ZZ and Ambrose when both are out of contract in June and it's unlikely that we will now get a fee for either. Considering that a few weeks ago we were having a fire sale and selling anything that moves it seems a strange business move to hang onto two players with no transfer value.
0
Comments
I do laugh at the transfer deadline when people start wetting their knick-knicks at the slightest little rumour!
Like a previous Charlton midfielder whose name unfortunately I can't quite remember, they've been offered new 5 year contracts, with the promise they'll be sold to the highest bidder in January.
;o)
haha !!
Buyers market as far as we're concerned though Large. If nobody wants to buy then we can't sell.
By the way, wasn't suggesting that you were wetting yourslef above - just talking generally.
I don't think this argument has any basis. Today is September 1st, not February 1st. How can anyone presume what Ambrose or Zhi's performance will be over the next four months? Again, should Zhi manage to perform at the levels he did for the club last fall, his value, if anything, will increase. A number of PL teams will be fighting relegation and will (more likely than not) be looking for an honest midfielder that can poach the odd goal.
Perhaps that's the wrong perspective, but I think this turns out better for the club in the end if their valuation wasn't going to be met now.
Think you've answered your own question there.
Nearly 20 goals between them last season in a crap season.
The only reason we won't have sold is that a deal could not be done.
Correct, but on the player side of things.
"We have no ambition, we need to keep these players to challenge"
We havent sold, so i'm sure it will be:
"What are the club doing? We're going to get nothing for these players now - the Board has lost it"
Well Hung Onto ........... ?
Now that could be a Chinaman to please the ladies
;o)
Spot on. People were waiting for the player we "always" sell at the last minute with no time to replace him and when it doesn't happen they complain about that.
Absolutely delighted ZZ has stayed. Class player, a worker and a goal scorer.
Not sure how Maglor has worked out that "The only reason we won't have sold is that a deal could not be done". That is based on what?
I've no idea why no deal was done with WBA or anyone else but there are plenty of other options than just that one.
- He might have signed a new contract to extend the one that runs out in June,
- we might be about to sell him to a club outside the UEFA where the window doesn't apply (ala Smertin),
- our new and secret Arab Owners wanted to keep him and are funding the deal,
- the board, having raised the money they needed from other sales, have allowed Pardew to keep ZZ and in so doing are showing the "ambition" that people keep saying they don't have.
- ZZ loves shopping in Greenwich Sainburys and wants to stay in SE London
If ZZ has decided to see out his contract and go on a free in the summer then we could lose out financially but isn't that what people want. If we sell a player before his contract is finished then "we are a selling club" (bit like Real Madrid were yesterday then) and "we always sell our best players" but when we don't something is wrong as well.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. FFS just be happy for a few seconds that we got a class player in the side for a few more months at least.
If he wants a Prem career and will leave Charlton on a free then it's up to him to work his socks off and prove that he's capable of playing at the higher level - and that has to be good for us. Similarly with Ambrose.
1. When are we likely to see him in a Charlton building again ?
2. When is he likely to be match fit ?
1. Was training a Sparrows Lane last week so has already
2. No idea but he played for China a few weeks back so can't be far off
I have my sources as well, you know*
*it was on the OS during the week
hope so, maybe with a fixed transfer fee so we can sell him at the last minute of the January window to keep everyone happy
He ought to have recovered from his Olympic exertions then (China didn't actually get very far anyway)
Bailey in the tackling, holding role with ZZ given licence to get forward and support the strikers should be very productive in this league.
Problem is it has clearly a stopped us trading be it wages or fee, so we have a bit of a problem. There is of course the next transfer window, plus a loan scenario so he may still go in the next few days be it on loan with a view to a perm move in Jan. This would also allow another loan coming the other way.
The alternative is that we pair him up with Bailey and see what happens, if not we might be able to 'convert' him to be a centre half next to Hudson, I do recall reading he can play there, but with Cranie coming in perhaps that isn't necessary?
I think he'd be a bit lightweight there against the Jon Parkin's of this league - we'd also lose his energy and phenominal (love that word!, hehee) work rate in midfield.
But as you say, we've got Crainie in who seems ideal to partner Hudson.
With tongue firmly out of my cheek, I'd plum for that one, well partially anyway. Pards seemed to indicate the other day during an interview that the financial contraints had "eased" of late. That suggests to me that we played hard ball with WBA on the price in the knowledge that we didn't need to sell him.