Interesting comments from the Chairman on the transfer window

Well?....
What did he say then?

He said don't worry be happy ..

We made a £20 million bid for a player but the club didn’t want to sell.

martin_p wrote:We made a £20 million bid for a player but the club didn’t want to sell.

Suspect Kelvin Phillips.

martin_p wrote:We made a £20 million bid for a player but the club didn’t want to sell.

Ronaldo?

Lansbury

I love how Mike Garlick surfaces not long after each transfer window has closed to tell us about the bids we made that weren't successful.

It has to be Phillips. Camarasa and Billing went for less than that and Mooy on a season long loan. Can't think of anyone else we were seriously linked with who could command that kind of fee - and it has to be a CM as we got all the other bases covered. The deadline day deal for Drinkwater suggests we'd been knocked back on another target.

ksrclaret wrote:I love how Mike Garlick surfaces not long after each transfer window has closed to tell us about the bids we made that weren't successful.

It’s become an annual event

And here's what you could have won.

Why didn't he offer £21m ?

He also said wages aren't the problem, it's finding clubs willing to sell, he also backed up my assessment and rated the window 6.5 out of 10.

ClaretTony wrote:It’s become an annual event

Last window was Che Adams wasn't it ?

ClaretTony wrote:It’s become an annual event

Bi-annual

AndyClaret wrote:Last window was Che Adams wasn't it ?

It didn’t take a lot of working out that it was Adams last January.

If it was Phillips not sure what he expected. It’s not that Leeds didn’t want to sell, of course they’d sell for what they valued him at.

https://www.lancs.live/sport/football/t ... t-16735769" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I remember Spurs getting the same from Daniel Levy for a few windows. If we move in a similar direction to them, I’ll be happy.

AndyClaret wrote:He also said wages aren't the problem, it's finding clubs willing to sell, he also backed up my assessment and rated the window 6.5 out of 10.

I thought wages were the problem?

Darnhill Claret wrote:I remember Spurs getting the same from Daniel Levy for a few windows. If we move in a similar direction to them, I’ll be happy.

Only if we win stuff, they're struggling to win things and we don't want to be like that.

“He said: "Each year the madness of the transfer window grows and some of the fees now involved for players are absolutely astronomical.”


Each year the madness of the Premier League money grows and some of the fees now involved are absolutely astronomical.

Probably a link somewhere.

The best bit is when he likens very wealthy Premier League clubs like ourselves to the repression of black Africans.

agreenwood wrote:The best bit is when he likens very wealthy Premier League clubs like ourselves to the repression of black Africans.

Jesus Christ please tell me this is a joke.

Spiral wrote:Jesus Christ please tell me this is a joke.

He compares the difference between the bigger and smaller clubs to an “apartheid system”.

This is why I dont like the guy. Yes he has done great for Burnley but I doubt any other manager would have stuck at it. Silence all the way through the window then does things like this. Havent watched it yet but usually throws in a bit of hope for the next window but after hearing it more than 10 times you just know he is lying

agreenwood wrote:He compares the difference between the bigger and smaller clubs to an “apartheid system”.

F'k sake. Right, going to need to watch this now. Yo can't go trivialising a horrible political system that trampled over people, reducing its overbearing and oppressive manifestation to a mere component of 'market dynamics'. FWIW, I'm a fan of Garlick and like how he's running the club.

no post

The bit about wages was interesting.

I don’t think it was long ago he was saying that fees aren’t the problem, but wages were.

Nonayforever wrote:Why didn't he offer £21m ?

I can see where he's coming from....some on here don't want to stump up £20 to watch their "Beloved" ?? Team play against Sunderland.

agreenwood wrote:The bit about wages was interesting.

I don’t think it was long ago he was saying that fees aren’t the problem, but wages were.

Well, wages certainly wouldn't be a problem bringing a player here from Leeds.

I'll just clear a few things up for the absolute dummies we get on here.

He didn't say wages aren't an issue, he was talking about in this window about the targets we had that they weren't the issue.

He didn't say 'the apartheid system', he said like 'an apartheid system'. The word means separation.

No Chairman talks about specific transfer dealings whilst a transfer window is open.

Bin Ont Turf wrote:He didn't say 'the apartheid system', he said like 'an apartheid system'.

Which is exactly what's been posted on thus thread AN apartheid system. I did find it a very strange choice of word at best.

