Gareth Bale Transfer Speculation | Done
- Thread starter forevrared
- Start date
- Status
Was always going to be a good player. If you watched him and thought he was shit, you should take up a different hobby.
He was a bit shit at left back though.
I didn't really watch him intently...it was a running joke about them losing or something wasn't it?
Spurs didn't won a game he started in a year and a half or so IIRC.
The talent was always there to see
Bale was never a great defender, but the moment he became somebody at Southampton you just knew he was going to be a fantastic footballer. If you didn't know that, then yeah, a different hobby or pursuit of some kind would definitely be in order.
What a load of bollocks. He didn't look like becoming anywhere near as good as he is now in those first few months at Spurs. He obviously had talent but there's no-one here who could've told you he had the talent to be this good. He's just developed extremely well.
Southampton were playing in the lower leagues and he had only one full season there. I doubt many (if any) on here watched him regularly enough in his Southampton days to form an opinion.
Looked talented, not shite.
He was more talented than his performances were suggesting at the time, definitely. I think everyone would agree on that. Was there many that thought he looked talented enough to be the best player in the league though? Doubtful.
His rate of improvement has been astonishing to be honest. I don't think I've ever seen a player turn from a flop to one of the world's best players in 2 or 3 years.
What's more astonishing is that it's down to 'arry.
Arry really blundered into it though. He was playing second fiddle to Assou Ekotto before he was moved to left wing due to injuries.
He could easily have gone on loan to a lower league team that January.
He could easily have gone on loan to a lower league team that January.
True on both counts. Regarding Bayern, they have worked themselves into a quality position since then... the fantastic thing for them at the moment as well is that they are in a position to complete monopolise the top talent of one of top two footballing nations on the planet, making sustained success in a difficult era much easier. The bastards. They've already gone for Mandzukic, Neuer and Goetze in recent times, and their academy has also churned out players like Alaba, Kroos, Schweinsteiger and Lahm on top of that. All of them quality players. I'm sure if they pushed hard enough they could tear a hole in that Dortmund team and take Gundogan (not that they need him..), Lewandowski, Hummels, etc off their hands too.
United on the other hand reside in the same nation as two crazy billionaire oil clubs, with players of mediocre talent going for huge sums of money. We're also based in a city with shit weather and a country that isn't churning out anywhere near the same level of talent as Germany. We've got some quality players at the club already, but there is a feeling that we need to aim extremely high at the moment in preparation of what is to come over the next few years in terms of oil clubs taking over. It's going to be a harder gap to bridge in the near future if we do take our foot off the gas a bit (or if certain players do not develop), particularly in context of the current state of the transfer market and the paucity of top class, technically excellent youngsters that this country seems to produce.
'arry must be the luckiest manager ever, he was ready to loan Bale to Nottingham Forest but then Spurs had an injury crisis and he was forced to play Bale at left wing and the rest is history.
Imagine the shite 'arry would buy with a hundred million windfall. That would have been fecking amazing to watch unfold.
He probably would've sold and bought Jermaine Defoe and Peter Crouch ten times.
Come one Spurs, bring him back.Point is, he never showed exceptional talent. He looked like someone who could become a good PL player. Back in 09 if someone would've suggested that he'd be footballer of the year and go for a world record 80million + fee, you'd have been laughed it.
Honestly I didn't think he stood out until Arry was forced to play him as a winger.
I do think the flop tag was totally uncalled for. He looked a quality player to my eyes and I'd watched him play live a few times and his touch especially caught the eye, but don't think anyone would've thought he'd be an £85m footballer. He did however look like he had the talent to play for say ourselves and be a success so I don't think player of the year was beyond him though he did have a lot of doubters during his early phase at spurs which was OTT due to the unlucky tag attached to him, world player of the year? yes, doubt anyone thought he'd got the talent to do that... most would argue that he still does not possess the talent to reach that level.
He has improved massively in the past year or so. Hard work on the training ground does pay off. He's basically a poor man's Ronaldo, still, not a bad level of player to be.
You should take a look at Gündogan´s first six months in Dortmund. You will probably not even recognize him.
Bale was never a flop to be honest, he just needed time to settle in at Tottenham. Back then, people wrote him off too quickly. Giving a player a little bit of time and trust can do miracles to a talented player.
