|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jul 12, 2017 16:13:50 GMT
Stoke also retain an interest in Manchester City midfielder Fabian Delph but are mystified by reports that Bruno Martins Indi is returning to the club. It was reported that Stoke had agreed a fee with Porto for the defender, who impressed on loan last season, but there has still not been a breakthrough.
...from Percy
|
|
|
|
Post by samba :) on Jul 12, 2017 16:14:06 GMT
Might cancel my subscription with sky for this
|
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Jul 12, 2017 16:16:15 GMT
Be surprised if he signs tomorrow if he did play in the friendly today. Will be a good signing for us and will see Wolly moved on I guess. Don't you know we are stoke we don't sign anyone till its a Friday  |
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Jul 12, 2017 16:17:55 GMT
Sky know absolutely fuck all. It was a poster on here that informed that hopeless platypus Dorsett that we were signing Jermaine Pennant, and he made himself look a right chopper when he said "Peter Crouch is NOT signing for Stoke" only for him to show up in a van two hours later. Sky know about as much as the Gravity Crocodile. Indeed calling Sky Sports reliable is tantamount to saying Jimmy Saville was a trustworthy babysitter! H As I said yesterday sky sources (this message board) and we all know how accurate on signings that is lee trundle anyone! |
|
|
|
Post by scfcno1fan on Jul 12, 2017 16:20:50 GMT
Percy has spoken.
Wonder what knot fm are on about.
Signing zouma and BMI, just can't see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bojan Mackey on Jul 12, 2017 16:24:04 GMT
Stoke also retain an interest in Manchester City midfielder Fabian Delph but are mystified by reports that Bruno Martins Indi is returning to the club. It was reported that Stoke had agreed a fee with Porto for the defender, who impressed on loan last season, but there has still not been a breakthrough.
...from Percy Still the only credible journalist where Stoke info is concerned, by a very long way. |
|
|
|
Post by GeneralFaye on Jul 12, 2017 16:25:30 GMT
Think the thread title needs a change..
|
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jul 12, 2017 16:28:31 GMT
This could be Rob Dorsett's biggest howler since mistaking a groundsman for Nicklas Bendtner's dad
It was the specificity of the fee that fooled everyone - very peculiar!
|
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Jul 12, 2017 17:45:40 GMT
Stoke also retain an interest in Manchester City midfielder Fabian Delph but are mystified by reports that Bruno Martins Indi is returning to the club. It was reported that Stoke had agreed a fee with Porto for the defender, who impressed on loan last season, but there has still not been a breakthrough.
...from Percy Stoke are mystified the only positive thing the club has said for a year is we want Bruno , take control of the PR it's not hard for £1m a year |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2017 17:48:02 GMT
It could be stoke holding fire in the hope we sign Zouma instead
|
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Jul 12, 2017 17:54:06 GMT
It could be stoke holding fire in the hope we sign Zouma instead We need 2 regardless , plus a midfielder a forward and possibly an Arnie replacement. What a fucking mess |
|
|
|
Post by itsmorethanagame on Jul 12, 2017 17:54:35 GMT
It could be stoke holding fire in the hope we sign Zouma instead I suspect/hope that we want both. If we get Zouma in first it then massively strengthens our hand at the negotiating table as we can tell them we will wait a year and have him for free next season if they don't lower on the price. If we are desperate for him now though they can hold us to ransom. Of course, it still remains an absolute mystery of what's happened with supposed buy out clause. I would love to know exactly what's gone on but suspect we will never find out. |
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jul 12, 2017 18:15:34 GMT
It could be stoke holding fire in the hope we sign Zouma instead I'd rather we sorted a permanent deal for Bruno if it's one or the other. |
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Jul 12, 2017 20:36:00 GMT
Sunshine Moonlight Good Times Boogie Who are we going to blame for all that? Not Benji, it's there's too much happiness |
|
|
|
Post by theteacher on Jul 12, 2017 21:46:16 GMT
If Zouma signs on loan for the season........ Hughes offers Porto €6m or we wait for next season when Bruno is then available on a free.
Bruno advises that he warns to join Stoke and is happy to wait for the end of his contract before joining Stoke on a free.
