ChezGiven

Nice opener for the season, Hart having a blinder.

We don't know whats being done from our side though? Could be a simple case of we wont pay enough. OM do seem to saying conflicting things though, one min we have agreed next we haven't. We do know. We know we met all the conditions demanded by L'OM last week. Marseille started fucking about after that. Thats why HBA is refusing to train and is now in Newcastle. Anyone following this closely should know that. Ok chill man. Au contraire, i was merely nipping hysteria in the bud.

We don't know whats being done from our side though? Could be a simple case of we wont pay enough. OM do seem to saying conflicting things though, one min we have agreed next we haven't. We do know. We know we met all the conditions demanded by L'OM last week. Marseille started fucking about after that. Thats why HBA is refusing to train and is now in Newcastle. Anyone following this closely should know that.

The only cockends in the boardroom during this transfer have been in Marseille.

More a comment on their role off the pitch imo.

We've put him up in a caravan in Whitley, talks to continue tomorrow.

Its definitely Newcastle airport.

Possibly spoken to Beye or Cisse? They were both mates when they were up in the NE and i presume they live down there still.

I hope you're right no worries with the english pal, its better than kockheads not just his either.

I think you missed the point, or perhaps i should've spelt it out more clearly, about OM hoping that a club [willing to pay a respectable transfer fee, relative to their valuation, a club that might prove just as or more attractive to the lad] might materialise with a firm interest between now and the close of the transfer window. I think you underestimate the significance of the game even though it is a match against a lower tier international side in Norway, from a scouting perspective anyway. Managers & scouts [at top clubs] are more interested in how a youngster fares [how their physical & technical come to the fore] when they're surrounded with good/top players [with pace & movement, whether or not they have it in them to take the bull by the scruff of the neck when they're surrounded by players with bigger reputations ie. if they're a shrinking violet or not] regardless as to whether it's versus Brazil, Norway or Luxembourg. Thats all true but as Ketsbaia said, we had the deal agreed and then the offer has come in for Niang and now they have the money to get Fabiano without selling Ben Arfa. Its obviously a tricky situation and if we dont want to risk 7/8m on a player who may flop (for reasons outside his talent, thats not in question) then a loan with a view to buy seems sensible. As thats the only deal we have been prepared to look at, not sure we are taking the piss. I agree that his goal last night makes it less likely he will come, however if the player himself is set on coming then we just need to hold our nerve. A deal agreed in principle [begrudgingly accepted] and nothing set in concrete or finalized on paper by the sounds of things. And OM have every right to move the goal posts, hedge their bets on another club [as i have mentioned] entering the frey: particularly for a player by some accounts is a co-contributor in a frosty relationship between the player & manager, and is currently nearing the end of current contract [last 2 years]. It's a matter of opinion but i'm still of the judgement that OM are playing a waiting game of their own, for the reason which is the polar opposite of our board. They're prepared to roll the dice, they're gambling: hoping that greater exposure will protect & maintain their valuation over the course of this window or in the event of a switch in January, or perhaps to minimise their losses if previous hype [of a couple years back] is to be believed. The loan system has it's place. As a means of topping up a squad with fringe/squad players, amidst the strains imposed by an often heavy fixture schedule. I think of players like Cordone and Distin as examples. But to target priority players [or blue-chip youth talent] is equally unambitious, as well as wrought with danger both prior and after a deal being done. OM are taking their valuation seriously and bids like ours are underanderstably translated as 'ridiculous', hence the moving of the goal posts. Man.Utd haven't built a healthy relationship with Sporting [as a feeder club] by attempting to take the piss out them in being constantly at odds over valuations. Our bid can be fairly viewed as being disrespectful: a belated bid for Delph being another. And '1st option to buy' options are tenious at best, and there's plenty of scope for another/bigger club to materialize with a firm interest at a later time and opportunity for an Arfa to change his mind in accordance to various intangibles. Distin [admittedly a late bloomer, and the sort of squad top-up i speak of] couldn't be convinced to stay on, and we were vastly more ambitious. It's unfair to actually compare the two boards in this instance, but nonetheless the danger of the '1st option to buy' method is there to see. As for what i've placed in bold. That's the very nature of the transfer market. It's a risk based business, one that is speculative and volatile: sometimes players may fail acclimatise into the club dynamic for reasons unrelated to football [Domi, a less obvious example of a foreign export failing to settle in]. Prior to our move for Cole there were question marks raised [when discussing the pros & cons] during the process of evaluating him. Keegan and the remainder for the front-office/board [Fletcher, Shepherd and Hall Jnr] had to balance his potential/his scope for improvement against that of his character [unusual, hot & cold/aloof: and team dynamic, having everybody pulling in the one positive direction and KK was a guru in that department/individually man-managing playing staff] and what was a sketchy fitness record. Cole [in regards to the question of character] when against the grain when compared to KK's earlier signings, but he recognised the pros very much outweighed the so-called cons. At the end of the day he went with his gut instinct and the board fully backed the manager's judgment, and coughed up what was a very respectable transfer fee back in the day. Shepherd was 100 percent correct in his evaluation of Ashley's running of the club, and FS much to the majority's disdain was correct in regards to many things he said which were deemed to be politically incorrect/offensive. The business of football [the transfer market] is an entirely different beast to that one treaded by Ashley out in the business world. It's largely speculative, risk vs reward as mentioned. Ashley, as it would appear, seems uncomfortable with this notion. Whereas he/Ashley should stick with a market which is more homely to him, a market which allows him to consolidate & strengthen his strength by resorting to anti-competitive & unethical practices: where in addition where it's all too very easy to buy a sufficient shareholding or a saboteur voice on a rival or major product supplier, in order to protect his overall interests. Blokes like Ashley who are unable to distinguish between the two [and hence by nature are unwilling to apply the appropriate practice, and by nature he was/is a cheap & tacky store trader he struck an oil deposit, by accumulating a set of of brands in a developing - or yet to be fully tapped market - during an economic boom time] have no place in football. From the outset [on another forum admittedly] i questioned Ashley's propensity to apply the proverbial corporate razor-cutter mentality, and duly raised concerns as to whether his running of the club would closely follow suit: both applying to business models/practices in addition to the character of the man. On both counts, it seems as though i was unfortunately correct. I was going to wait until it was clear which way the deal was going, however, from the french press it is clear that it is Marseille fucking about on this, not us. As my French colleague said yesterday 'never do business with anyone from Marseille'.

