Samwam27 517 Posted July 1, 2015 Could it be paving the way for a departure. Norwich get in there early| Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kick it off 1,927 Posted July 1, 2015 Promising news.Would think that Van Dijk is free to go if someone matches Celtic''s price. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
smooth 114 Posted July 1, 2015 We did not officially announce mulumbu today so maybe a double official unveiling this week? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cantiaci Canary 556 Posted July 1, 2015 I fear he is too big a fish for us. There will be plenty of suitors. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cannigia1 0 Posted July 1, 2015 van dijk is staying at Celtic Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trevor Hockey's Beard 520 Posted July 2, 2015 Doesn''t he do a bit of moonlighting on the side, teaching in the ruins of the Arts School? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FenwayFrank 2,424 Posted July 2, 2015 Is that when he isn''t sweeping chimneys ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted July 2, 2015 Whilst Celtic bringing in other defenders, possibly replacements, is a good sign - the fact that Southampton are almost certainly not going to be getting Alderwiereld is a bad one. They are looking at van Dijk as an alternative.If Norwich want him, they need to make a big move early. Stoke and Swansea have shown the advantages of getting in early and going big by brining in (or close to brining in) Shaqiri and Ayew respectively. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lharman7 39 Posted July 2, 2015 We could surely compete with Southampton for his transfer fee but I''m not sure McNally would want to make him our highest paid player. Wages would be the stumbling block. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted July 2, 2015 Southampton are absolutely loaded, and have the additional Europa League cash (which is significantly more now BT Sports are paying).Think of the transfer fees Southampton have received from Liverpool alone over the past two seasons and the relatively little they have spent. Lallana - £25m, Lovern - £20, Clyne - £12.5m. Not to mention the money for Chambers and Shaw, Southampton can quite easily blow Norwich out of the water if they so choose to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nicko 0 Posted July 2, 2015 We did officially annouce Mulumbu didn''t we? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lharman7 39 Posted July 2, 2015 Bethnal Yellow and Green wrote the following post at 02/07/2015 6:09 PM:Southampton are absolutely loaded, and have the additional Europa League cash (which is significantly more now BT Sports are paying). Think of the transfer fees Southampton have received from Liverpool alone over the past two seasons and the relatively little they have spent. Lallana - £25m, Lovern - £20, Clyne - £12.5m. Not to mention the money for Chambers and Shaw, Southampton can quite easily blow Norwich out of the water if they so choose to. Yes i understand that but Southampton go about there business very astutely and i don''t think they would pay an over inflated price for a player just to outbid Norwich. Which would then bring us back in the game. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted July 2, 2015 No, but he''s still on leave due to international game commitments. The club will have a nice picture of him holding the shirt (or scard) once he''s back from his holidays. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted July 2, 2015 Price is all relative though. Norwich need 6 or so players this summer so will have to spread their available cash wisely - Southampton need as many probably, but have a lot more cash to spread. He may be ''worth'' more to them than he is Norwich. Southampton aren''t afraid to spend money when they deem it necessary. £12.5m for Wanyama shows that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,530 Posted July 2, 2015 [quote user="lharman7"]We could surely compete with Southampton for his transfer fee but I''m not sure McNally would want to make him our highest paid player. Wages would be the stumbling block.[/quote]In the 2012-13 season our wage bill was the same as Southampton''s. But in 2013-14 season they spent £9m more on wages than we did.. It is a fair guess, particularly with our relegation in between, that the gap will have carried on widening and be a fair bit more than £9m this season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted July 2, 2015 Southampton did take the advice often given in ''moneyball'' (I hate that word) techniques - wages are more important than transfer fees.They are happy to pay players big wages in order to secure deals. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites