Official Gary Cahill transfer thread

[Wandering Willy]

would you bet 14m that gary cahill won't leave on a free?

He'll not leave for free. More likely is we'll accept a silly offer on the final day of the transfer window.

So yeah, I'll take that bet.

I'm trustworthy. So I'll hold the money.

[drummergeek]

if we are giving him a new contract there is no point putting a 12m release clause in.

Course there is. Why would he sign a contract that makes it harder for him to leave Bolton than it already is?

He is more than likely going to walk away on a free to the club of his choice with a couple of million cash in hand, only way he'd sign a contract would be out of pure loyalty to us for getting him to where he is now and he feels he owes us a payday- there is no other logical reason he'd sign a deal. He's made no bones about the fact he wants to play for a top club- although he has done it in a respectful way.

Clubs are put off by our 17m pricetag. If we're saying to Cahill, here's a big wage increase and look we'll stick this release fee in so it's easier for you to get out to a big club then he might (still doubt it) but might agree to it.

If we're offering him a new contract with the same 17m release fee or no release fee then he's fecked up any ambitions of playing at the top level because we're not going to get there and clubs aren't going to pay that sort of money for him.

clubs don't want to pay 17m because he has 1 year left if he had longer on his contract they would pay it. look at how much english players have gone for.

[CrazyHorse]

would you bet 14m that gary cahill won't leave on a free?

He'll not leave for free. More likely is we'll accept a silly offer on the final day of the transfer window.

So yeah, I'll take that bet.

I'm trustworthy. So I'll hold the money.

Nice one Willy, you're a star.
PM me your account number and sort code and I'll transfer the money right away.....

[plymouth wanderer]

would you bet 14m that gary cahill won't leave on a free?

He'll not leave for free. More likely is we'll accept a silly offer on the final day of the transfer window.

So yeah, I'll take that bet.

I'm trustworthy. So I'll hold the money.

he ain't going no where the bakery ain't open

[Wandering Willy]

would you bet 14m that gary cahill won't leave on a free?

He'll not leave for free. More likely is we'll accept a silly offer on the final day of the transfer window.

So yeah, I'll take that bet.

I'm trustworthy. So I'll hold the money.

Nice one Willy, you're a star.
PM me your account number and sort code and I'll transfer the money right away.....

Normally I would but the wire transfer system to Lagos is not working today.

Best place would be my office located in the car park at Aldi.

[Prufrock]

would you bet 14m that gary cahill won't leave on a free?

I bet you £17m he won't leave on a free.

This way, you take the bet, I buy Cahill for Arsenal for £17m, you then owe me £17 million, and we have got our price for GC, all at your expense. Mwahahahahahahahahah.

[jimbo_bwfc]

if we are giving him a new contract there is no point putting a 12m release clause in.

Course there is. Why would he sign a contract that makes it harder for him to leave Bolton than it already is?

He is more than likely going to walk away on a free to the club of his choice with a couple of million cash in hand, only way he'd sign a contract would be out of pure loyalty to us for getting him to where he is now and he feels he owes us a payday- there is no other logical reason he'd sign a deal. He's made no bones about the fact he wants to play for a top club- although he has done it in a respectful way.

Clubs are put off by our 17m pricetag. If we're saying to Cahill, here's a big wage increase and look we'll stick this release fee in so it's easier for you to get out to a big club then he might (still doubt it) but might agree to it.

If we're offering him a new contract with the same 17m release fee or no release fee then he's fecked up any ambitions of playing at the top level because we're not going to get there and clubs aren't going to pay that sort of money for him.

clubs don't want to pay 17m because he has 1 year left if he had longer on his contract they would pay it. look at how much english players have gone for.

Perhaps, although I'm not totally convinced they'd pay it either way. Lescott is an anomoly because of City, but why would any of the other clubs pay that much for a 25-year old whose biggest achievements so far are with a team who've never finished in the top ten whilst he's been there?

Perhaps we're just guilty of overpricing him. Phil Jones went for 17M because he's 19 and already there or thereabouts the level of Cahill.

I'm sure Wenger's looking at it and saying, well I can get someone like Juan Mata for 17M why would I pay that for Cahill, whether he has one year left or five years?

Although the original point still stands up, we're not offering him a new contract so we can get big money, we're offering him a new contract so he doesn't leave for free. To do that we're going to have to give him something very special and heavily weighted in his favour, because there isn't much incentive for him to re-sign at the moment with some of the clubs that are tracking him.

[Armchair Wanderer]

Neil Ashton, ex-NoW, was saying on t'radio tonight that GC had a good season but the semi-final, his performance in particular, would have put people off.

[Lord Kangana]

Did he get that from hacking Wenger's phone?

[a1]

Neil Ashton, ex-NoW, was saying on t'radio tonight that GC had a good season but the semi-final, his performance in particular, would have put people off.

so if we've been knocked out in the third round, we'd be getting big money ?

[jimbo_bwfc]

Can't work out why Wenger is willing to pay more for Jagielka than it'd take to get Cahill.