His talent wasn't in question, although there was something missing and I didn't see him in turning into this kind of player. His work ethic off the pitch must be excellent, dare I say Ronaldo-esque.
I can't recall what the hesitation was by Fergie going after him, but Bale was a left back at the time and we were well served by Evra then, of course. But my God he looked like a natural left winger. We could never have known how far he would develop in so short a period of time, but I do recall a lot of screaming on various United forums for Fergie to go all out for Bale. Bale was that good back then. Speed and power in abundance. What he didn't have was showstopping defensive ability, but so what?
No hesitation by Fergie. Southampton shafted us. I am glad they sold their 25% sell on fee for 3m. They must be gutted.
I wasn't aware of that. How did Southampton shaft us?
By shafted, I mean this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ied-sign-Gareth-Bale-Southampton-replied.html
That is exactly how you get a players market value - I never said it wasn't.
The point that me and others have made is that Bale isn't going for market value and that Madrid are overpaying.
The other 99% of clubs are relevant in that to cause a global shift in prices across the market you need more than just PSG, Monoco, Chelsea, Madrid and City overspending, that seems pretty obvious.
I'll try and give a brief example of the way I view it and the point I was trying to make - say there is something called the market value and then something called the inflated value, with the latter being the value placed on players by oil rich clubs.
If the market value of Cavani was previously £35million and now the inflated value is £50million, then that is roughly a 50% increase in value. But that 50% increase hasn't and won't hit the market across the board because the inflated value can't have global affect unless a significant number of clubs apply those valuations. That is where the 99% is relevant, and my point is that not only will they not pay those inflated fees because they acknowledge it isn't sustainable or economically viable, but they genuinely can't even if they wanted to because they can't afford the inflated fees.
There are far many more aspects to this and there is probably two arguments to be made a) when the inflated value just becomes the market value, and more importantly b) whether the inflated value has already established itself for top tier players.
B is a much better argument IMO and its quite possible that it has due to the number of rich clubs applying the inflated value, as they are dominant in a particular section of the market then its easy to see how their inflated values could quickly become the accepted market value for that specific market.
So imagine there was just City applying the inflated value and no other oil rich clubs existed. They wouldn't be able to shift the price for top tier players by themselves as one person overpaying can't have that effect. So say they overspend and buy player X for £40million, that doesn't mean that Porto can demand an inflated fee for player Y - there isn't enough teams applying the inflated valuations so Porto either can't sell or inevitably accept the proper market value.
The problem now is that as there is six or seven of these clubs applying inflated fees in such a specfic area of the whole market (the market for the best players) that eventually it could/will become just the accepted market value.
So if we go back to the Porto example and City overspending on player X, if six or seven other clubs apply the inflated valuations then Porto can sell player Y for an inflated fee, whereas if only City did they cannot.
I mean you can see this in the market for top strikers this summer. There were 3 top tier available players in Lewandowski, Falcao and Cavani - two have gone to clubs that apply inflated valuations, Monoco and PSG. Now because it is such a small market the question is whether the inflated valuations have become the market valuations - this is exactly what we will find out with Suarez.
Napoli and Atletico sold for inflated fees so Liverpool are expecting to recieve the same fee for Suarez, exactly like my Porto example above. Arsenal aren't a club that applied the inflated fees so if they do end up paying £50million for Suarez then that supports the view that the inflated value has become the market value.
However what I expect to happen is that the inflated fees won't take hold even in the market for top end players, because there still isn't enough teams applying inflated valuations.
Describing how the brilliant Tottenham forward became the one that got away, Ferguson said: ‘We were disappointed in Southampton at the time, because we were first there, but they never came back to us. We were disappointed in that.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2319110/Manchester-United-tried-sign-Gareth-Bale-Southampton-replied.html#ixzz2aqiwzRnb
That's it? Sounds to me like CYA.
If Fergie wanted him badly enough he would have done more than left a voice message. He would have banged the doors and put in a bid that Southampton could not have refused to accept. At this time, there was hyterical media coverage of this young Welsh wizard, so it's not as though he was just another Angelo Henriquez his scouts found 7,000 miles away, so there was plenty of opportunity for Fergie to have gotten his way.
But that is water under the bridge.
