It’s the measure of Virgil van Dijk that we’re even having the debate about whether he’s the best central defender we’ve seen in decades. If he’s not, he’s close. That said, measured against the other two players Southampton have secured from Celtic in recent seasons, his ability to influence a game is not of the standard of Victor Wanyama.
It’s no surprise that Southampton have been under pressure to sell Wanyama, or that they have apparently gambled on holding him, better options than Tottenham are likely to lie ahead for Victor. Virgil has perhaps found his level.
I’m off to read all those articles about how good Celtic are at developing >£10m footballers and why Southampton are not as clever as Celtic, just like the ones criticising Celtic for not being as clever as Dundee United.
More on Virgil later in the week, best of luck to him on England.
128 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
Celtic will have a list of targets.
Ronnys part (if he has any say) is done.
Pushing deals over the line is not his job.
I woulda thought everyone knew that.
BSR
The same poster who told us about the Lenny spat with the great moustachioed one, said that Lenny wanted to keep him, and he wanted to stay, I believe him :-)
HH
……………………
T29
Another myth, we give players a platform to riches, why wouldn’t they want to come.
And I have a firm grip on reality btw.
HH
Cultsbhoy @2:04 is that it? That explains nothing other than PL is extremely well paid. What I want to know is why? in laymans terms. I suspect you don’t really know unless you are privy to his contract details,if so spit them out. How is his bonus calculated? How can he manipulate the situation to do this ? Does the board see this happening and do nothing? The answer may well be yes but please explain. H H Hebcelt
PhilM saying Big Michael about to call in the £5M loan???
Jails filling up with sevconians??
Is it the end for sevco???
What does it all mean??
THE EXILED TIM
We can’t even match the riches on offer from Bournemouth.
We dropped our season book price and attendances didn’t increase. Get with the times.
HT
Absolutely.
However, the Internets prefers it’s own agenda.
Joe Ledley may or may not have stayed but I’m pretty sure the salary at Crystal Palace and not Peter Lawell was the clincher, IMHO.
Sammi would have taken another contract for sure, but there just wasn’t one there, shame we couldn’t make room for an ex whipping bhoy, turned cult.
Wonder what’s holding things up with big bad Jozo?
The thought of a back 3 , efe , boyata, Mulgrew, … Is currently causing severe distress in the Van Persie household.
Sorry, that’s it up now.
GLIBBY MCSHAMELESS on 1ST SEPTEMBER 2015 5:26 PM
PhilM saying Big Michael about to call in the £5M loan???
Jails filling up with sevconians??
Is it the end for sevco???
What does it all mean??
Well………….it could mean vanilla with strawberry jelly………..
or
Chocolate with raspberry jelly…..
or
honeycomb crunch with lime jelly……..
Please tell me we’ll be signing a striker!!
Hayley Mc Queen on transfer deadline programme .A good reason to watch it just in case we sign someone of course.
AULD BERTIE on 1ST SEPTEMBER 2015 4:15 PM
Can’t be too long before the pessimistic horde get ripped into Virgil’s statement. ‘Wouldn’t surprise me if Lawwell drafted that statement…’ ‘Virgil was paid £20 grand to say this c**p’. ‘Lawwell ‘s bonus kicks in now, it was dependent on Virgil who didn’t want to leave.’ Of course the Godfather of Doom and Gloom, who emigrated from UK as not enough dark nights and rain, ‘ this Croatian CH cheap option, crowds will be under 25,000 next year, if Celtic don’t win treble and reach semi final of EL. ‘
– See more at: http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/the-measure-of-virgil-van-dijk/#sthash.EvLLcKsj.dpuf
Regardless of the HappyClaptrap you have written above, I personally have got no desire to read Virgils statement. Virgil Van Dijk came to Celtic to market himself to potential suitors in the EPL. You & others like ye can scream to you’re blue in the face that it was to play for the famous Glasgow Celtic but it wasn’t, that’s the reality. Unfortunately that is how Peter the Pied Piper sells Celtic to these Mercenary type players by promising them an indirect route to the Premier League. So when players like Virgil come to Celtic then leave after a lousy 2 years it tells me all I need to know – that they never had any desire to play for Celtic in the first place. When people like Virgil, Guidetti & Wanyama make their little love hearts to the fan’s all I can think is “shove up your Jaxy, I’ve seen it all before”. If you wanna kid yourself that’s fine but don’t insult others because they have the mentality to out these frauds for what they are.
If you wanna prove to me that you got Celtic & its fans at heart then you do so by signing a new contract, not by adding Southampton players on Twatter.
Do you know what it means to be Patronized?
Hail Hail
DJ67 – Couldn’t agree more, but I don’t have a problem with the strategy. If we can turn a $2.9m investment into $12m in two years then the club should be congratulated. I don;t like selling our best players but it’s the reality of the situation we are in. I have no interest whatsoever in what Virgil had to say on his way out. I wish him all the best in the EPL. He is going to miss out on European football but I’m sure he knows that already.
