£750k bid for Wes from Villa...

[PurpleCanary 5,558]

[quote user="ncfcstar"][quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="ncfcstar"]This thread shows up the stinking attitude of some ''fans'' at the moment. EDP and Mick Dennis both reporting no transfer request and bid rejected, but some of you can''t help but think it''s all lies and ''Hughton''s fault'' - it is pathetic.[/quote]IF (and that''s a BIG if) there is any truth to the suggestion that he''s not happy and has asked for a request, I''d have to argue that a large part of that probably IS Hughton''s fault.It''s the manager who''s choosing NOT to play him, the manager who is unwilling to play a more creative player like Wes or Fox despite us struggling to provide service to our strikers and actually score goals, so it''s not a big stretch to understand why those players may well want to move elsewhere is it?To our knowledge (which is limited I agree), we''ve never heard rumours about Wes being unhappy here before, but first we had club legend Holt who''d clearly had enough of playing under CH, and now it''s apparently club legend Hoolahan...How many more will be potentially be added to this list by the end of CH''s tenure???[/quote]Exactly Indy, IF.  Why believe the nationals who have no link to the club rather than Mick Dennis who is very good friends with Delia or Michael Bailey from the EDP?Hughton was proved right with Holt, he''s gone to Wigan and done absolutely nothing.  Wes is apparently unhappy yet he has started the last two league games and played as many games under Hughton last season as he did under Lambert in the PL.  But as per usual, Hughton is to blame....[/quote]Far from denying the story Mick Dennis has effectively confirmed it, by saying Hughton would like to join Villa:Privately, Norwich insiders regard the Hoolahan bid as almost insulting and have no wish to do business with either Lambert or Villa because of bad blood over the way the Scot manager left them after lifting them 54 places in three seasons. Hoolahan would welcome the chance to join Villa, because they are offering a longer deal than his current Norwich contract, which has 18 months to run.’The only disparity is over whether Hoolahan has or has

not put in a transfer request. The Birmingham Mail, whose reporters

generally have excellent contacts with their local clubs, says he has.

The EDP says he hasn''t yet. While Dennis hints that if Hoolahan hasn''t already then he soon will.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,090]

Wes is worth more to us than anybody else would be willing to pay. No deal!

[morty 0]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="morty"][There was no bad feeling between us and Celtic, and they weren''t a rival in our own league.

[/quote]Sorry, Morty,perhaps I''m missing something here, but please explain just what all the "forbidden to sell to another rival in our league " stuff is all about .I just don''t get it. Liverpool sell to Everton, Arsenal to Man U/Man City, even Spurs to Arsenal for gawds sake.If you had a car to sell, would you refuse to sell it to someone else in your street ?If Wes wants to leave and if Villa come up with the asking price , precisely what is the problem, as you see it ?

[/quote]Wes is worth more to us than the price we would get for him. He is a good squad player, and when he can be bothered he can turn a game and win us points.It isn''t forbidden to sell to a relegation rival, but it wouldn''t be wise. Big potential for egg on face, and I told you so''s.

[Shaun Tilly Lace 0]

Pity we can''t arrange a free transfer for Hoots!

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="ncfcstar"][quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="ncfcstar"]This thread shows up the stinking attitude of some ''fans'' at the moment. EDP and Mick Dennis both reporting no transfer request and bid rejected, but some of you can''t help but think it''s all lies and ''Hughton''s fault'' - it is pathetic.[/quote]
IF (and that''s a BIG if) there is any truth to the suggestion that he''s not happy and has asked for a request, I''d have to argue that a large part of that probably IS Hughton''s fault.

It''s the manager who''s choosing NOT to play him, the manager who is unwilling to play a more creative player like Wes or Fox despite us struggling to provide service to our strikers and actually score goals, so it''s not a big stretch to understand why those players may well want to move elsewhere is it?

To our knowledge (which is limited I agree), we''ve never heard rumours about Wes being unhappy here before, but first we had club legend Holt who''d clearly had enough of playing under CH, and now it''s apparently club legend Hoolahan...

How many more will be potentially be added to this list by the end of CH''s tenure???
[/quote]

Exactly Indy, IF.  Why believe the nationals who have no link to the club rather than Mick Dennis who is very good friends with Delia or Michael Bailey from the EDP?

