06 Jun 2017 16:33:19
Hi Ed's,

Any news on the VVD transfer? Do the latest developments mean we may miss out?

{Ed001's Note - there is no development, we still have to agree terms with Saints.}

1.) 06 Jun 2017
06 Jun 2017 16:43:50
It will be fine. Saints reported spurs over toby what ever his name is. It's probably just postern and sour grapes. Just a matter of time I think. Ynwa.

2.) 06 Jun 2017
06 Jun 2017 16:43:58
It's done according to Graeme Kelly who is the only person to know about our interest since March, £44 mil plus 8mil add ons.

3.) 06 Jun 2017
06 Jun 2017 16:59:13
That Kelly bloke reckons it's already sorted. He also said ( yesterday ) that there will be a statement of some sort ( today ) wouldn't disclose as he said it would annoy the fans?

Dunno how reliable he is. I just go with the Ed's and Macca.

4.) 06 Jun 2017
06 Jun 2017 16:52:28
On yahoo it says this
Southampton have asked the Premier League to investigate an alleged illegal approach from Liverpool for Virgil van Dijk, according to reports.

Southampton are angered by the Reds allegedly making contact with Van Dijk without permission and have made it clear to the Premier League that they have received no official approach for the player.

READ MORE: Premier League 2017/ 18 – Every team, every signing for next season

Van Dijk is expected to leave the south coast this summer but Southampton are unwilling to let the Dutchman leave. It has been widely reported the Dutchman prefers a move to Anfield, but he’s also being chased by Chelsea and Manchester City.

Liverpool are willing to pay a world-record sum for a defender – expected to be around £60m – to break Southampton’s resistance while they are also prepared to match City’s offer of a contract worth around £200,000 a week.

Van Dijk would become Liverpool’s record signing and highest-paid player should the deal go ahead.
He has five years to run on his contract, meaning Southampton are in a strong position regarding his future.

5.) 06 Jun 2017
06 Jun 2017 17:36:52
Thing is Alderwield wasn't a Saint player.

6.) 06 Jun 2017
06 Jun 2017 17:41:33
Its a possibility of a fine and point deduction. Wont affect the deal for VVD as long as we agree figure with Saints. That about right ed?

{Ed001's Note - it really depends on what the crime is that we are being accused of. Until we know for sure what Saints' complaint actually is, no one can possibly know what the punishment could be.}

7.) 06 Jun 2017
06 Jun 2017 18:03:35
I think its the fact we didn't get permission from them. Great stuff . I guess that's that then. Transfer ban likely. No vvd salah etc. Jesus christ Liverpook why owe why! Aaaarrrrgggghhhjh.

8.) 06 Jun 2017
06 Jun 2017 18:24:58
Am I not right in saying Southampton have a history of doing this to clubs. They did it with Clyne, and alderweireld. As well as that every paper has printed both Pep and Conte have spoken to VVD, so I think it's all a load of bs just to get more money, some even saying trying to force VVD to City because they are paying more.
I trust Macca when he says it's done as well as others who seem to have decent knowledge. Big up all the eds btw.

9.) 07 Jun 2017
07 Jun 2017 02:48:27
How could Saints have done it with Aldeweireld if he was never actually owned by Southampton? He was only loaned there.

{Ed001's Note - they had agreed a deal to sign him, terms were agreed with the player, then Spurs stepped in and he changed his mind.}

10.) 07 Jun 2017
07 Jun 2017 15:39:38
My understanding is that some news recently have made Southampton reconsider whether we have behaved appropriately. And they has asked for an investigation based on this. This does not mean we have misbehaved or that we haven't.