Blantyre Kev
Your earlier summation of the goings on at Sevco re Charlie Green and Craigie Whyte are along the right lines.
However, there is such a myriad of points to consider here that I suspect that there will be a long long way to go yet before we reach anywhere near a full conclusion.
The offences could be common law offences such as theft or fraud and then there are offences under any number of statutes including The Companies Acts, The Insolvency Act, The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and the Financial Services Act 2012 (misleading statements and impressions in relation to investments and financial products). The Criminal Justice Act, … and that is all before we start to consider questions of common actions such as conspiracy etc.
However, for the moment lets stop and consider the situation about the ownership of the assets bought by Green through Sevco Scotland Ltd or Sevco 5088 Ltd.
If there has been a fraudulent transaction between two parties ( and in this case one of thoe parties must be the company who did the buying of assets or the selling of shares under a prospectus ) then any such transaction is likely to be voidable in law.
That then means that the transaction can be reversed OR the party who has suffered a loss can claim damages.
So if we stick to the purchase of Rangers assets for the moment, if the liquidators think that this was in some way fraudulent and the creditors of Rangers PLC have been short changed in some way then they may well lodge a claim against — well pick any Sevco from two!
However, a complication arises in terms of some property because Sevco obtained a recorded title to certain assets and have since borrowed against those assets by taking a loand from Mike Ashley’s Sports Direct who in turn gained a recorded security over those assets.
Now Ashley can rely on that security and could call up his loan having demanded repayment of the sums due. As Phil McG has alluded no doubt that is being considered.
However, if someone – anyone – were to turn up and pay that loan then that might end Ashley’s leverage depending upon what his long term plans are. I would guess he wants a playing Rangers and shirt sales.
However, he has no security over Ibrox and so the liquidator could seek to reverse any transaction that involved Ibrox and if successful he/she could then seek to resell that asset to any interested party.
Then again, the if the transaction to Green were voided, then the liquidator could only sell Ibrox subject to validity of the title of Rangers PLC.
That title, it is alleged, was always subject to a floating charge, which rumour has it, was taken by ticketus with an error as to its enforceability. However, Ticketus would undoubtedly have a claim as they lent £25M plus interest with a presumed security over the stadium and all other assets.
Then again it is said that the floating charge was in actual fact retained by Craig Whyte and merely “pledged” to ticketus along with personal and corporate guarantees from Whyte.
In tye intervening period, Ticketus have called in Whyte’s guarantee and have a decree against him and so could sequestrate him at any time.
However, again, it may just be the case that Whyte “sold” his rights in the floating charge to Worthington PLC in which he owns shares, and this company have made a claim against the liquidator saying that they always held a floating charge over the assets of Rangers and that they should have been preferred creditors.
My guess is that Ticketus ( Octopus ) have tied up Whyte personally and are effectively running the Worthington show which makes Worthington a very well funded litigant and claimant.
When a well funded litigant pitches up and defence team are going to immediately calculate the “litigation risk ” and start to calculate what it is going to cost their client just to defend any case andthen they will look at the case and see what they think the likely outcome will be. Having done that they will then calculate a number which is worth offering the well funded litigant to go away.
The Liquidators are not going to part with money in this way unless they are forced to or unless they can recoup some of it in the event of the whole thing being dodgy.
So, what does all this mean?
It could mean, and I stress could, that the assets of Sevco are the subject of claim which may mean Sevco is a busted flush. What is certain is that any share flotation in the near future is a virtual non starter as the position is so unclear.
Ashley will do what he must to protect himself.
All the civil cases must play second fiddle to the prosecutions which take precedence and so none of this is going to be unravelled anytime soon.
If Green fraudulently acquired the assets and then issued a prospectus that he knew to be untrue etc then he is in real soapy bubble.
As for the SFA and the SPFL – well it might just be the case that they received an application from a company seeking membership which had no rights in either any stadium etc from which to play or in any other so called assets bought from the Administrator.
If the idea of the “club” being separate from the company is to prevail, then it would appear that no one has actually bought any “club” at all and that someone has merely been dealing in company assets and rights without full title for the past few years.
In any event, if it turns out that persons have made untruthful statements to the governing football bodies on behalf of company or indeed club then I would expetct the SFA to simply negate the entire footballing position.
To say that this is a potential mess of unparallelled proportions is the understatement of the century.
Do you remember all those posts which ended “Never interrupt your enemy ………….”?
It has taken me 15 mins to get in here tonight on I phone.
I do not want to be checked out to betting firms.
I also do not want to read mindless Twitter like posts on the EPL.
I have been patient so far but can someone show me how to cut through all this peripheral sound.