#23 - Arturo Vidal

So happy we got him

Hopefully he fits into our tiki taka system (:

tiki taka is yesterday.

Our new style is hara kiri

Hapless_Hans wrote:tiki taka is yesterday.

Our new style is hara kiri

Doubt it, Farfan was one of our best attacking players at the Copa America. I understand his injury kept him out for the year, but he is still a player you would want on the bench.

My only wish is that he would've continued playing in Europe so he would remain in top form for the qualifiers, but he will be in the middle east.

El Shaarawy wrote:Its 'farfarce' ffs

No, it's not. Has been, is and will be farcefan, forever.

What is futbol on about?

Dunno, exhausting day managing Pedro's transfer i'm guessing, got his head thinking backwards

It's crazy in a market where DiMaria goes for £60m (€85m), Vidal who is arguably better currently in the same position, and are both around the same age, goes for €35m. Juve should really made a stance for more money.

The difference is quite simply that Utd were ready, one might say even happy, to spend that much while we aren't.
That and the 'CL winning Real Madrid player' bonus.

Juve should have baited English sides for a bidding war imo, once they realized Vidal was definitely leaving.

Doesn't matter if a player wants to go somewhere particular.
It's a reasonable price, honestly. They snatched him up from in front of our nose for 12, 13m back then.
They owed us one.

Hapless_Hans wrote:Doesn't matter if a player wants to go somewhere particular.
It's a reasonable price, honestly. They snatched him up from in front of our nose for 12, 13m back then.
They owed us one.

It actually does matter. It forces the club (Bayern) the player wants to go to, to pay up what other clubs are offering (or something close to it). It's simple economics.

Don't call me James wrote:

Hapless_Hans wrote:Doesn't matter if a player wants to go somewhere particular.
It's a reasonable price, honestly. They snatched him up from in front of our nose for 12, 13m back then.
They owed us one.

It actually does matter. It forces the club (Bayern) the player wants to go to, to pay up what other clubs are offering (or something close to it). It's simple economics.

Why? If club x offers more than club y but the player doesn't want to join club x, the higher offer is useless.
That's what happened with Alexis too, after all.

Let me give you a scenario: Club X offers $1 and club Y offers $5. Player wants club X. Player's current club (club Z) doesn't want to lose the player. The current market price for player is about $4.

It doesn't matter what the player wants. If player is adamant on leaving Club Z accepts the $5 from club Y and tells club X and player that if they want to get this deal done, they need to match that offer (or get close to it).

The fact that Juve bent over, is pretty sad. Should have baited English clubs and Bayern might just have stepped back.

@Hapless_Hans

I beg to differ : Juventus just have to ask Vidal to not talk about the fact that he absolutely wants to join Bayern and tell to every potential buyer that they will sell vidal to the one who makes the right offer .

There's nothing like a fixed 'current market price'.
Who says Vidal should be worth more than what we paid?

The selling club can of course decide for which price they want to sell and for which they won't. And then they can look at offers and decide to hold out for more or take what they are offered.

But the notion of a 'bidding war' doesn't make sense if clubs are bidding where the player does not want to go - these transactions won't happen and therefore have no direct impact on the player's price.

They bought him for 13m and sold him for 35+m, after getting 4 of his prime years. Cry me a river.

There's a world existing beyond the silliness of the Premier League.

Hapless_Hans wrote:There's nothing like a fixed 'current market price'.
Who says Vidal should be worth more than what we paid?

The selling club can of course decide for which price they want to sell and for which they won't. And then they can look at offers and decide to hold out for more or take what they are offered.

But the notion of a 'bidding war' doesn't make sense if clubs are bidding where the player does not want to go - these transactions won't happen and therefore have no direct impact on the player's price.

They bought him for 13m and sold him for 35+m, after getting 4 of his prime years. Cry me a river.

There's a world existing beyond the silliness of the Premier League.

non sense!

Bénin wrote:@Hapless_Hans

I beg to differ : Juventus just have to ask Vidal to not talk about the fact that he absolutely wants to join Bayern and tell to every potential buyer that they will sell vidal to the one who makes the right offer .

but Bayern also talks to the agent I assume.
Or maybe noone but Bayern wanted Vidal

35 millions for Vidal is good money. Juve bought him for less than 20 millions euros ( can't remember ) and he gave them 3-4 great years. Also, with that deal Juve has a good business relationship with Bayern from now on . It reminds me when Arsenal sold Fabregas to Barca for 29 millions euros.

Obviously 35 millions is far from being enough if you think about Benteke, Caroll price tag but I'm glad that deal went that way.

Hapless_Hans wrote:There's nothing like a fixed 'current market price'.
Who says Vidal should be worth more than what we paid?

The selling club can of course decide for which price they want to sell and for which they won't. And then they can look at offers and decide to hold out for more or take what they are offered.

But the notion of a 'bidding war' doesn't make sense if clubs are bidding where the player does not want to go - these transactions won't happen and therefore have no direct impact on the player's price.

They bought him for 13m and sold him for 35+m, after getting 4 of his prime years. Cry me a river.

There's a world existing beyond the silliness of the Premier League.

I get really bored in the middle of arguments like these and find that I don't give a shit about the subject I'm even talking about.

I wasn't gonna reply but I felt you wrote a lot there for me to just ignore it. It's a courtesy response, if you will, to tell you that I read it and I still don't care.

Fair enough

What's the argument here? From what i gather Hans is right usually if a player wants to go somewhere then the club will sell him there at a discounted fee rather to someone who offers more simply because the player refuses to go there.

Well, yeah that's usually the case. Because the selling club has no other options.

But if other clubs come in to compete for the players signature, things change.

But I swear, this is my last post on the subject. I don't care m8s. In fact I agree with Hans taht Juve did a number on Bayern 4 years ago when they got VIdal so this is justice.

Hapless_Hans wrote:tiki taka is yesterday.

Our new style is hara kiri

Sep puku

Well, that's why Dortmund couldn't sell Robert Lewandowskli either. Lewandowski only wanted to go to Bayern, and 1 year before his contract ran out, Bayern just didn't want to pay Dortmund's asking price. So Dortmund only had the option of selling Lewandowski at a real cut privce to Bayern or keep him one more year and lose him for free - and they chose the latter.

Moreover, if a player wants to go to one club only, then it is no use telling the player not to talk about it as the player will very likely already have talked with his wish club (no matter whether its allowed or not - try to prove that!) and the club already promised him a lucrative sign-on fee. (After all, if they don't have any competition, this significantly lowers the transfer fee and so a little extra for the player will still be cheaper for the interested club.)

So it is in the players interest, to "leak" that he doesn't want to go to any other team as that way he forces his current club to either accept any offer or keep him and then maybe risk that they might lose him on a free (depending on the contract length), as the sign-on fee will be his no matter when he transfers earlier or later.

Vlad the Impaler wrote:

Hapless_Hans wrote:tiki taka is yesterday.

Our new style is hara kiri

Sep puku

Pep Puku