FCBurnley wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:09 pm

I wonder how SD feels about having to lie to the fans about all the sore toe malarkey

I wonder why he needs to lie at all (if he is).

John Percy says Leicester expected to come back in with a fresh offer.

claretandy wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:21 pm

John Percy says Leicester expected to come back in with a fresh offer.

I don't doubt they will. Burnley seem to be adamant it's to be £50 million, not £30 million.

But it looks like it's a case of when and not if he's going. He's probably played his last game for us.

Think we sell at 40.

KefkaClaret wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:25 pm

Think we sell at 40.

What do Brentford get, just under £10 million of that?

Balls to £40m. If you put a clause in players contracts then you’ve got to hold out for it.

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:27 pm

What do Brentford get, just under £10 million of that?

Isnt it 27.5% of any profit ?

Probably already been mentioned but rather than selling tarks and having to pay a large % to Brentford. Could we play it smart and suggest a player swap Harvey Barnes and demari gray? Maybe plus cash because that's probably still below tarks value.

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:27 pm

What do Brentford get, just under £10 million of that?

27.5% of the profit.

FCBurnley wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:09 pm

I wonder how SD feels about having to lie to the fans about all the sore toe malarkey

I wonder how he feels about you calling him a liar when he’s telling the truth

Granny WeatherWax wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:32 pm

Balls to £40m. If you put a clause in players contracts then you’ve got to hold out for it.

I thought the clause only applied to three northern clubs? So it won't apply to Leicester. Anyway, it's Burnley who wanted the clause, so they can accept a lower bid if they want to.

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:40 pm

I wonder how he feels about you calling him a liar when he’s telling the truth

You certain bailout that CT?

Jesus! Some people need to wind it in. Doubt seriously Dyche would lie, nor would the medical team. Why would they?

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:46 pm

You certain bailout that CT?

Whatever is or isn’t happening with Tarkowski, I know the injury is genuine.

Gordaleman wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:43 pm

I thought the clause only applied to three northern clubs? So it won't apply to Leicester. Anyway, it's Burnley who wanted the clause, so they can accept a lower bid if they want to.

It is, but shows £50m is the minimum we value him at.

Imagine the grief some people would be giving garlick if he put a bid in if £30m for someone valued at £50m.

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:47 pm

Whatever is or isn’t happening with Tarkowski, I know the injury is genuine.

Brilliant, thanks

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:40 pm

I wonder how he feels about you calling him a liar when he’s telling the truth

SD is in an intolerable position and is clearly being made to tow the party line. I am not blaming SD. I just feel sorry for him. Would you like to explain the Tarks injury or are you having to toe the party line as well

FCBurnley wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:49 pm

SD is in an intolerable position and is clearly being made to tow the party line. I am not blaming SD. I just feel sorry for him. Would you like to explain the Tarks injury or are you having to toe the party line as well

I know he’s injured with the toe problem, end of story. Whether we sell him or whether we don’t is another matter.

BenWickes wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:46 pm

Jesus! Some people need to wind it in. Doubt seriously Dyche would lie, nor would the medical team. Why would they?

Because if he is being sold they don’t want him playing and getting a genuine injury. This is big money we are talking about here

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:52 pm

I know he’s injured with the toe problem, end of story. Whether we sell him or whether we don’t is another matter.

So will he be fit to play tomorrow if not sold ?

claretandy wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:39 pm

27.5% of the profit.

it is, which is why we should try and get a cash + player or players deal. They can have Tarks for 20, we can have a couple of theirs and we would only owe Brentford 4-5 million

Possibly a white lie - the sort you tell the kids because it's in their best interests.

Reality is if Tarks has said that he won't sign a new deal here, then this is probably time to hark him around. Sadly, I think that he will go and I will be gutted. Let's hope we have solid plans in place for his replacement and Gibson's.

The stakes are massive.

People can mock about Smalling, but we would need PL nous and the best way to not cock things up is a deal where it's a swop. Plus cash for us.

Vegas Claret wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:55 pm

it is, which is why we should try and get a cash + player or players deal. They can have Tarks for 20, we can have a couple of theirs and we would only owe Brentford 4-5 million

As I understand it if a club takes a player in part ex then that player has a value that is added to the amount paid. If that was not the case then add on clauses would have little or no value

FCBurnley wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:49 pm

SD is in an intolerable position and is clearly being made to tow the party line. I am not blaming SD. I just feel sorry for him. Would you like to explain the Tarks injury or are you having to toe the party line as well

I don't think Dyche toes the party line. He knows the board have him to thank for where we are. I'm pretty sure they are aware he's the boss. Probably explains a lot about goings on. Not saying he's arrogant or even over-stepping marks but Garlick knows where the bread is buttered but definitely no way Dyche is toeing a line. Thought that was clear.

FCBurnley wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:58 pm

As I understand it if a club takes a player in part ex then that player has a value that is added to the amount paid. If that was not the case then add on clauses would have little or no value

in which case, they can have Tarks for 20 million and we can have two of theirs for 20 quid

Granny WeatherWax wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:48 pm

It is, but shows £50m is the minimum we value him at.

Imagine the grief some people would be giving garlick if he put a bid in if £30m for someone valued at £50m.

I think everyone knows that values are under strain due to the Covid situation anyway.

I still don't think Tarky is going anywhere for what it's worth, but if he does and his sale allows us to bring in other players that would usually cost more, why not?

