I do not believe in coincidences and it is no coincidence that practically every window we get "news" of Levy tinkleing off a club. WBA this year, Southampton last, Lyon with Lloris, Seville with Fazio, Sporting with Dier, Seville again with Ramos and the list goes on. People will say that Levy is just doing this for the best interest of the club, which I can understand. But why is it always US that get the bad publicity? Hundreds of transfers are done every window but it is consistently US that are held up as untrustworthy and cheapskates. Don't the chairmen of other clubs also look out for their own? So why don't we see the same headlines about them? Even Chel53a came out smelling sweeter in their pursuit of Stones. Why, then, is it always us that get the bad press? Is it possible there is a wholesale Fleet Street agenda against us?
Interesting point. It's a shame that the transfers where there is success aren't mentioned. Of course the one co-incidence is that the other side complained about something or other. The other co-incidence is that Levy is our chairman. However, I think if you look at the circumstances a bit deeper, you could argue that there are other very separate factors that lead to the complaining. We've done Southampton and WBA to death, but I just want to clarify a few things:
Lyon with Lloris - You failed to mention this year Aulas' comments about what a pleasure it was doing business with us. By the by, Aulas has a history of complaining about everyone who buys their best prospects including Chelsea. So the co-incidence here could be argued to be Aulas.
Sporting with Dier - None of the ire was directed at Spurs but rather Dier's representatives and father -->
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...ric-Diers-departure-to-Tottenham-Hotspur.html
Sevilla with Ramos - They were upset of an apparent illegal approach. The thing with manager "transfers" is that they cannot effectively stop a manager from leaving, but instead have to relent. They were unhappy we tapped up Ramos, so much like Southampton are annoyed at the fact they lost a manager to us. In the end it was settled amicably with them saying they were happy with the agreement.
Seville with Fazio - We paid the buy out clause, they felt that the buy-out clause was only for domestic transfers only. That was the problem and I think it was mostly directed at Fazio for appearing with us before they had received the money. In order for a transfer to go through and be official, both clubs have to submit the registration, so I wonder just how genuine this is.
We should have course say "screw them" and erect an "us and them" bunker attitude but would that be useful? If we really want to improve, we need to buy players. And after the Bale money debacle, players from Premier clubs offer a lower risk element. However, if our reputation as untrustworthy transfer partners precedes us, then we should not be surprised to find doors closing shut in our faces...
Money talks and if they don't want to do business, screw them is a perfect response. Southampton don't want to do business with us because they see us as direct rivals. WBA because Peace wanted to have his drama and make everything public. We have bought from other english clubs this transfer window and previous windows without so much of a whimper of discomfort but that doesn't fit the narrative. Almost every top 10 club in this league will have an example of someone being tinkled off that they have bought a player.
For all it's worth, I believe that Levy left it late, thinking he held all the cards in the poker game and believing he could bully Peace to accept the move on our terms. But he failed to read both the circumstances as well as his opponent, who just pulled out the royal flush at the very end to win the game. As for Levy walking away, how can you square that circle when we were throwing desperate offer after offer past the eleventh hour? To me, it just confirms that Levy got caught with his pants down!
Well, I don't think there is anything that anyone can say to persuade you otherwise. You've obviously made up your mind. Forget that transfers in general take a long time, forget that our first bid went in on 18 August. That first bid does not signify the first time that you have made contact or negotiating. So why let facts get in the way. We have managed to sign a number of players this window before the deadline, but Levy decided that for Berahino he wanted a bit of excitement. You know, he just really wants to screw things up for bricks and giggles.
As for Levy walking away. Ultimately he did. He wanted to get a deal done because he wanted the player. Surely that's what we want him to do? If he was desperate he could have offered £50m but he didn't. He bid to his maximum and then walked away.
I do accept that in any transfer you win some and lose some but no amount of sweeteners can disguise the fact that the Berahino affair was a total shambles from start to finish. If posters like Milo think that is OTT, I have no problem; I equally think that some of the posts in this thread belie a groupie mentality, if not extremely condescending
The Berahino transfer saga was a complete shambles, but to lay the blame at Levy's door is unfair. It was a shambles because it was enacted in public for which there was no Spurs involvement. What is OTT is to assume that just because there are a group of people that just so happen to agree on a viewpoint that is contrary to your own that there is a "groupie mentality" and that they are condescending. Please point it out specifically, as for me I will just assume that I have been condescending which is not my intention.
I just hope that Levy learns a lesson from this farce especially that, in business, the last thing you want is to antagonise the people who you want to deal with. I am not holding my breath, though...
I don't think you should hold your breath and I don't think Levy has anything fundamental to particularly learn. His way of working has been successful, and he's not the problem. He's working within his means and if that tinkles people other clubs off, then there's not a lot you can do. It may stop being able to do further business with those clubs, but it also may not. Until we see evidence of this, I don't think it is a problem. Yes, there are going to be things that he could have done better. No one is perfect and I don't see the consistency that you do in clubs having a problem in dealing with us.