I depends who writes the story. I have seen it written that Southampton rejected us. Spurs offered the 25% sell on fee, perhaps that had something to do with it.
History now.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2006/oct/17/southampton
This is the sort of stuff that was commonly said when Bale was first breaking through. The hype around him on forums came from a couple of youtube videos of him scoring some sweet Beckham-esque free kicks...he's probably scored about two of those since. He changed his entire technique because even that side of his game was failing miserably at Spurs. He really wasn't very impressive.
This is the sort of stuff that was commonly said when Bale was first breaking through. The hype around him on forums came from a couple of youtube videos of him scoring some sweet Beckham-esque free kicks...he's probably scored about two of those since. He changed his entire technique because even that side of his game was failing miserably at Spurs. He really wasn't very impressive.
Top class players have tripled in value though. A perfect example is that Ruud Van Nistelrooy would not cost £19m anymore... He'd cost £55-60m (just like Rooney would be going for "Bale amounts" - £90m). Look at every transfer in the last year or two that doesn't involve a small team selling, a poor contract situation or an unproven/unknown player and it'll become apparent.
What you don't seem to realise is that Manchester United can afford to buy a player for £60m every single season quite comfortably (as can 5-6 other teams). Between the period of buying RVN and Rooney we spent roughly 75-80% of our net profit (over 4 years) on signing players. Most people don't realise that if you pro-rata that sort of spending to this period of time it would be like buying every player we have bought over the last 4 years... And then going out and spending an additional £75m every season (£250-300m total). Obviously this figure sounds obscene but this is the kind of spending we were sanctioning a decade ago.
It still perplexes me as to how some people still think £30m is even a factor in modern day top level Football... You do realise that we are given much more than this every year just for essentially showing our faces in the group stages of the Champions League? Getting dumped out by Basel in the group stages earned us £36.5m... Add to that an extra £20m every season from 13/14 for the new TV rights and probably another £10m in overseas rights for 14/15 and it becomes even more insignificant.
I agree all clubs haven't tripled their profits... But all top clubs have. If we were interested in Darren Bent I'd agree with you and I'm sure we could get him for £7-8m, however top players like Fabregas, Falcao, Cavani, Suarez, Bale etc... Are all going to command way above £30-40m and easily pushing £50m+, which is their market value. Your argument re: Baines is a strange and irrelevant one - it's akin to my Darren Bent example.
If you want the figures - Google them (Swiss Ramble is a great blog). Pay particular attention to our "EBITDA" levels over the past decade when looking at overall profitability.
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/gareth-bale.219286/
Here is everyone laughing at his losing record. Apart from maybe one or two, no one really said that he's a good player. There clearly wasn't anything overtly brilliant about him in those early days. Yet, some on here will have you believe that they rated him all along and only superior posters could see it.
Jesus fecking christ, this is horrific!
No he would not. Ruud came from the Eredivisie and wasn't proven at anything like the highest level, it was like Liverpool buying Suarez and he went for £25million not £60m!
Seriously if that is your argument that Ruud would be sold for £60million in todays market you are out of your mind.
Would Figo go for £150m, Crespo go for £90m?
Not that this is even the point. The whole point was whether these huge fees represent the market value or whether they are distorted fees paid by abnormally run clubs, and you haven't addressed that at all.
If Monoco wanted to pay £60million for an Eredivisie striker then that wouldn't change anything, I would still be saying that they are overpaying.
You have completely missed the point of the Baines argument - the whole debate is whether inflated transfers have infected the entire market, and with Everton demanding £20million for Baines and Wigan £20million for McCarthy the answer is that selling clubs hope that it has - but until these transfers actually materialise then these inflated fees are limited to a few abnormally run clubs with valuations above the normal market rate.
Remember the time when the cafe used to ridiculous him that Spur never won a game with him on the pitch? Good old times eh.
Yes, there were questions about Bale in his early Spurs days -- at least something like "hype exceeds reality" criticism. But when he was a Southampton man the hype was surreal.
Yeah, that is interesting. Part of me thinks that these reactions can also be attributed, at least in part, to sour grapes. United missed out on him and the Caf reacted in kind. So much changes in general opinion of the Caf when a player United are rumored to be interested in joins a different club.
- Status