It's the same for everybody, not just Burnley.

Vegas Claret wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:59 pm

in which case, they can have Tarks for 20 million and we can have two of theirs for 20 quid

Good try

I think we need to face it that Tarks is gone either in this window or the next. Good player for us and needs to do what is best for him now.
I think we need a steady old pro to come in alongside either Dunne or Long ( at least whilst Mee is still out)
Long has proven that he is capable when we have called on him but does need Prem experience alongside and we are paper thin on that without JT or Ben.

WazzaClaret wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:37 pm

Probably already been mentioned but rather than selling tarks and having to pay a large % to Brentford. Could we play it smart and suggest a player swap Harvey Barnes and demari gray? Maybe plus cash because that's probably still below tarks value.

I can't see Leicester letting Harvey Barnes go, he's been in fine form this season, and they'll be hoping to attract the big boys if he has a strong campaign.

Demarai Gray they probably would consider letting go if the deal suited them, Spurs are interested so if we're thinking along those lines then we'd better get a move on.

TBF I'll be glad once the window shuts, and we can concentrate on the action on the pitch, instead of all this rumour mongering.

Gordaleman wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:01 pm

I think everyone knows that values are under strain due to the Covid situation anyway.

I still don't think Tarky is going anywhere for what it's worth, but if he does and his sale allows us to bring in other players that would usually cost more, why not?

It's the same for everybody, not just Burnley.

I’d prefer Tarks than £40m (less Brentford share) 10 times out of 10.

Granny WeatherWax wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:06 pm

I’d prefer Tarks than £40m (less Brentford share) 10 times out of 10.

Agreed. Would prefer to have him at his peak for two years and see where we can take this team.

The clause only being active for NW clubs seems like 'new news'. Where has this come from? In any event, if Leicester cannot activate the clause then we are free to demand whatever we like and have no obligation to sell. Whether that is good business is another matter. As for getting players in part ex, as has been said many times already, they have to be valued fairly when calculating Brentford's profit share. Sure, there's a bit of leeway in terms of valuing part ex but not that much. I like Albrighton fwiw.

All well and good saying we'll have this and that Man U player but have they expressed any interest at all?

It seems likely that £40m gets it done unless the investors have other ideas.

Granny WeatherWax wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:06 pm

I’d prefer Tarks than £40m (less Brentford share) 10 times out of 10.

So would I, but that doesn't mean you'll get him. Money talks in football but if we get a new RB and a quality RW with the proceeds, I wouldn't be too upset.

Football is football and players move on. I'd rather have a couple of new players who want to be here than one who doesn't, if that's the case.

Still think he'll stay and maybe leave in January depending on where we are in the league then, and whether or not he's back in the England set up.

I believe Sean's been having a chat with him over an omlette.

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:08 pm

Agreed. Would prefer to have him at his peak for two years and see where we can take this team.

Me too. The problem arises if he wants to move.

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:14 pm

Me too. The problem arises if he wants to move.

Then we take the money and reinvest. It was similar to when we lost Keane to Everton, but then we had Tarkowski to come in. Gibson was meant to be that option, but now we’ll need to accelerate the development of Dunne and Thomas, and if they’re not quite ready, a stop gap signing of Dawson or (am I really saying this) Smalling if that were possible.

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:14 pm

Me too. The problem arises if he wants to move.

True, but with the Euros next year and the potential of a massively lucrative contract the following year, I would think he’d remain motivated!

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:14 pm

Me too. The problem arises if he wants to move.

He’s 28, time isn’t on his side, If no one meets our valuation of him I wouldn’t give a hoot how much he agitated for a move.

I wonder if Saint-Etienne are monitoring the situation?

Is McNeil still leaving?

I think it would be for the best in the long run if Leicester increase their bid enough for the club to agree to the sale of Tarkowski in this window. Sooner rather than later.
Then there will be no more talk of sore toes and most likely the boost of another signing. Wilson hasn't been kicked into touch yet but even if it's not him the money will be there for someone else. I would not discount another incoming centre half with good PL experience who will play next to Mee. A big well done to those who have stood in over the last week or so as well. It's good to see player development outside last seasons squad is on the up at the club.
Things are a long way from being as bad as some would like to think.
We are now a selling club again and that will be the case until something dramatically changes.

If he does go, I would like 2 to come in. We need a bit more depth which means more numbers.

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:08 pm

If he does go, I would like 2 to come in. We need a bit more depth which means more numbers.

If he leaves we need 2 centre halves never mind just ‘2’

Played his last game here and no injury

BOYSIE31 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:17 pm

Played his last game here and no injury

How do you know this?

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:23 pm

How do you know this?

Did you not know boysie knows everything

Bigvince wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:27 pm

Did you not know boysie knows everything

No, I didn't.

He hides it well.

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:52 pm

I know he’s injured with the toe problem, end of story. Whether we sell him or whether we don’t is another matter.

He doesnt have a toe injury at all. How can you say you know he's injured? The fans are being strung along again! We deserve the truth for once!

Blackburn_Claret wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:37 pm

He doesnt have a toe injury at all. How can you say you know he's injured? The fans are being strung along again! We deserve the truth for once!

Thanks for your contribution but I’d prefer it if you didn’t rubbish my correct information

Blackburn_Claret wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:37 pm

He doesnt have a toe injury at all. How can you say you know he's injured? The fans are being strung along again! We deserve the truth for once!

Did we get our knickers in such a twist when Keane went?