Home
Transfer Talk
Transfer Targets

Two Bruma angles that are wrong

TRANSFER TALK


I'm hit first thing this morning with headlines about Bruma, as expected so let's have a look at a couple of headlines.

Caught Offside tell us we have suffered a setback, why? They tell us a deal has been denied which is very misleading as no official deal has been made so there is no official deal to be denied. Denying something that doesn't exist isn't a setback.

The story is that an unofficial deal has been agreed, Galatasaray have not denied that at all, they merely say no secret agreement has been made over a fee. Two clubs talk and talk in rough figures, they ascertain the sort of figure that would be acceptable to both sides, they don't have to agree on an actual fee.


As I wrote in my piece when I broke the news yesterday (Bruma Spurs £12.5m deal or no deal, make your minds up!), no official deal does not mean there is no unofficial agreement.

A deal has to be in writing to be official and the lack of that allows deniability, often to keep supporters happy. It is nieve to think the two clubs haven't spoken and have ballpark figures as both sides have to prepare for the transfer window and need to know what is happening with their squads.

Both have to have contingency plans. Galatasaray would have to know roughly how much someone is prepared to pay for a player they have to sell or lose for free in a year. They have to know what income they might get to know what they can spend. It isn't simply a case of let's put a fee on a player and that is what we will get, not with a year left on a contract anyway. It why all the talk of £35m for Barkley is nonsense.

So much happens behind the scenes that the public don't get to see and don't get to hear about.

Galatasaray admits they have a proposal from us, they have admitted therefore that we have spoken with them, we haven't just sent them something out of the blue. They have forwarded that proposal to Bruma, that could be verbally or in a form of writing, letter, email to agent etc.

Another headline invents a deal, they say a deal has been 'completed', for which there is no evidence. Nobody says a deal has been completed so where has this completion come from?

A completed deal is surely one that is officially agreed and arguably signed. A completed deal is not informal talks where the two parties have found some common ground. Anyone can always change a verbal agreement or change their mind totally. Was the Willian deal completed?


Post a Comment