£3.5m bid rejected for Snodgrass.

[Mervmeister 18]

Seen quite a few links on google and twitter that we have upped our bid once again. Daily Mail reporting we have gone back with 5m bid.

[York Canary 28]

Seriously hope we aren''t going in over £5m

[YellowLittle1 0]

I would go £5m still, sort of ambition we need. Last time the reason we got relegated was because we didn''t get a striker in soon enough and we were not ambitious enough.

Let''s do it and back it, he is 23 a player with a big future, personally I think he should be number 1 target.

[newyorkcanary 14]

Absolutely worth going in for 5 million. So far we have or will spend 2.5 mil on Vaughn, 2.1 mil up to 2.8 on Morison, 1.5 mil on Bennett and just wages on Johnson?

So in Transfer fees we have spent 8.9 million on 4 players. If we go with PL''s estimate of 7 players as well as "keeping some powder dry" in January, we can definitely afford another 10 million on the last 3 players in. It will still leave plenty of money for wages and January transfer cash.

[alysha 0]

Someone has said on Twitter that Sky Sports have confirmed this morning that Leeds have rejected a £3.6m bid from Norwich for Snodgrass. Surely wouldn''t raise our offer by this little? Doubt it''s true but I''ll keep an eye out on Sky Sports News

[Jim Smith 2,322]

We kept raising our Morison bid by quite small amounts if the figures reported by journalists on twitter are anything to go by. In this case, however, I would prefer us not to mess about and to seal the deal!

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Muddy funster"]I''d rather pay £5m for McGugan than £5m for Snodgrass! I think Snodgrass is an excellent player - but McGugan would be my one choice from the Championship last season![/quote]

Agreed... [Y]

I would actually rather spend £5 million on McGugan than anything over £3.5 million for Snodgrass, as I think McGugan has far more to offer us and blend in with the players that we currently have.  I also believe that if he fits in and stays injury free that he would be the type of signing that could be worth in excess of £10 million a couple of years down the line quite easily.
[/quote]

I find myself agreeing with that, Smudge & Muddy. McGugan looked a really top class player in the Forest game at CR. More of an out and out midfielder than Snoddy but I would take bets now that he turns out the classier player in the long run.
[/quote]

Can McGugan do it for 90 mins?

[Twitchy 0]

Any news/update/sighting or apperance on Supermaket Sweep down Morrisions on that young Snoddy lad or are we feeling it''s a bit of a non runner.

[Bill 1,788]

"Doubt it''s true but I''ll keep an eye out on Sky Sports News"

yep, I''m fairly certain that the first thing any agent involved in multi million pound negotiations is going to think is " club chief executive or spotty 17 year old works experience las at sky sports ... who should I phone first about the new offer ? "

maybe .......... just maybe, the club''s reaction to the cack handed incompetence of the clown from Burnley FC over the Lambert non story should just about suggest what attitude clubs take to ANY information leaking out during negotiations

and maybe ... just maybe, sky sports (as is the sun and talk sh!te) staffed not by someone who can magically get the info BEFORE the relevant club gets it, but by spotty interns whose sole remit is to fill up the pages so to push up the hit rate to better increase advertising revenue

which can''t be too difficult if you follow a few simple rules

1. If you have previously claimed that a player was about to join/being tracked/approached and nothing has happened post the following

a) the bid has been refused

b) the club has been told to up the offer

c) the club is going to up the offer

2. Players and clubs can be linked by a finding a player that has ''done well'' who is at a club that is not ''doing so well'' and link to club that is ''doing very well''. Once posted, wait, then use 1.

Please remember to only use 1 and 2 if your usual sources (player agents) have not supplied you with enough links/rumours etc

But above all it is the hit count ... that counts. So if you can''t make it up, we''ll get someone in who can.

.

[alysha 0]

[quote user="City1st"]"Doubt it''s true but I''ll keep an eye out on Sky Sports News" yep, I''m fairly certain that the first thing any agent involved in multi million pound negotiations is going to think is " club chief executive or spotty 17 year old works experience las at sky sports ... who should I phone first about the new offer ? " maybe .......... just maybe, the club''s reaction to the cack handed incompetence of the clown from Burnley FC over the Lambert non story should just about suggest what attitude clubs take to ANY information leaking out during negotiations and maybe ... just maybe, sky sports (as is the sun and talk sh!te) staffed not by someone who can magically get the info BEFORE the relevant club gets it, but by spotty interns whose sole remit is to fill up the pages so to push up the hit rate to better increase advertising revenue which can''t be too difficult if you follow a few simple rules 1. If you have previously claimed that a player was about to join/being tracked/approached and nothing has happened post the following a) the bid has been refused b) the club has been told to up the offer c) the club is going to up the offer 2. Players and clubs can be linked by a finding a player that has ''done well'' who is at a club that is not ''doing so well'' and link to club that is ''doing very well''. Once posted, wait, then use 1. Please remember to only use 1 and 2 if your usual sources (player agents) have not supplied you with enough links/rumours etc But above all it is the hit count ... that counts. So if you can''t make it up, we''ll get someone in who can. .[/quote]

So don''t you accept that organisations such as Sky Sports News can sometimes release information before the clubs themselves?

[Downloads 35]

I wouldn''t bother, he''s been grumpy for a couple of days!

[AJ 1,222]

I won''t believe nothing until I see a picture of Lambert and said player holding a shirt together.

[alysha 0]

[quote user="AJ Wizard"]I won''t believe nothing until I see a picture of Lambert and said player holding a shirt together.
[/quote]

Same here, but during pre-season it isn''t going to stop people talking about what''s being said in the media. I don''t believe everything I read, but I don''t believe that news never gets broken first from the media either, a perfect example being when Steve Morison handed in a transfer request after Milwall rejected one of our bids, it was first broken by the media and was then confirmed a few hours later by Millwall themselves.

[Mervmeister 18]

If this aint gonna happen I would actually love to see Boyd arrive from peterborough instead. Would be a great alternative IMO.

[Bill 1,788]

"So don''t you accept that organisations such as Sky Sports News can sometimes release information before the clubs themselves?

No.

Perhaps you might care to work out where that information has come from that these organisations release, then you would understand the contadiction in your question. it was not the media that ''broke the story about Morison'' but either himsel, his agent of Millwall. The media was the method of doing that, not the originater.

Fees, payments etc are only allowed to be disclosed if BOTH parties agree. Therefore the idea that during multi million pound negotiations one side is going to prejudice those negotiations by contacting some pimply Fred at a news media is farcical. There is little to gain but an enormous amount to lose.

On the contrary these websites are there to generate income through ''hits'' so they have everything to gain and nothing to lose by posting up fabricated tosh. Most are aware that the readership is not too bright and will happiliy swallow anything, as long as it suggests they are being let in on something. A point in case has been the sun where almost everything it has recently predicted about City has been inaccurate.

Check even deeper and you''ll find that almost all of their stuff uses conditional phrases such as ''look to be'', ''could be'', ''expected to''. If they had hard news, facts or something accurate that was provable why use those phrases ? Why not simply state the case ?

Or could it be that they are merely reporting speculation, as posted elsewhere ?

[alysha 0]

I agree with you in regards to players being linked in newspapers and on websites etc. but with reagrds to SSN for example, of course I realise that any information that recieve is not through their own digging but that they have been contacted from the relevent parties, but I don''t object to take notice when something is announced; pre season on this messageboard would  be pretty boring if everyone did so

[Bill 1,788]

"but I don''t object to take notice when something is announced; pre season on this messageboard would be pretty boring if everyone did so"

I''m not quite sure of yourmeaning, any chance of making it a bit clearer ?, ta