ClaretTony wrote:Which is exactly what's been posted on thus thread AN apartheid system. I did find it a very strange choice of word at best.

Indeed and regarding BOTs other clarification for dummies, he said on wages:

"Often I read fans saying we couldn't compete on wages and that is normally not the case any more, it is more whether there is a willing seller."

agreenwood wrote:Indeed and regarding BOTs other clarification for dummies, he said on wages:

"Often I read fans saying we couldn't compete on wages and that is normally not the case any more, it is more whether there is a willing seller."

Well there won't be if we remain so cautious. Phillips should have been signed. We had the movey surely.

ClaretTony wrote:Which is exactly what's been posted on thus thread AN apartheid system. I did find it a very strange choice of word at best.

I know what's been posted.

A right way of thinking would be to think it was a strange choice of word to use.

But this .......

agreenwood wrote:The best bit is when he likens very wealthy Premier League clubs like ourselves to the repression of black Africans.

summitclaret wrote:Phillips should have been signed.

And if it was Phillips then he made it clear that Leeds didn't want to sell. Similar to us I suppose with Tarky and McNeil for whom we clearly received offers. Should we have sold them just as Leeds should have sold Phillips?

Bin Ont Turf wrote:I know what's been posted.

A right way of thinking would be to think it was a strange choice of word to use.

But this .......

Because that’s the modern day understanding of the word, whatever the literal meaning is. Tap it into google. Tell me what page you get to before you find it used in any other context.

ClaretTony wrote:And if it was Phillips then he made it clear that Leeds didn't want to sell. Similar to us I suppose with Tarky and McNeil for whom we clearly received offers. Should we have sold them just as Leeds should have sold Phillips?

I expect he had a release clause value just like I assume our 2 had and that none were met. That's how it works.

From Spiral
Jesus Christ please tell me this is a joke.

From Claret 59
Jesus Christ be praised.

summitclaret wrote:I expect he had a release clause value just like I assume our 2 had and that none were met. That's how it works.

No it doesn't work like that, does on occasions with some players but generally not. The point I'm making is you can't wait to have a go at the club for not signing a player but make no comment at all when the club have kept players that others have wanted to sign from us.

You can tell the transfer window is closed.

I assume we bid for Dale Stephens!?

Teasdale Out!

Leeds must be crackers ( and loaded ) if they received a bid for 20m for a player out of contract in 10 months and didn't sell.

Also BFC equally may have been called crackers bidding 20m for a player out of contract in 10 months time.

I think theres a few porkies being told, and also a few "the one that got away tales" to keep people happy/content.

I think it's quite obvious what the plan was/is, and I'd say it's been another success in terms of business for the excellent business man that is Mr Garlick.
Well done.

Long may he reign.

tim_noone wrote:Teasdale Out!

Frank wouldn’t have taken this from the serial moaners!

Bin Ont Turf wrote:I know what's been posted.

A right way of thinking would be to think it was a strange choice of word to use.

But this .......

Mike Garlick, football’s answer to USA’s Steve Kings

If we’ve confidence in the ability and potential of a player, such as Phillips, we eventually need to take a bit of a calculated risk.

The transfer fees are astronomical but assuming said signing delivers, we would be quids in.

Last window or the one before, I remember posters saying that we don’t need to be signing players with resale value. I still think that this should be our model, alongside some more experienced pros and youth hopefully coming through.

MACCA wrote:Leeds must be crackers ( and loaded ) if they received a bid for 20m for a player out of contract in 10 months and didn't sell.

Also BFC equally may have been called crackers bidding 20m for a player out of contract in 10 months time.

I think theres a few porkies being told, and also a few "the one that got away tales" to keep people happy/content.

I think it's quite obvious what the plan was/is, and I'd say it's been another success in terms of business for the excellent business man that is Mr Garlick.
Well done.

Long may he reign.

From what I have heard they seem pretty sure he will sign a new contract now the window is shut. Think he is a Leeds supporter too by all accounts so probably unlikely to run his contract down and screw them over

claret10 wrote:From what I have heard they seem pretty sure he will sign a new contract now the window is shut. Think he is a Leeds supporter too by all accounts so probably unlikely to run his contract down and screw them over

How would he be screwing them over? I read this a lot about players. A footballer has every right to whatever he wants. If he signs a contract and stays for the duration and chooses to leave that’s his right. He owes the football club nothing.