The 2010 Summer transfer thread

[Pesci]

Aurelio was hardly there for one season

I'll take four years of good service from a free transfer any day.

[Dan]

Don't watch much Liverpool, but only really noticed Aurelio the season before he left, so presumed he was there 1/2 seasons.

[Blue Rosler]

And most people would say that Finnan was a perfectly average defender before he went to Liverpool. Were you raving about his signing?

He got the job done, and Luke Young is a perfect stop-cap until you find a long-term replacement.

[stokeriño]

1345 BST: Chelsea have confirmed that boss Carlo Ancelotti will be handed more transfer funds if the Italian coach asks for them. Chief executive Ron Gourlay has also insisted striker Didier Drogba definitely not be leaving the club .(AP)

Probable translation: Chelsea have no plans for any other transfers this summer.

[Pesci]

Plus it looks like he'll only be back-up for the RB and LB spots at most. I'll happily take that. It's not like having Degen there and Carragher filling in from time to time was any better.

[Hobo]

At least Finnan was still in his twenties though.

[Blue Rosler]

Also, for Fulham, Hodgson signed Bobby Zamora and Mark Schwarzer. Both players who fans probably rolled their eyes at, but turned out to be extremely important players. And Bobby Zamora hardly had a top-notch reputation before this current season.

The list goes on for Fulham really: Pantsil, Hangeland for £2mill, Gera...

[therockbox]

There's a difference. When Finnan signed he was 27 and had just had an excellent season with Fulham (he was poor in his first with us, but when Rafa arrived he started to pick up form again). Luke Young is 31, has just had a pretty poor/non-existant season (for whatever reason) with Aston Villa, and now means that, as a squad, we have four right backs and no left backs.

31 is getting on a bit for a Premier League level full back. If he was still 25/26 with a career ahead of him I wouldn't mind, but at 31 he's got a couple of seasons left in him (tops), and his arrival, apparently as a right back given his annoyance at being played on the left by O'Neill, is only going to hamper the development of a player like Martin Kelly, who has a decade ahead of him and is highly rated by both Liverpool and England.

It's a poorly judged bit of business by a club who are already in financial trouble, and takes money out of a threadbare transfer budget when there are other areas that need serious attention.

[Blue Rosler]

It'd be easy to argue that Luke Young is the best player for the develop of Martin Kelly too.

Would signing a world-class player to play instead of Kelly be good for him? Hodgson might plan on Kelly playing, but if he's injured, or goes into a bad run of form then there's a proven (albeit not proven to be great) Premiership player who can stand in. Hodgson at Fulham seemed to get the best out of players, so I'm sure he'd be able to get the best out of Luke Young whilst also giving Kelly a chance at the first team.

[therockbox]

In what sense? Young is going to be Johnson's back up, which means Kelly is going to get even less playing time. I'd much rather have Kelly as second choice behind Johnson given his obvious potential.

In our squad, right back, central defence and attacking midfielder/second striker are all positions that were relatively well covered. We have massive gaps at left back, central midfield and up front. This summer we've sold our only left back, will probably sell a central midfielder, and signed a right back, a centre back and two attacking midfielder/second strikers.

[ONO]

He's jetted off to Portugal with the rest of the Villa squad today though. Looks like he is in two minds about going.

[Guest Jacob]

Spurs bid rejected for Parker. Any idea how much it was for? Was hoping Villa would sign him but it looks like we may be priced out.

I am rather annoyed that after all this hype and pomp about Lerner, it turns out he may be another Doug Ellis.

[ONO]

Villa will not be getting Parker, regardless of what Porno Dwarf rambles on about.

And what are you on about "another Doug Ellis"? Talk sense. He is rebuilding the North Stand. Fixed bits and pieces round the stadium. Look at the training facilities Villa now have. He has also spent £120m since he came here. MON has people wasting away on the bench on high wages, some in excess of £40k a week.

Lerner is a businessman. MON has bought players, doubled their pay packet and then ditched them. Lerner has every right to want these players off the books before MON goes on another spree.

Edited July 28, 2010 by ONO

[Pesci]

Spurs bid rejected for Parker. Any idea how much it was for? Was hoping Villa would sign him but it looks like we may be priced out.

I'm not sure, but I know West Ham have valued him at 15M. Which is fair enough because he's probably their most important player and they're right to want a decent return on him. But he's nowhere near that and if Villa pay it, it just shows how warped our obsession with English players can be. It's not like you're gonna fail the homegrown rules any time soon.

Edited July 28, 2010 by Pesci

[Summers]

I don't want Parker. I'd take him for 6m, just because. Nothing more. Otherwise, let Spurs have him and we'll take Huddlestone for half what they pay.

[ONO]

Porno Dwarf was yapping on about us paying close to £20m for Parker. Snide little creep. He's left City and he is still obsessed with Villa.

Edited July 28, 2010 by ONO

[Crybaby Bunting]

It'd be great if Scott Parker didn't turn up to training tomorrow because West Ham rejected a bid that didn't actually exist

[nabeel]

I wish Arsenal would sign Scott Parker

[Hobo]

Porno Dwarf was yapping on about us paying close to £20m for Parker. Snide little creep. He's left City and he is still obsessed with Villa.

Porno Dwarf?

[ONO]

David Sullivan.