January 2022 Transfer Thread

[Dr Nowt]

If we were signing him, then he’ll have spoken to Klopp, even if that was only officially permitted this evening.

 

If he chooses to go elsewhere in the summer after doing so, so be it, but you’d imagine there’s every chance he’ll have been more than sold on the idea.

[dockers_strike]

3 minutes ago, Razoray said:

Un fucking believable.

[No2]

You can sign a player any time, you just can't register them outside the 2 transfer windows. What's stopping us buying him if the intention was to let him remain at Fulham?

[3 Stacks]

See, now this is incompetence from the club that is very legitimate to complain about. That's absolute bullshit. 31 days and you leave till the end.

[Anubis]

 

 

[John102]

1 minute ago, No2 said:

You can sign a player any time, you just can't register them outside the 2 transfer windows. What's stopping us buying him if the intention was to let him remain at Fulham?

I was wondering this myself.

[dockers_strike]

14 minutes ago, No2 said:

You can sign a player any time, you just can't register them outside the 2 transfer windows. What's stopping us buying him if the intention was to let him remain at Fulham?

Not really, any 'contract' doesnt have any legal force so he'd still be free to talk and sign for someone else in 6 months.

 

I just looked at the deadline day ticker. chelsea had a bid for a charlton player reported as accepted at 22:38, 30 minutes after we were reported to have agreed a deal with Fulham. chelsea are also reportedly loaning the player back to the EFL club.

 

Something has gone massively wrong here. Either Fulham have acted the absolute twat or Julian Ward has dropped a bollock.

 

In the scheme of things not much changes as the lad was to stay at Fulahm. It does mean other clubs canstart sniffing around him and fulham will no doubt now go to a tribunal for the final fee once he's out of contract if we sign him then.

[an tha]

17 minutes ago, No2 said:

You can sign a player any time, you just can't register them outside the 2 transfer windows. What's stopping us buying him if the intention was to let him remain at Fulham?

Boils down to this....

 

Liverpool have failed in their bid to sign Fulham's talented teenage forward Fabio Carvalho.

The clubs agreed a fee in the region of £8m shortly before the deadline but the final details of deal - which included 19-year-old Carvalho being loaned back to Fulham - could not be concluded after a race against the clock.

No deal sheets are used in the EFL and with the loan back being non-negotiable for Fulham, Liverpool were frustrated in their attempts to get the transfer over the line.

[an tha]

17 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

See, now this is incompetence from the club that is very legitimate to complain about. That's absolute bullshit. 31 days and you leave till the end.

Is right.

 

I wonder how much club tied up resource and time in Diaz deal and just assumed this deal could de done late only to be caught out.

[Megadrive Man]

The Harry Wilson deal to Fulham was structured in a weird way, something to do with trying to help Fulham with the EFL fair play rules. 

 

I wonder if this deal was supposed to be a similar idea.

[dockers_strike]

26 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

See, now this is incompetence from the club that is very legitimate to complain about. That's absolute bullshit. 31 days and you leave till the end.

You make it sound like Fulham said 'yeah, ok, we'll do a deal' 31 days ago. They didnt. They said ok around an hour before the deadline.

 

Something's gone wrong and I suspect it comes from the fulham side.

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

It’s done,get over it.

[Jose Jones]

17 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

You make it sound like Fulham said 'yeah, ok, we'll do a deal' 31 days ago. They didnt. They said ok around an hour before the deadline.

 

Something's gone wrong and I suspect it comes from the fulham side.

Pen was too lightweight to sign the paperwork.

[3 Stacks]

Of course the Neco Williams to Fulham loan deal went through, though. That's what's important.

[m0e]

Not signing a player who was not joining us until the summer anyway is literally the last thing I'm going to worry about.

[aws]

13 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Pen was too lightweight to sign the paperwork.

Ink wouldn't settle. 

[Jose Jones]

26 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

Of course the Neco Williams to Fulham loan deal went through, though. That's what's important.

Bit surprised we let Neco go, maybe with Thiago and Elliot back we felt we had enough numbers in midfield to give Milner full time back up right back duties.

[dockers_strike]

29 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

Of course the Neco Williams to Fulham loan deal went through, though. That's what's important.

Yes because fulham probably insisted that was sorted first then acted the twat dragging their feet and other obstacles over this lad's deal who we'd agreed to loan back as they wanted.

 

But it's always Liverpool's fault, isnt it?

[Jose Jones]

3 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Yes because fulham probably insisted that was sorted first then acted the twat dragging their feet and other obstacles over this lad's deal who we'd agreed to loan back as they wanted.

 

But it's always Liverpool's fault, isnt it?

Why didn't we insist that the Carvalho deal was sorted first and then act the twat dragging our obstacle feet with the Neco Williams deal then eh?  Didn't consider that did you?

[TheHowieLama]

What if both deals started at the same time but one took longer?

Hmm?

[dockers_strike]

8 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Why didn't we insist that the Carvalho deal was sorted first and then act the twat dragging our obstacle feet with the Neco Williams deal then eh?  Didn't consider that did you?

We insist the Carvalho deal is done first and the Neco deal 2nd and fulham say 'deal's off.' Did you think about that?

[Jose Jones]

10 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

We insist the Carvalho deal is done first and the Neco deal 2nd and fulham say 'deal's off.' Did you think about that?

Yes, it's obvious Fulham are better negotiators than us.  Glad you have seen this.

[3 Stacks]

25 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Yes because fulham probably insisted that was sorted first then acted the twat dragging their feet and other obstacles over this lad's deal who we'd agreed to loan back as they wanted.

 

But it's always Liverpool's fault, isnt it?

I don't even criticize the club that much. Relax, mate.

[Jose Jones]

13 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

What if both deals started at the same time but one took longer?

Hmm?

Fabio Carvalho = 13 letters

Neco Williams = 12 letters

 

Pretty obvious why the paperwork took longer.

[Bobby Hundreds]

I'm not too arsed but it feels a bit amateur. Great work with Diaz dropped a bollock with Fabio. We don't know the details but it feels like Fulham have stitched us up. We did Spurs, they've done us it is what it is.