham for decent money. All because of something West Ham board member Karen Brady said that they didn't like in an article in the sun. Rest assured that if Man City came back in the summer with a take it or leave it 65 million offer then our owners will tell you to do one and probably refuse to sell to you in the future. Your owners are minted and our owners are aware of this too, they aren't stupid. They are somewhat legends in Leicester because the club always comes first before money, manager or any player. If they say the price is 95 million then you have two options, pay it or don't pay it.

Mahrez is a wonderful player so I can see why your owners might look at the Coutinho deal and think he's worth 95m. In fact, if Coutinho is worth 120m then you could argue Mahrez is worth more than 120. Although it is worth bearing in mind that any player is only worth what a club is willing to pay and that Barca ridiculously over paid for Coutinho, nobody else would have paid anywhere near that for him IMO. Bottom line though, you're right, your owners have every right to value their player at whatever they want and if they are happier to have a desperately unhappy player than let him go for less than their valuation then fair fucks to them. One last point though. If FFP 2.0 gets voted for and comes in this summer then who knows what will happen to transfer fees. IMO there is no way anyone will pay 95m for Mahrez if they can only have a net spend of no more than 90m for the season. Every chance the market is going to readjust quite dramatically quite soon. That 65m might have been the equivalent of 95+ in the summer.

 

[Jalfraag]

Predictable ! Big bad City !

What a prize prick !

http://www.punditarena.com/football/sokeefe/man-city-greed-leicester-mahrez/

http://twitter.com/simontokeeffe

I've politely responded to him.

 

[Lancet Fluke]

Predictable ! Big bad City !

What a prize prick !

http://www.punditarena.com/football/sokeefe/man-city-greed-leicester-mahrez/

http://twitter.com/simontokeeffe

**** looks like he has a chromosome disorder.

 

[hammersmithlad]

Hi guys, Leicester fan here and I come in peace. From a Leicester perspective what I can tell you about Mahrez is that his 95 million price tag will not be lowered in the summer whether he goes on strike or not, our owners are very rich and very stubborn. I reckon you have Liverpool to thank for that price tag after how much they sold Coutinho for, and statistically speaking Mahrez is better than Coutinho anyway. Our owners are aware of this information, hence the large price tag. These are people who preferred to loan a fringe player in Slimani to Newcastle for free when they had a chance to sell to West Ham for decent money. All because of something West Ham board member Karen Brady said that they didn't like in an article in the sun. Rest assured that if Man City came back in the summer with a take it or leave it 65 million offer then our owners will tell you to do one and probably refuse to sell to you in the future. Your owners are minted and our owners are aware of this too, they aren't stupid. They are somewhat legends in Leicester because the club always comes first before money, manager or any player. If they say the price is 95 million then you have two options, pay it or don't pay it.

That's an interesting perspective on the Mahrez topic.

My perspective on this is quite different, whereby I think the eventual price tag will be lower than the current asking price for the following two reasons which intertwine.

1) The amount has already been set with a value on a club asset that already seems to be decreasing in value. i.e. gone AWOL, depression, public disappointment & disengagement with management, large possibility of trophy less season & no summer world cup platform to elevate/showcase talent & increase value.

2) Leads me onto the world cup whereby Mahrez will most likely be yesterday's fish and chip shop paper as other 'stars' performing in Russia reach James Rodriguez status for the summer month and by pass Mahrez's so called value since clubs are now looking at the World Cup flavour of the month where Mahrez is no where to be seen aside from the negative media which occurred earlier in the year.

Simply my take on things.

 

[Thaksinssoldier]

What'll be really interesting is if he does go on strike and City move in for him, he'd have justification to sue leicester for loss of earnings if they reneged on an agreement.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

Also for anybody wondering, we signed Mahrez for 400,000 and we have already profited on that through Mahrez shirts so we wouldn't actually be losing anything if we let him run down his contract. We literally hold all the cards when it comes to this particular player. Two and a half years left, no release clause, no financial pressure to sell to recuperate fee paid.

Purely from the financial aspect, maybe.

But future players you are looking to sign might think twice if they regard your management as being dishonourable regarding commitments made during transfer / contract negotiations .

PS I do not know whether Mahrez was given any such promises when signing his contract, just speculationg.

 

[KingPower]

Mahrez wanted to leave in 2016 after winning the title but the owners convinced him with 100 grand a week to stay and have a go in the Champions League, with the agreement that they would accept bids that met their valuation of the player. Last summer Roma were the only club to make any real offer and it was laughable, something like 20 million, so we rejected. Man City are the only other club to come in for him, apparantly below the owners valuation. They haven't broken any promises with Mahrez and I can genuinely see why they are reluctant to sell for what they originally wanted after Van Donkey and Coutinho. I think it sends the right message personally, the owners' long term goal is for Leicester to be Champions League regulars and big clubs don't sell their best players unless the buying club are getting ripped off, they just don't. I think that is the image they are trying to portray.

 

[Dax777]

This is quite awkward.

I don't think City are so in love with Mahrez that we'll 100% go back for him next summer, he might end up doing all this breach of contract stuff and not have anyone to pick him up in July.

Also why didn't he do this a week ago?

Probably coz he thought he had an understanding. :( Feel bad for him. But he needs to get over it quickly and get back to work.

He will definitely move in the summer. Even if not to us... No need crying over spilled milk.

 

[BigOscar]

Probably coz he thought he had an understanding. :( Feel bad for him. But he needs to get over it quickly and get back to work.

He will definitely move in the summer. Even if not to us... No need crying over spilled milk.

He's been aiming for a move for a while now, not specifically to us. We were just the last straw it seems

 

[Dax777]

He's been aiming for a move for a while now, not specifically to us. We were just the last straw it seems

In the past though, it was Arsenal who were the suitors. And you know Arsenal historically are more flirts than the are serious suitors most of the time.

I think this is the first time there was a legitimate suitor who bid and stayed on it. Anyway, good luck to him. Hope he gets his wish come summer.