Porto then have a decision to make. Similar situation to where we were in Begovic and Nzonzi a while ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 12, 2017 21:53:07 GMT
I wish we'd had just done the bit where we thought we could sign him due a clause in the deal of his loan. Fucking club. |
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jul 12, 2017 21:56:26 GMT
I wish we'd had just done the bit where we thought we could sign him due a clause in the deal of his loan. Fucking club. Don't Mention The Option!  |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jul 12, 2017 22:02:25 GMT
I wish we'd had just done the bit where we thought we could sign him due a clause in the deal of his loan. Fucking club. Do you actually need the word 'thought' in that sentence? All reports suggests that we could HAVE done but ... didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on Jul 12, 2017 22:03:26 GMT
If Zouma signs on loan for the season........ Hughes offers Porto €6m or we wait for next season when Bruno is then available on a free. Bruno advises that he warns to join Stoke and is happy to wait for the end of his contract before joining Stoke on a free. Porto then have a decision to make. Similar situation to where we were in Begovic and Nzonzi a while ago. Hmmmm!!! 🤔 The only problem with waiting til next season (when he's free) is that if Porto call our bluff, we then run the risk of being in a queue for his signature!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Pretty Little Boother on Jul 12, 2017 22:08:57 GMT
The only problem with waiting til next season (when he's free) is that if Porto call our bluff, we then run the risk of being in a queue for his signature!!! Or being fucking relegated! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2017 22:14:37 GMT
No need for the abuse, you're a decent poster when you don't try all the itk stuff. You were found out massively with the O'dowda incident and you have posted nothing since to prove you're not a chancer. I've posted about whelan and us being in talks with chelsea. Albeit not on the main board because people like you don't appreciate it, but i have messaged it with people who appreciate it.. 😂😂😂😂 |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 12, 2017 22:20:22 GMT
No it wasn't. Doesn't it concern you that our clubs lawyers can't get a clause in a contract to bind? That then the CEO most probably believes is binding. And then this info is passed to the manager who then says don't panic, we have a deal in place, there's no rush, we can sign him whenever. That's extraordinarily poor practise. And bad business. He is, so getting him for 5m quid cheaper would have been ace and could have gone towards a right back. I take it you're just on one big wind up with this? If so, bravo, it's worked a treat so far. If not, ffs man Wind up? Nah. It's got worse as the deal to sign him is seemingly bollocks. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 12, 2017 22:21:18 GMT
I wish we'd had just done the bit where we thought we could sign him due a clause in the deal of his loan. Fucking club. Do you actually need the word 'thought' in that sentence? All reports suggests that we could HAVE done but ... didn't. I did Paul because a lot of people seem to think we're doing good business and I'm on a wind up. The stupidity astounds me. |
|
|
|
Post by baystokie on Jul 12, 2017 22:23:20 GMT
I wish we'd had just done the bit where we thought we could sign him due a clause in the deal of his loan. Fucking club. Do you actually need the word 'thought' in that sentence? All reports suggests that we could HAVE done but ... didn't. 'All' reports may not be 'all' believable. I notice that very few, if any, have stated the actual wording of the clause which COULD suggest that very few, if any, of the reporters have actually seen an actual copy of the deal papers which, in turn, COULD suggest that all the reports are second/third hand. Just a thought in the midst of the blood-letting  |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jul 12, 2017 22:32:02 GMT
Do you actually need the word 'thought' in that sentence? All reports suggests that we could HAVE done but ... didn't. 'All' reports may not be 'all' believable. I notice that very few, if any, have stated the actual wording of the clause which COULD suggest that very few, if any, of the reporters have actually seen an actual copy of the deal papers which, in turn, COULD suggest that all the reports are second/third hand. Just a thought in the midst of the blood-letting There are numerous accounts directly from the manager and the club claiming that such a clause existed. All the Portuguese press reported that we had allowed the clause to elapse and then Peter Smith who is staying in the same hotel as the club in Switzerland and is seemingly interviewing Hughes daily, reported exactly the same yesterday. That's what I was referring to, nothing more. |
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Jul 12, 2017 22:34:54 GMT
This whole Option thing is a farce but at this stage, it's somewhat moot, we need to get Bruno pronto Option or no option
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 12, 2017 22:39:48 GMT
This whole Option thing is a farce but at this stage, it's somewhat moot, we need to get Bruno pronto Option or no option It shouldn't be moot though. It's a pretty big deal (in more ways than one). They shouldn't be allowed to get away with these things with a sweep under the carpet job. |
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Jul 12, 2017 22:45:29 GMT
This whole Option thing is a farce but at this stage, it's somewhat moot, we need to get Bruno pronto Option or no option It shouldn't be moot though. It's a pretty big deal (in more ways than one). They shouldn't be allowed to get away with these things with a sweep under the carpet job. Yes and I've agreed with you, it's shocking that the Club don't see to grasp the basics of a legal option, however, we need to ensure that we sign Bruno. If he costs 13 mil, they just pay it and let the option recriminations play out seperately (and you open a separate thread  So yes, as to where we find ourselves today in relation to signing Bruno the option/non option is moot |
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jul 12, 2017 22:49:37 GMT
This whole Option thing is a farce but at this stage, it's somewhat moot, we need to get Bruno pronto Option or no option It shouldn't be moot though. It's a pretty big deal (in more ways than one). They shouldn't be allowed to get away with these things with a sweep under the carpet job. So are you saying because there was a previous fuck up we shouldn't sign him now? That's stupid. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 12, 2017 22:53:10 GMT
It shouldn't be moot though. It's a pretty big deal (in more ways than one). They shouldn't be allowed to get away with these things with a sweep under the carpet job. So are you saying because there was a previous fuck up we shouldn't sign him now? That's stupid. No. Where I have said that? I just think they should be chastised and it not swept under the carpet. I haven't actually mentioned signing him at all. So feck knows where that's coming from? |
|
