I doubt if the the same scenariop will ever happen again. Could you imagine SAF phoning Wenger the same way he phoned Wilkinson?
And then a conversation along the lines of " By the way is Nasri available, how much?"Nasri To City - Done Deal!
- Thread starter evra
- Start date
- Status
I doubt if the the same scenariop will ever happen again. Could you imagine SAF phoning Wenger the same way he phoned Wilkinson?
And then a conversation along the lines of " By the way is Nasri available, how much?"Exactly. If Nasri tells him: I want to go to United. I'll do it this summer for a fee, or next summer for free - What is Wenger supposed to do? He'll sell him to us.
I doubt if the the same scenariop will ever happen again. Could you imagine SAF phoning Wenger the same way he phoned Wilkinson?
Yeah, it's never happening exactly like that, granted. Ferguson must still be laughing about how he pulled that one off.
I like the fact he can play in a few positions. More excuse to sign him. I'm starting to get excited to be honest
This would be like the Michael Owen signing where it goes from no chance to you turn on SS news and just go "what?!?!?!?" as he walks out of the medical.
Yeah, I guees my point is that Wenger will be loathe to sell him to us. If an equally acceptable offer comes in from another club he will do everything in his power to shift him to that other club. In much the same way as SAF dealt with the Heinze to Liverpool situation.
And yes, I do realise at the end of the day they cant force him to go somewhere he doesn’t want to go.....
It will be interesting to see how this develops.
Thing was Owen was already on a free and he could go where he wants. Even if Nasri wants to come, doubt Wenger would let him
didnt mean in a logical sense, purely on a scale of mentlness
The one key difference for me is that Wenger isn't SAF.
Also maybe the fact that in recent times the Arsenal-United rivalry has not been as fierce, especially when compared with United's constant rivalry with Pool.
Has he signed an improved contract yet then? It'd just be too funny for him to join us.
It's interesting that all the papers are quite clear that United haven't yet talked to Nasri or his agent. That's the one detail which prevents the club being accused of tapping up.
Which does make you wonder if the story has been deliberately linked by someone within the United camp to up the pressure on Arsenal.
Then again, they expect to compete with us for the title so letting one of their best players join us doesn't seem a bright idea from that aspect, rivalry and prestige aside.
how can we expect to get Nasri for 10million if Young is going to cost somewhere between 15 and 20 million depending on which paper you believe. No chance.
Don't believe this Nasri stuff at all.
Don't believe this Nasri stuff at all.
I agree, smacks of a leak, probably never happened as described and easily denied.
If this is purely to extract a better deal, it is a touch elaborate and more than the usual agent bullshit.
What I don't understand is why a new deal wasn't put before him 2yrs before expiry.
We are not expecting him to be sold for £10m, if you read the comments after the sum was quoted. If it's true that there is a bid, it's most truly a bid to test Arsenal's resilience.
This one from a week back is the key for me:
"One thing's for sure: we're not selling him to Manchester United," Wenger told the French radio station RTL. "Are we still in discussions with Nasri? Yes, but we are still in disagreement over the financial contract on offer, which we haven't settled. We are trying to extend his deal."
Arsenal vow to keep Samir Nasri out of Manchester United's clutches | Football | The Guardian
"One thing's for sure: we're not selling him to Manchester United," Wenger told the French radio station RTL. "Are we still in discussions with Nasri? Yes, but we are still in disagreement over the financial contract on offer, which we haven't settled. We are trying to extend his deal."
Arsenal vow to keep Samir Nasri out of Manchester United's clutches | Football | The Guardian
Indeed. There's also the fact that all the coverage makes it clear that United haven't even approached Arsenal yet. It's fairly obvious the response they'll get when they do.
Reading it again makes no sense. What was it that United discussed about with Nasri's representatives? If we want the player, we go directly to Arsenal and seek permission to speak to the player and agent, no?
Arsenal should return the favour, since we did sell them Silvestre!
In theory.
In reality, personal terms are often thrashed out before the club makes any kind of official bid.
have we signed him yet?
That's the so called 'tapping up', isn't it? Most transfers probably work like this though so yeah...
That is indeed tapping up. Not sure what the exact rules are but it's interesting that all the press coverage of this mentions Nasri's agent has not been involved. Makes you wonder if the player of his agent have to be directly involved to constitute tapping up and the club are stressing this detail to cover their arses.
He can force Arsenal to let him go with the help of the Webster ruling - he has had his three years at Arsenal, and he is in the final two years of his contract, so he can buy himself out.
I thought he was in his last year?
That would rank high on the North London Sol Campbell scale.
He is, but the rule is that you have to be in the last two years of your contract, If you're in the last year, you're also in the final two
He is, but the rule is that you have to be in the last two years of your contract, If you're in the last year, you're also in the final two
Ah, now I understand. I am old, forgive me!!
I wouldnt want anyone at United who uses this route, but the possibility is there.
There's an agreement between the top clubs that they wouldn't use that rule.
What would happen if he bought himself out without a particular club in mind and was a free agent is another matter...
Yeah, as exemplified by Beckham's transfer from United to Madrid, when United had apparently received a higher offer from Barcelona and wanted him to go there. I could be wrong, but I think the difference between Beckham and Heinze is that in the latter case, United had already
stipulated, as part of the transaction, that he couldn't sign for a specific club, or clubs, including Liverpool.
It all depends how badly he wants to come here I guess.
He is, but the rule is that you have to be in the last two years of your contract, If you're in the last year, you're also in the final two
I thought it could only be used within a few weeks of the last game of the season - have to give notice as it were - remember reading that during the Heinze/Liverpool stuff.
Also, I believe there is an understanding between top clubs not to use it to take each others players..
With Heinze there was nothing in place stating he couldn't sign for Liverpool and that's why Heinze's team took it to court.
He is, but the rule is that you have to be in the last two years of your contract, If you're in the last year, you're also in the final two
The rule is actually that they must wait until after they've completed the first three years of their contract. Which won't happen until July 11th.
Like Brophs said, though, the top clubs have an agreement not to use this clause against each other.
He'd have to inform the club three weeks after the last game of the league season at the latest. Which means that if he wants to do it, he has to make the decision this weekend.
But he won't do it.
I still reckon Arsenal will pay him a substantial signing on fee, and keep his salary within a wage structure (if it exists). Or break the wage structure, pay what he wants to keep him out of our grasp, then sell him for around £35 million if he still want to move.
Wenger will not sell a Virus to us...
Nasri will sign a new deal soon
Nasri will sign a new deal soon
- Status