http://www.shieldsgazette.com/nufc/Toon-wo...Arfa.6474106.jp? Still some hope.

http://www.lequipe.fr/Football/breves2010/...ise-a-l-om.html

Relationships between him and the club were already at breaking point anyway, otherwise we wouldnt be in the position to get him on loan for a bag of Ashley's finest peanuts.

As I said, I think the 5m is "good value" for 10000 people to benefit. I'd also say having access at home is a lot easier and likely to be used far more than an "inconvenient" trip to the library - ie they aren't going to go there every day. 500 quid per person is good value iyam.

Its an interesting question though as its not 'a computer' or 'the internet' which is being provided, its 'information'. In which case, there is an argument (even if i cant do it justice here) which says that access to the wealth of human knowledge and information that exists online (which has a marginal cost of zero to the user, therefore not subject to scarcity) can be equated to basic rights like health and education.

Is it Phil K off NO? Mad as a balloon that lad.

I think you missed the point, or perhaps i should've spelt it out more clearly, about OM hoping that a club [willing to pay a respectable transfer fee, relative to their valuation, a club that might prove just as or more attractive to the lad] might materialise with a firm interest between now and the close of the transfer window. I think you underestimate the significance of the game even though it is a match against a lower tier international side in Norway, from a scouting perspective anyway. Managers & scouts [at top clubs] are more interested in how a youngster fares [how their physical & technical come to the fore] when they're surrounded with good/top players [with pace & movement, whether or not they have it in them to take the bull by the scruff of the neck when they're surrounded by players with bigger reputations ie. if they're a shrinking violet or not] regardless as to whether it's versus Brazil, Norway or Luxembourg. Thats all true but as Ketsbaia said, we had the deal agreed and then the offer has come in for Niang and now they have the money to get Fabiano without selling Ben Arfa. Its obviously a tricky situation and if we dont want to risk 7/8m on a player who may flop (for reasons outside his talent, thats not in question) then a loan with a view to buy seems sensible. As thats the only deal we have been prepared to look at, not sure we are taking the piss. I agree that his goal last night makes it less likely he will come, however if the player himself is set on coming then we just need to hold our nerve.

I still havent given up on this. Cant get my head round Year Zero's point of view either. Its L'OM pissing about delaying things so that they could get him in front of the national and internatonal TV cameras against Norway to try and get more bids but thats us taking the piss out of them? Not sure i get that.

Aye the next bloke doesnt give a shit, just wants his chicken nuggets.

Not possible simultaneously unless in some form of kinky caterpillar.

His comments first refer to the player and then he says there has been no contact. Linguistically the subject of the second part is the subject of the first. Saying there has been no contact with the player means nothing. The president of l'OM has said there will be a meeting on friday. My guess is that the player didnt want to be completing a transfer whilst playing for a new national manager after the team was a national disgrace.

I hate keyboards and mice now. Sooooo 20th century. All that is true about the iPad but if you look at where innovation is this year in the tech market its in mobile OS. I mean that from a hardware perspective too, not just software. The big growth in Chinese and other far east high-tech parts suppliers is for mobiles and therefore by defintion, tablet OS parts. In 2 years, the iPad will have 200gb of storage with minimally 2gb of RAM (figure plucked out of my arse btw). By that time HTML5 will be more prevalent too.

True but for anyone thinking about getting a new laptop, then i'd argue the laptop is a total waste of money.

My mate toured with Girls Aloud last year (or year before? cant remember now) and Cheryl was not the one who did coke. Then, anyway. I know more but am not saying it.

Anyway, twice the price but ten times the fun seems good value to me.