Hughton was proved right with Holt, he''s gone to Wigan and done absolutely nothing.  Wes is apparently unhappy yet he has started the last two league games and played as many games under Hughton last season as he did under Lambert in the PL.  But as per usual, Hughton is to blame....
[/quote]

Far from denying the story Mick Dennis has effectively confirmed it, by saying Hughton would like to join Villa:

Privately, Norwich insiders regard the Hoolahan bid as almost insulting and have no wish to do business with either Lambert or Villa because of bad blood over the way the Scot manager left them after lifting them 54 places in three seasons. Hoolahan would welcome the chance to join Villa, because they are offering a longer deal than his current Norwich contract, which has 18 months to run.’

The only disparity is over whether Hoolahan has or has not put in a transfer request. The Birmingham Mail, whose reporters generally have excellent contacts with their local clubs, says he has. The EDP says he hasn''t yet. While Dennis hints that if Hoolahan hasn''t already then he soon will.
[/quote]

 

Big difference between wanting to leave and handing in a transfer request - probably worth a couple of hundred thousand pounds to Wes who would instantly lose his ''loyalty'' bonus for making such a request.

 

I have no doubt Wes would like to move, as Mick Dennis says to get another year on that contract (which Norwich certainly aren''t going to offer him) - but whether he will sacrifice a significant bonus to do so is another matter. Especially when Norwich will probably sell him in the summer without him needing to put in a request.

[TCCANARY 263]

Unless a picture of a signed transfer request is posted on David McNally''s twitter feed along with the scans from Wes''s recent injury and the audio tape of Wes telling his team mates that he''s never going to play for NCFC again plus signed affidavits from at least three players that he''s destroyed the harmonious atmosphere at Colney then I don''t believe a word of it and the rest of you should really be embarrassed that you''ve been taken in by this.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="morty"]Wes is worth more to us than the price we would get for him. He is a good squad player, and when he can be bothered he can turn a game and win us points.It isn''t forbidden to sell to a relegation rival, but it wouldn''t be wise. Big potential for egg on face, and I told you so''s.[/quote]Well OK Morty. That''s your view. Some of us have very different takes on this. Your first point is very much open to debate, especially.But you still haven''t really clarified what you mean by selling to a rival. Are you seriously saying that if Vincent Tan suddenly decided that he liked the cut of Wes''s jib, and instructed OG Solskjaer to bid 4m to take him to Cardiff ,you''d say "Oh no. They are one of our rivals. Mr Tan can take his money back to Kuala Lumpur and stick it where the sun doesn''t shine "??!!

[snake-eyes 13]

Reggie,

 

I think the argument should be that we should not sell Wes for any price, unless we have a replacement that is better or at least equal to (if available for less than we are offered for Wes).

 

However CH may see it differently in that Wes is not the type of player he wants and so will ship him anyway if he has a replacement of his liking.  This to me would be an error, but as it has been clearly pointed out on here my opinion means nothing, especially when I disagree with the managers thinking or decisions.

 

Snake

[Nuff Said 5,140]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="morty"]Wes is worth more to us than the price we would get for him. He is a good squad player, and when he can be bothered he can turn a game and win us points.It isn''t forbidden to sell to a relegation rival, but it wouldn''t be wise. Big potential for egg on face, and I told you so''s.[/quote]Well OK Morty. That''s your view. Some of us have very different takes on this. Your first point is very much open to debate, especially.But you still haven''t really clarified what you mean by selling to a rival. Are you seriously saying that if Vincent Tan suddenly decided that he liked the cut of Wes''s jib, and instructed OG Solskjaer to bid 4m to take him to Cardiff ,you''d say "Oh no. They are one of our rivals. Mr Tan can take his money back to Kuala Lumpur and stick it where the sun doesn''t shine "??!![/quote]In McNally/Hughton/whoever''s mind, they will have an equation that goes something like:((v - r) x £) / cwhere v = value of player to current squadr = potential value of intended replacement, if there is one£ = offered pricec = how close they are likely to be to us in the tableIf any one of these is unusually high/low, it will alter the decision. So at 750K it''s not worth selling, but at £4 million it might be.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="snake-eyes"]

Reggie,

 

I think the argument should be that we should not sell Wes for any price, unless we have a replacement that is better or at least equal to (if available for less than we are offered for Wes).

 

However CH may see it differently in that Wes is not the type of player he wants and so will ship him anyway if he has a replacement of his liking.  This to me would be an error, but as it has been clearly pointed out on here my opinion means nothing, especially when I disagree with the managers thinking or decisions.

