Media reports from Scotland are suggesting that Saints are demanding too much money for Fraser Forster and pricing Celtic out of a deal.

Celtic have made clear their desire to re-sign Fraser Forster this summer after an outstanding season on loan in his second spell at the club, but it is reported that Saints want £10 million for the keeper and that is an issue given that Celtic also cannot match the £70 k a week that the big goalkeeper is on at St Mary's.

Forster who is 32 is at his peak as a goalkeeper in terms of age, but is £10 million too much ?

I would say that we are entering a period where both clubs are jostling to take their positions and that the price will be somewhere in between.

Saints are quoting £10 million as they would hope that if they do pursue Olivier Ntcham, then the price for Forster would take up a big chunk of any fee that would cost, this in turn would free up Celtic to start to put together a deal that Forster would accept, with two years on his Saints contract left, Forster has a big decision to make financially.

This means getting out the calculator and seeing if he can afford to throw away a significant amount of money, at Saints he will not only be on that big salary, but a big annual loyalty bonus payable on July 1st every year.

I would not say that Forster is being greedy, after all he was offered the contract and signed it, but would any of us choose to take a likely 50% pay cut lightly,

In simple terms with two years left Forster is unlikely to get more than £35k a week anywhere, so x that by 104 weeks and he will be giving away £3.6 million in salary if he sticks to his Saints contract.

The reality is that Saints will probably have to offer him an incentive to take the drop in salary, perhaps £1 million which would normally be factored in to the transfer fee, and for Forster himself he is getting a longer term deal thus more security.

There is going to be a lot of give and take needed on both sides and the real key is going to be whether Saints are truly interested in Ntcham, he is going to be central to the move either as part of a double deal or if he goes elsewhere the money received will help pay for Forster.

So should Saints drop their price ? the answer is not at the moment, it is a bargaining tool, but I suspect that there is a lot of negotiation to go yet, for Saints it is about getting that £70k a week off the books so they can use it elsewhere, from this perspective they can afford to drop a little in price.

Photo: Action Images

Peterx added 10:24 - Jun 8 Would be good to see another Prem team come in to sharpen Celtic's resolve. I think Forster could be quite an attractive option for one of the other Prem teams as a starter or say for Chelsea replacing Caballero (38 now) as No 2 with Arizabellaga (sp) not looking to be the finished article. Another option could be to sell Gunn and let Forster vie for the No 1 birth with McCarthy now that Forster has his confidence back. To me, bottom line is we have 3 keepers of very similar ability, with McCarthy having a small edge and getting my emotional vote for that great save against Swansea that pretty much kept us in the Prem.

1

highfield49 added 11:00 - Jun 8 Seeing as a lot of people are going to be losing their jobs in the coming weeks, as a direct result of the economic downturn, I suspect Forster won't be getting too much sympathy if he has to scrape by on £35k a week. I understand the thing about signed contracts and losing money Nick, however, wouldn't you actually want to play football before your career ended?
1

Centurion added 11:22 - Jun 8 £5 million would be a fair price IMO.
-1

d_ember added 11:53 - Jun 8 It was OK for us to pay Celtic 10m for him but now they want him on the cheap, and for us to soften the blow of his wage drop. I read all the pieces about a third choice keeper etc and the fact they can not meet his wages. If we wanted to sign Coutinho how do you think telling Barcelona that he is a not a first choice pick, and can you pick up two thirds of his salary for a couple of years which is no doubt around the 200k mark would wash? We have already funded Forster to the tunes of 35k a week at Celtic, they have won the league giving them entry into the CL next year, a couple of domestic trophies, one of which was attributed to Forster playing out of his skin, and hey have charged us top dollar for all the players they have bought from us. We also have to listen to how they are such a big club and would be a title contender in the Premiership from some of their deluded supporters. 10m and 70k a week is affordable for mid size club they can certainly afford it.

4

TimSaint added 12:33 - Jun 8 Remember those haydays when he was touted (albeit by the club) as the next big transfer fee to be leaving St Marys - record clean sheets, becoming an England International etc prompted someone in their wisdom to offer him a massive pay increase on a long contract, just like they did with VvD. We have been paying for this error in judgement virtually ever since. FF seems to be much more at home at Celtic, as his performances have shown - at League, CL and EL levels. There are less pressures there and I believe he is personally happier there. So they should take him and continue to use him where he is best suited. If they are unwilling to pay £10m, then do that player swap that was mentioned with their midfielder - or perhaps they have another CB we could have as well / instead - as a swap for either FF, or Elyounoussi, or both ? He seems to be

1

legod7 added 13:08 - Jun 8 Selling Gunn and bringing back Forster is not a viable option. We already have young Harry Lewis as our 3rd choice keeper.
1

NewburySaint added 13:20 - Jun 8 If they want him that much stick with our asking price, then we’ll see how much they really want him. I personally would be over the moon if we got 8 mill for him and his wages off our payroll. For Forster you would think he would want to move on even if he is prepared to sit on his 70k contract for another 2 years when, if we don’t loan him out again if we haven’t sold him, he could find himself without a club without having played for 2 years-a longer term contract now Somewhere else on even half his current salary is surely a better proposition than the lottery of being a free agent in 2 years.

0

underweststand added 15:05 - Jun 8 ....considering he's been costing us £3.6 million a year and that would all be money down the Solent if he doesn't move somewhere else, we need to be pragmatic about this. If an offer comes in from another (Prem.) club... then £10 million is still a giveaway , even if it's over the odds for a club like Celtic. Although FF did have a good season and a half, I think Celtic did well to demand the fee they did when we signed him in the first place. IF ..he wants to stay at his beloved Celtic then he needs to seriously consider if that would be preferable to taking a big salary cut. We need to get a half decent fee for him, and hope we don't have to play against him - if he does sign for another Prem. side. IF..it's down to a player-exchange for Ntcham, then both sides need to get serious about the relative player values, and not fluff around quoting unrealistic figures. .

1

Noah289 added 20:12 - Nov 26 Transitioning to less energy-intensive consensus mechanisms, such as Proof of Stake (PoS), can drastically reduce the energy consumption of cryptocurrency networks. Ethereum, for example, has transitioned to PoS with its Ethereum 2.0 upgrade. https://www.megadice.com/en
0

Blogs 31 bloggers

Bury Polls