Kroenke/Gazidis/Wenger out!: Page 230 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Kroenke/Gazidis/Wenger out!

kamikaze

y va marquer wrote:
What homework could we have done that would have categorically shown that the clause was not as it was understood by the Suarez camp?

get a copy of the contract from suarez's agent and then read it?

Mirth

Biggus wrote:
We can't even compete with the financial muscle and drawing power of Wolfsburg. 😆

Do yourself a favour GM, no one loves a good counterpoint or playing devils advocate more than me, but defending Wenger and his transfer policies is impossible.
You're on a hiding to nothing.

Eh? Wenger's fucked up the summer more than he has any of the previous years. That doesn't mean our bid for Suarez wasn't serious. Or the fact that we were seen as a genuine suitor for Higuain and pulled out on our own
terms.

What Wolfsburg have to do with this I don't know.

Qwiss

Not only was the £40m+1 clause bullshit, Suarez clearly wasn't all that bothered in coming to us anyway.

Biggus

General Mirth wrote:
What Wolfsburg have to do with this I don't know.

Haven't you heard?

Kel Varnsen

so who wants to see wenger extending his contract?

kamikaze

that would be a nightmare

Claudius

there is no way to justify extending this old dog. put him down. 2 decades is a long time for a manager, especially with a fruitless second half of that period. we need a change, someone who will come in with a new vision for the club and spend accordingly. can anyone here explain what our football philosophy is at present? explain our midfield? our attack? i have no clue what Wenger is trying to do with this Frankensquad

CitizenNo9

1) Wenger can't be held solely responsible for the 40+1 fuckup, this must have been discussed and surely someone amongst the intelligent people involved should have said err let's see the clause/contract. It's the kind of embarrassing cockup that would require a head to roll.

Claudius

it's mystifying that people making 70m pound decisions are so ill-prepared. we're a zoo.

Biggus

But Wenger is in control Lagos- footballistically he decides everything, all will now be decided on the pitch.

Alea iacta est.

y va marquer

I always thought that we did read the contract.
The fact that Liverpool refuse to sell to us isn't our f**k-up

CitizenNo9

are you just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing or are you failing to follow the flow of logic?

1) nobody bids 40+1 unless you beleive there is a clause that releases him @ 40m
2) clearly there was no such clause
3) therefore we clearly did not do our homework
4) it's not a question of refusing to sell, it's a question of not being obligated to sell. In which case the +1 makes us look very stupid
5) It is clear A schoolboy error was committed somewhere

y va marquer

I'm not disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing, no.
I never said that on reading the contract we believed that our bid would trigger an obligation to sell.

CitizenNo9

if we read the contract as you seem to imply we did, explain the purpose of the +1?

y va marquer

To trigger negotiations.

If you read the comnents from the PFA chief he says that a clause exists but

There are different ways it can be interpreted. If it goes to the Premier League it will take time, and the window is then closed.

Biggus

Careful Y va you'll be caught in a Biggus/Lagos sandwich and that can't be a
comfortable place to be!

y va marquer wrote:
I always thought that we did read the contract.
The fact that Liverpool refuse to sell to us isn't our f**k-up

We could have had Suarez if we had goner in hard, they actually mentioned it would take 50M.
Now whether you think he would be worth that is a whole new discussion but fact is- We could have gotten him we wanted.

Rohit

http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archive/wenger-i-am-not-reluctant-to-spend

I wonder what he means by "players left for financial reasons".

Players wanting to earn more or Arsenal needing to sell.

He and the club management really should have closed at least one target by now.

y va marquer

Biggus wrote:
y va marquer wrote:
I always thought that we did read the contract.
The fact that Liverpool refuse to sell to us isn't our f**k-up

Careful Y va you'll be caught in a Biggus/Lagos sandwich and that can't be a
comfortable place to be!

We could have had Suarez if we had goner in hard, they actually mentioned it would take 50M.
Now whether you think he would be worth that is a whole new discussion but fact is- We could have gotten him we wanted.

🙂
You guys are lil kittens

Still time for that £50m bid 🙂, it'll be right at the end if does happen though.

Claudius

Biggus wrote:
y va marquer wrote:
I always thought that we did read the contract.
The fact that Liverpool refuse to sell to us isn't our f**k-up

Careful Y va you'll be caught in a Biggus/Lagos sandwich and that can't be a
comfortable place to be!

what the hell is wrong with you, man? this is a family forum. think about the kids.

40m+1 is clear indication that there was a belief that we were securing something. +1 would be an insult if it only forced a negotiation. +1 makes sense if it seals the deal. 160m minus bank claims going to waste everyday because of buffoonery.

y va marquer

Ultimately how we perceive the plus 1 is down to our own interpretation and personal bias.
I personally don't see the insult or the buffoonery.
We were smoking them out, testing their resolve and Suarez's resolve.
There's is strong, his is weak.

« Previous Page Next Page »