Riyad Mahrez

[Healdplace]

By this logic any club should sell any player who wants to leave for City at any time for any price. Some people have developed very raggish attitudes on here.

As I never said any of that then it certainly does not apply to me.

I made very clear in this thread that we should pay £65 up to £70 m max because that was our limit based on what we had said about our transfer fee strategy, and what Tolmie posted hours before they asked for £95 million that he understood they would accept on the day and because it was a reasonable amount. We would not have paid more for Sanchez.

The fact was his reaction was entirely predictable given the past broken promises making this a unique situation. We were not trying to underpay for him. We offered to make him our record purchase. Hardly absurd.

Leicester said no and we rightly walked and now have the problem that would always follow.

I am baffled what this has to do with raggish attitudes.

Of course it was their choice to decline out offer but as I pointed out they now reap the whirlwind that was always going to brew. He may go back to play for them but if he doesn't any time soon my answer to the comparison with KDB was right. And if they sell him anyway in the summer they have miscalculated.

 

[Marvin]

I disagree that he was shafted. They had 2 days to react and think they can get more. They didn't put a gun to his head and force him to sign a 5 year contract for £100k a week.

Leicester are entitled to keep the player, but if they turn down a record City bid for a fee in excess of what they demanded a few months ago, then you can understand why the player would be very unhappy.

 

[MrDaveyHavoc]

Players, along with everything else in life, are worth what an interested party is willing to pay for them. By definition, Mahrez is not worth 95m. They can put that valuation on him but it's akin to saying "not for sale." It's their right of course, but if they truly made him a promise he could go for a "reasonable" fee or whatever the term they may have used, 65m is a reasonable fee by any non-PSG standard.

 

[Armaan]

As great a season as Sterling has had, I still have an uneasy feeling about him...... he still gives the ball away too many times, picks the wrong pass and misses chances he should score. He might as well have been on the bench against Liverpool. Let's hope he comes good, but I personally would take Mahrez in a straight swop deal all day long.
What do others think?

I wouldn’t swap sterling but I know what you mean.

 

[Dribble]

I disagree that he was shafted. They had 2 days to react and think they can get more. They didn't put a gun to his head and force him to sign a 5 year contract for £100k a week.

They had over 2 weeks to negotiate & find a replacement. The £95m bollocks was just pure opportunism on LCFC's behalf. Much like Wenger last week, I bet Leicester end up regretting not doing a deal..

I read an article in the Leicester Murcury (I think) which was quite balanced & said LCFC had to say no, just so everyone in football knew they meant business about wanting the club to be regular top 4 contenders.

Whatever their reasons, Mahrez signed the contract extension without a buyout clause & with only a gentleman's agreement to sell him at the going rate. In their book Neymar, Coutinho & VVD have set the bar, & they're charging what they think a player they want to keep is worth to them...

The ball is firmly in their court, but I'd like to know we'd go back for him in the summer...

 

[goalmole]

Greed. In the Summer they turned down a series of bids from Roma who refused or were unable to pay £50m. Now they say city valued the player at £60m or £65m but wanted £95m. The market is inflated but not to that extent. PSG sold Moura who is an outstanding player in the same category for £25m. Aubameyang moved for £55m. He's their player, but I believe they have just antagonised their player.

Speculation. I wonder if we switched attention from Sanchez in the Summer to mahrez? That would explain Simon Stone's BBC report that it was Leicester who contacted us at the end of the window with the suggestion of a move for £95m. They knew we were in for a forward and wanted to maximise a situation in which they saw Sane and Jesus were injured?

£65mill is maximising. £95mill is trying to take the piss.
Hope they have fun clearing their own shit up.

 

[Bozo]

Imagine if you didn't get want you wanted at work, so just decided to stop coming in.

 

[San Tropez]

Imagine if you didn't get want you wanted at work, so just decided to stop coming in.

Why are some people so determined to see this issue only from one side? Things are rarely black and white.

 

[CityStu]

Imagine if you didn't get want you wanted at work, so just decided to stop coming in.

If I was constantly overlooked for a promotion I deserved then I'd probably stop putting any effort in.

 

[Healdplace]

This is very simple really. They agreed to let him go for a fair price to a big side. Months ago they wanted £50 million from Roma who would not go that high. Now they were offered a 30% mark up on that and said no. They wanted close to a 100% mark up in 4 months.

Their reason seems to have been purely the £75 million Liverpool paid for VVD. Really a one off situation where everyone knows Liverpool were fleeced because of how they did the same when selling Coutinho.

Had that not happened in January then £65 million would have been regarded as a very good deal.

Which in the context of all the other deals this January - that expose the Liverpool trading as rogue and not the norm - it would be.

You can see clearly why Leicester did what they did as it was a way to keep a player they did not want to lose whilst tacitly saying that they were sticking to their promise and it was all our fault for not paying the new going rate. Whilst we were only ever going to pay up to our valuation.

Problem is if the transfer market goes to the absurd extremes Liverpool took it in Summer Mahrez will not go for under £100 million. And every club in the PL - Leicester included - will be having to pay fees like £60/£70 million to sign Mangala! That is unsustainable given there are some suspicions that the new PL TV deal this week could show little increase and not the huge rises it has before. That might well concentrate minds on keeping prices under control afterwards. As would FPP 2 if it gets passed.

So yes they were right from their point of view but had to know it would hurt the player mentally. And it is a gamble on ever increasing prices that could well backfire.

I am fairly sure we will go no higher than £70 million in the Summer if we go back for Mahrez at all. Less sure anyobody else will go to what Leicester want.