The Liverpool Echo has understandably added its half penneth to the news that Virgil Van Dijk will return to the Saints squad, for all this and the latest views from around the net on the situation read on.

The Liverpool Echo have run with the headline that Virgil Van Dijk is set for showdown talks this week with Mauricio Pellegrino, the paper stays with the stance that Liverpool will only step in should Saints decide to sell and that they would be prepared to shatter their transfer record. They also point out that Van Dijk hasn't played since January and is short of match fitness which is no good to Saints or Liverpool should the situation drag on.

Liverpool fan website Rousing The Kop claim that Pellegrino is planning for life without Van Dijk in their headline, the story itself leads with the fact that this is not actually new news and is mainly based on comments in our own Daily Echo.

They focus on these lines.

Manager Mauricio Pellegrino is said to have “been planning on life without him, either in the long or short term.”

Saints are hopeful of him rejoining the squad and staying put.

What interests them are the words long term and hopeful and they then look to the fact that Saints are chasing Kevin Wimmer from Spurs as a sign that we are softening our stance, of course if they did a bit more research they would know that we have yet to replace Jose Fonte.

They are also confused about why their club are not bidding for a player who openly wants to join them by stating

"While this would normally be a good thing, the club’s attempts to broker a deal are stuck in limbo until the Saints agree to sell. With no bids being made from other clubs due to their knowledge that the player only wants Liverpool, Southampton don’t exactly have anything to accept meaning that Liverpool cannot join in on any bidding war."

The answer is simple, Liverpool of course know they are on dodgy ground should they make a bid and that they could well be hauled before the Premier League should they do so, otherwise why do they not just slap an offer on the tabe and start talking.

The Metro also focus on comments in the Daily Echo, but they have a different slant from the straw clyutching on Liverpool fan sites, they feel that Saints are growing in confidence that the player will stay at St Mary's and that the club won't back down.

The Metro also feel that Liverpool's none bidding is significant and that it strengthens Saints position in that how can they sell a player that supposedly no one wants to buy as there are no offers on the table and that Van Dijk hass no choice but to knuckle down and get on with things.

But perhaps the most bizarre view on why Liverpool are not bidding comes from ESPN's Gabrielle Marcotti who also has spouted off on Talksport in the past he claims that Liverpool are spot on in their handling of the situation.

Marcotti says that Liverpool are aware that there is not actually a lot of interest in Van Dijk from elsewhere and that the Anfield club are actually staying patient so that with no other offers Saints are forced to sell to them cheaply.

This theory might actually hold water if we actually wanted to sell the player, but the reality is that we do not want to and because of their behaviour over the past months we dont want to sell him to Liverpool even if we did.

If we get a cut price bid then we will easily bat it off and even Virgil Van Dijk might be questioning Liverpool's ambition if they are willing to risk not only his fitness for the season as he is needed by the Netherlands for a do or die World Cup qualifyer in September but his career in general to save a few pounds.

With Saints at te moment having to pay Van Dijk 10% of any deal and Celtic 15% it is not going to be attractive to us to accept anything belo £70 million, if they think we will accept much less then they are truly deluded.

So the answer is this morning that there is little more to report on the situation until we know if Van Dijk has resumed training with Saints, but it does show how every media outlet will view the same story differently.

Whether it is the Liverpool Echo who are basically doing some PR for their club or indeed the Daily Echo doing it for theirs, or a Liverpool fan site trying to find something that suggests this deal might happen as they become more desperate or even the national journalists like Marcotti who have to make a headline out of everything.

Photo: Action Images

helpineedsomebody added 13:15 - Jul 31 on 2 fronts does the owner stick or twist 1 has she given the chinese enough time to conclude the selling of her club 2 when is she going to make up her mind on selling VVD / or tell him keep on training & i will tell you in january 2018 end of
-2

SanMarco added 13:33 - Jul 31 I vote we boycott the Liverpool Echo. Our Echo is bad enough with the adverts jumping all over the place on the website and sudden bursts of noise making you spill your ovaltine. I have every respect for fellow fans at all clubs but am I really interested in what Liverpool fans think? About the same as their interest in what I think. ZERO.
3

SaintNick added 13:49 - Jul 31 With regard to Kat Yes the Chinese have had enough time the ssue isnt about whether they have the money or whether they stll want to proceed but being allowed to transfer the money out of China, which perhaps suggests this could be a problem going forward we will be at the whim of the Chinese governement. VVW has been told he is staying its now down to whether he accepts this or not,

2

Jesus_02 added 14:24 - Jul 31 The ONLY thing stopping Liverpool form putting a bid in is them wanting to get him as cheaply as possible. And judging by their offers for Keita it would be pretty poor. They have given up after failing with a but for 66m... only its not 66m at all. its almost 40m + add-ons. I'm imagining that add ons include Liverpool's performance in the champions league and winning the EPL... an who would bet on that. I have come to the conclusion that Liverpool simply do not have the funds otherwise why would they invest so much time getting their "legends" (and Danny Murphy) to beg on their behalf?

1

wibbersda added 14:29 - Jul 31 Can someone please tell me when and where VVD has said 1. He wants to go and 2. To Liverpool. As far I can see he has said nothing and SFC are just letting him train on his own because all the speculation has obviously affected him mentally. For me, I would say that he is far better than Liverpool anyway, and surely he knows that.
2

underweststand added 14:41 - Jul 31 1- Don't know / aren't sure where KL stands on this, but if she was just in it for the money then she would have sold to the Chinese already-as they've been approved by the Prem. 2- As for VvD...all this flap about holding him to his 5 year contract is b*llshi*( if you ask me) . Saints are never likely to be able to sell another player at the reported level of fee. and as he doesn't seem to want to stay I say (reluctantly) take the money and laugh all the way to the bank. If SFC genuinely believe that we are keen to bring on Academy products then Jack Stephens has shown it does work. Buying the likes of Bednarek goes to show that we expect to bring him on at a young-ish age andwait to see him improve. Owner or not I'm sure KL relies more on Les / Ralph for their input than her own sense.

-3

GeordieSaint added 16:22 - Jul 31 If Kat was only in it for the money Virgil would have gone by now as apparently he is worth 25 % of the club, bet Celtic wished we would hurry up and flog him.
2

kenis added 19:36 - Jul 31 Is there any corroborating evidence / official document based sources for the 15% due to Celtic and the 10% due to VVD of any transfer fee? A sell on clause on either total transfer fee or transfer fee profit seems likely and has been reported at the time of the deal to bring him and is fairly common practice but it's only through discussion forums around this transfer has it emerged as "fact" that a player or this specific player gets a percentage of a transfer fee paid to them. It was widely publicised that Payet and Pulis received a "loyalty" bonus shortly before engineering their exits and players losing out on bonuses when they submit a transfer request seems widespread but not seen this 10% thing before. Unless VVD privately (and then "accidentally" publicly - resulting in a fine) submits a formal transfer request - whether a club bids or not - he is contracted to Saints and should be part of the squad and playing. If he's not giving his all then he doesn't get into the team based on performances in training. If he submits a request and we reject it or agree a price at which we'd sell or a bid comes in and no price is set or its below that price then he stays. If he had contact with Klopp over a move as reported then surely he's eligible for a fine as well or at least a formal warning. Don't buy the "once they want to go get rid point of view", or the "rot in the reserves" or "squad harmony". Unless he's actually disruptive treat him and his team mates as the professionals they are and paid to be.

1

Blogs 31 bloggers

Southampton Polls