 

Snake

[/quote]I would not disagree in principle with your first point Snakey. I think we are all discounting the possibility that there may well be a replacement lined up. I suppose it all depends on whether CH regards a Wes type of player as essential to the squad.....which brings me onto your second point. As you rightly say, we can debate this matter till kingdom come, but in the end, the only people that matter are CH and the Board.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="morty"]Wes is worth more to us than the price we would get for him. He is a good squad player, and when he can be bothered he can turn a game and win us points.It isn''t forbidden to sell to a relegation rival, but it wouldn''t be wise. Big potential for egg on face, and I told you so''s.[/quote]Well OK Morty. That''s your view. Some of us have very different takes on this. Your first point is very much open to debate, especially.But you still haven''t really clarified what you mean by selling to a rival. Are you seriously saying that if Vincent Tan suddenly decided that he liked the cut of Wes''s jib, and instructed OG Solskjaer to bid 4m to take him to Cardiff ,you''d say "Oh no. They are one of our rivals. Mr Tan can take his money back to Kuala Lumpur and stick it where the sun doesn''t shine "??!![/quote]You''re just being a bit silly now, I have explained myself perfectly well. Of course if someone bid 4m for Wes we''d sell him to them.So we sell Wes for 1.5. What standard Premiership player would we get in for that money then?

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="morty"]You''re just being a bit silly now, I have explained myself perfectly well. Of course if someone bid 4m for Wes we''d sell him to them.So we sell Wes for 1.5. What standard Premiership player would we get in for that money then?[/quote]Not really silly, Morty, just saying the same thing as you''ve said in another thread.As for your second point, well it''s been well debated in another thread. I agree that 1.5 m per se would not buy us much in isolation, but it just could be the difference between being able to afford a 6m player or not. Nothing concrete to base that on, of course, but basically, the more money there is in the kitty, the better as far as I''m concerned.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="morty"]You''re just being a bit silly now, I have explained myself perfectly well. Of course if someone bid 4m for Wes we''d sell him to them.So we sell Wes for 1.5. What standard Premiership player would we get in for that money then?[/quote]Not really silly, Morty, just saying the same thing as you''ve said in another thread.As for your second point, well it''s been well debated in another thread. I agree that 1.5 m per se would not buy us much in isolation, but it just could be the difference between being able to afford a 6m player or not. Nothing concrete to base that on, of course, but basically, the more money there is in the kitty, the better as far as I''m concerned.[/quote]Its a balancing act though.Its all well and good if we have a Hoolahan upgrade that has already agreed to sign, but to lose a valuable squad player without that being in place, would be irresponsible. Especially given our current midfield injuries.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="morty"]So we sell Wes for 1.5. What standard Premiership player would we get in for that money then?[/quote]If that was all it was you''d probably have a fair point, but it has to be taken in an overall potential context though.We don''t know how much Hughton will be given to spend in Jan, let''s say he wants a new player at 10 mil but the board will only sanction 8.5mil (for whatever reason), suddenly that 1.5 mil offered for Wes means that we can then buy a player that we couldn''t without the sale.It''s not always as simple as "Sell player A and use those funds only to purchase Player B".As it stands we have a player that may or may not want to leave the club, a player who our manager is reluctant to use on a consistent basis, a player who is getting towards the latter part of their career (and may only have 1 ''big'' move left in him), and a player who can be brilliant on his day and completely anonymous off it.The key issue is that none of us can see the whole picture, if we knew the manager''s view, the player''s view, whether or not we have a potential replacement in mind etc, then we could offer our opinions about each of those areas, but at the minute it''s simply guesswork, and my personal take is that if we get a good offer we should cash in now rather than in the summer, as it reduces our wage bill and potentially allows us to cover the costs of a better player coming in who could make a massive difference for us, rather than a hit and miss one depending on form and if the manager deigns to use them...

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="morty"]You''re just being a bit silly now, I have explained myself perfectly well. Of course if someone bid 4m for Wes we''d sell him to them.So we sell Wes for 1.5. What standard Premiership player would we get in for that money then?[/quote]Not really silly, Morty, just saying the same thing as you''ve said in another thread.As for your second point, well it''s been well debated in another thread. I agree that 1.5 m per se would not buy us much in isolation, but it just could be the difference between being able to afford a 6m player or not. Nothing concrete to base that on, of course, but basically, the more money there is in the kitty, the better as far as I''m concerned.[/quote]Its a balancing act though.Its all well and good if we have a Hoolahan upgrade that has already agreed to sign, but to lose a valuable squad player without that being in place, would be irresponsible. Especially given our current midfield injuries.[/quote]Quite  so, Morty . All the more reason why any transfer kitty should be as full as is humanly possible. If for no other reason that the whole transfer window idea tends to inflate prices, particularly for the calibre of players we (should) be after.For example , I would not envisage too many people mourning Wes, if in a couple of months we have the new Yaya Touré , recently acquired for 6m from Rennes, Toulouse, Getafe , Bologna etc gracing our midfield......