Jagielka is a good player don't get me wrong but he's 29 in August, has had a career blighted by injuries, no-more proven at the 'top stage' of football than Cahill. Hardly an outstanding player, good player, but not outstanding. I'm not saying Cahill is any better mind, but he is younger, cheaper and can probably go abit further in the game.

Seems an odd one.

[TANGODANCER]

Can't work out why Wenger is willing to pay more for Jagielka than it'd take to get Cahill.

Jagielka is a good player don't get me wrong but he's 29 in August, has had a career blighted by injuries, no-more proven at the 'top stage' of football than Cahill. Hardly an outstanding player, good player, but not outstanding. I'm not saying Cahill is any better mind, but he is younger, cheaper and can probably go abit further in the game.

Seems an odd one.

Yes, Wenger's very odd. He's probably still remembering that end of season defeat and jut doing it for awkwardness. He's like that.

[Hoboh]

Can't work out why Wenger is willing to pay more for Jagielka than it'd take to get Cahill.

Jagielka is a good player don't get me wrong but he's 29 in August, has had a career blighted by injuries, no-more proven at the 'top stage' of football than Cahill. Hardly an outstanding player, good player, but not outstanding. I'm not saying Cahill is any better mind, but he is younger, cheaper and can probably go abit further in the game.

Seems an odd one.

Easy answer "Our Gaz" looks far better to us than maybe he actually is due the the rest of the dross that plays in our so called defence, blind pensioners on a beach with a bell less ball fall into that catagory as well. If we could do a deal for 10 mill + Ngog we 'd do very well out of it.

[Tombwfc]

Can't work out why Wenger is willing to pay more for Jagielka than it'd take to get Cahill.

Jagielka is a good player don't get me wrong but he's 29 in August, has had a career blighted by injuries, no-more proven at the 'top stage' of football than Cahill. Hardly an outstanding player, good player, but not outstanding. I'm not saying Cahill is any better mind, but he is younger, cheaper and can probably go abit further in the game.

Seems an odd one.

Easy answer "Our Gaz" looks far better to us than maybe he actually is due the the rest of the dross that plays in our so called defence, blind pensioners on a beach with a bell less ball fall into that catagory as well. If we could do a deal for 10 mill + Ngog we 'd do very well out of it.

Alternatively according to some on here we have a past-it 'keeper, the world's worst ever right-back, a pub-standard clogger and a lanky dopey nice person.

If we're able to stay up with that 'shite', Cahill must be a miracle worker.

[Hoboh]

Can't work out why Wenger is willing to pay more for Jagielka than it'd take to get Cahill.

Jagielka is a good player don't get me wrong but he's 29 in August, has had a career blighted by injuries, no-more proven at the 'top stage' of football than Cahill. Hardly an outstanding player, good player, but not outstanding. I'm not saying Cahill is any better mind, but he is younger, cheaper and can probably go abit further in the game.

Seems an odd one.

Easy answer "Our Gaz" looks far better to us than maybe he actually is due the the rest of the dross that plays in our so called defence, blind pensioners on a beach with a bell less ball fall into that catagory as well. If we could do a deal for 10 mill + Ngog we 'd do very well out of it.

Alternatively according to some on here we have a past-it 'keeper, the world's worst ever right-back, a pub-standard clogger and a lanky dopey tw*t.

If we're able to stay up with that 'shite', Cahill must be a miracle worker.

Not getting into a lip lock but Cahill would have waltzed into a top 4 team according to some on here................................ and feck me our defence WAS REALLY that good with the relegation form shown at the latter end of the season our Gazzer included

[jimbo_bwfc]

Liverpool are the latest club in the mix.

Apparently Daily Mail going big on the story, their backpage. Story from Dom King, former Liverpool Echo writer, whether that means he has his ear any closer to the wall I've no idea, but I certainly hope someone comes in and bids for him.

Liverpool might be ideal if they throw N'Gog into the deal, saves us having to fork out money for a striker. Wouldn't mind getting Danny Wilson in on the act too, on loan.

[Lennon'sEleven]

Liverpool are the latest club in the mix.

Apparently Daily Mail going big on the story, their backpage. Story from Dom King, former Liverpool Echo writer, whether that means he has his ear any closer to the wall I've no idea, but I certainly hope someone comes in and bids for him.

Liverpool might be ideal if they throw N'Gog into the deal, saves us having to fork out money for a striker. Wouldn't mind getting Danny Wilson in on the act too, on loan.

Yeah - here's the story: http://bit.ly/q1wveU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

None of the quotes say anything concrete about GC... but they did seem to be after Jones before he went to Man U, and they have been shipping goals. Plus, like you say, there's the little matter f N'Gog. May have legs this one, I guess.

[Prufrock]

Liverpool seems the most likely/only destination at the moment. Fits their MO. Problem is replacement, because, and I don't think this has been mentioned enough, Knight and Wheater is TERRIFYING. Domed.

[Lord Kangana]

When's Ricketts back?

[BWFC_Insane]

That seems like a nothing story. No substance about making a concrete bid or owt. Seems more like a journo just saying we must buy a centre half, oh look Gary Cahill might fit the bill. As Pru says IF we do sell Cahill, then Coyle best have a replacement in mind and have done enough of the spadework to be able to move quickly. Though I suspect he has....