[morty 0]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="morty"][quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="morty"]You''re just being a bit silly now, I have explained myself perfectly well. Of course if someone bid 4m for Wes we''d sell him to them.So we sell Wes for 1.5. What standard Premiership player would we get in for that money then?[/quote]Not really silly, Morty, just saying the same thing as you''ve said in another thread.As for your second point, well it''s been well debated in another thread. I agree that 1.5 m per se would not buy us much in isolation, but it just could be the difference between being able to afford a 6m player or not. Nothing concrete to base that on, of course, but basically, the more money there is in the kitty, the better as far as I''m concerned.[/quote]Its a balancing act though.Its all well and good if we have a Hoolahan upgrade that has already agreed to sign, but to lose a valuable squad player without that being in place, would be irresponsible. Especially given our current midfield injuries.[/quote]Quite  so, Morty . All the more reason why any transfer kitty should be as full as is humanly possible. If for no other reason that the whole transfer window idea tends to inflate prices, particularly for the calibre of players we (should) be after.For example , I would not envisage too many people mourning Wes, if in a couple of months we have the new Yaya Touré , recently acquired for 6m from Rennes, Toulouse, Getafe , Bologna etc gracing our midfield......[/quote]And thats what makes the whole thing ridiculously intense. The salient point here really is that you have to trust the manager and the board to get on with things, in the best interest of Norwich City.Which obviously a lot of people will have trouble with!

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="morty"]So we sell Wes for 1.5. What standard Premiership player would we get in for that money then?[/quote]If that was all it was you''d probably have a fair point, but it has to be taken in an overall potential context though.We don''t know how much Hughton will be given to spend in Jan, let''s say he wants a new player at 10 mil but the board will only sanction 8.5mil (for whatever reason), suddenly that 1.5 mil offered for Wes means that we can then buy a player that we couldn''t without the sale.It''s not always as simple as "Sell player A and use those funds only to purchase Player B".As it stands we have a player that may or may not want to leave the club, a player who our manager is reluctant to use on a consistent basis, a player who is getting towards the latter part of their career (and may only have 1 ''big'' move left in him), and a player who can be brilliant on his day and completely anonymous off it.The key issue is that none of us can see the whole picture, if we knew the manager''s view, the player''s view, whether or not we have a potential replacement in mind etc, then we could offer our opinions about each of those areas, but at the minute it''s simply guesswork, and my personal take is that if we get a good offer we should cash in now rather than in the summer, as it reduces our wage bill and potentially allows us to cover the costs of a better player coming in who could make a massive difference for us, rather than a hit and miss one depending on form and if the manager deigns to use them...[/quote]

^^^^^ This

[Buh 0]

Could this all be related somehow to the Jed steer tribunal next week?

[morty 0]

[quote user="Buh"]Could this all be related somehow to the Jed steer tribunal next week?[/quote]Whilst I see what you''re saying, in what way?

[Bill 1,788]

So it was all sh ite.... yet againbut it didn''t stop the numpties, the window lickers and other assorted drivel merchants from over exciting themselves and in some cases soiling themselves ''religos'' step aside - feeding made up crap to the deluded and terminally dim is far more profitable when it involves football ''rumours''" blessed are the stupid " St Paul''s letter to the intern

[Buh 0]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="Buh"]Could this all be related somehow to the Jed steer tribunal next week?[/quote]Whilst I see what you''re saying, in what way?[/quote]

Not 100% sure myself,

[morty 0]

[quote user="Buh"][quote user="morty"][quote user="Buh"]Could this all be related somehow to the Jed steer tribunal next week?[/quote]Whilst I see what you''re saying, in what way?[/quote]

Not 100% sure myself,[/quote]I think the Hoolahan bid wasn''t just about Lambert wanting the player, I think there was a wee bit of mind games going on, so who knows.

[PurpleCanary 5,558]

[quote user="City1st"]So it was all sh ite.... yet againbut it didn''t stop the numpties, the window lickers and other assorted drivel merchants from over exciting themselves and in some cases soiling themselves ''religos'' step aside - feeding made up crap to the deluded and terminally dim is far more profitable when it involves football ''rumours''" blessed are the stupid " St Paul''s letter to the intern

[/quote]As far as I can see the basic story, that Villa want to buy Hoolahan and that Hoolahan might (according to Mick Dennis) very well want such a move, stands. All that McNally has denied is the detail that Hoolahan has put in a transfer request.