Pellegrino Speaks Out About Virgil Van Dijk Thursday, 7th Sep 2017 14:23 Mauricio Pellegrino has spoken to the press ahead of the game against Watford at St Mary's on Saturday about Virgil Van Dijk.
Pellegrino stated that the fact that the club had kept Van Dijk showed the ambition of the club and its management and owners and that it did not need to sell any player, indeed it wished to keep all of it's squad at present.
The manager also confirmed that Virgil Van Dijk is back training with the first team although he has spoken of how it is now depending on the player when he returns to first action.
By this he meant that the player himself knew his fitness levels and when he would be ready for a return to action.
The manager also stated that although the player was training at the same fitness levels as the first team squad, that he would need a game under his belt before he was ready for premier league action, presumably in the U23's.
When pushed about whether meetings between himself and Van Dijk had taken place, Pellegrino confirmed that they had and that the situation was now in his own words "normal" however he would not elaborate on this other than to say that whatever had been said was a private matter between manager and player.
This would seem to indicate that contary to tabloid press speculation Van Dijk will not be in contention for the Watford game, but once he has got a U23 game under his belt then he could be available, this ties in with the reports coming from sources close to the club who have suggested that the Crystal Palace game is earmarked for the players return to the first team matchday squad if not a place in the starting line up.
Pellegrino seemed to be relaxed on the matter giving confidence that relations between manager and player are not strained and that although Van Dijk will perhaps not be happy to still be at Saints that perhaps he will see sense in the coming months and realise that there is nothing to be gained from sitting on the sidelines.
Already the usual suspects in the media are stating that Liverpool will return in January and attempt to sign the player again, hopefully it will be a lot more convivial than this summer, Saints will need to look to get the best out of a bad situation, if that is getting three good months out of Van Dijk then trousering a big transfer fee then that is better than most clubs will have in this period.
Saints now have to get their plans in place and agree with Van Dijk the way forward, if the compromise is sell him in January then we need to be identifying his replacement in the coming weeks, so that the transition is swift and seamless.
Photo: Action Images
Please report offensive, libellous or inappropriate posts by using the links provided.
1teeminants added 14:37 - Sep 7
We need to get a full season out of him and sell him in the summer if he wants to go. VVD being out for Wembley final cost us dearly. We would have won that trophy had he played that's how good he is. | ![](/images/avatars/2020.gif) | |
aceofthebase added 14:49 - Sep 7
A January transfer is ridiculous, nothing will have been gained, it will have made a nonsense of hanging onto him this summer. We need at least two more years from VVD | ![](/images/avatars/0.gif) | |
BaselSaint added 15:26 - Sep 7
Well, we stood our ground and I guess slowly players and agents are learning that Saints are not the pushover we were, nevertheless it seemed like a lot of arse-ache just for him to go in January. | ![](/images/avatars/10243.gif) | |
SaintBrock added 17:13 - Sep 7
We were not the only ones BaselSaint remember, Liverpool (Coutinho), Arsenal (Sanchez), Chelsea (Hazard) and Spurs (Deli Ali) all stood their ground. We may have won the first skirmish but the war has only just begun. If he's off in January then there is absolutely no point at all in bringing him back into first team action. | ![](/images/avatars/0.gif) | |
Donola added 17:37 - Sep 7
As said above ... He will not be going in January!! If Lazy journalism is already happening on this site, just days after we said he was Definitley 'Not for Sale' and has a 5 year contract ... Then God help us!! The Liverpundits and the press are going to be a nightmare. Please, please listen to what you are told by the club.... And Write articles on that evidence. The club has not said he is available in January ... FACT .. Nothing else can be said. Stop it!! | ![](/images/avatars/0.gif) | |
Saintsfc added 08:27 - Sep 8
'shown great ambition'.. so come September 2018 VVD will be wearing a saints shirt? I'd love to see it and hate to say it but we are not an ambitious club.. not since markus/cortese anyway | ![](/images/avatars/0.gif) | |
luffy22 added 10:44 - Sep 8
Apparently not one single club made any approach for him, after all that fuss he created his ego must be very bruised. It would be like dumping your misses to get a better one to find she's the only one who wanted you, and now your left alone and having to crawl back on her terms, as your not as handsome as you thought you were. Almost feel sorry for him | ![](/images/avatars/0.gif) | |
Saintsfc added 10:58 - Sep 8
Luffy because Southampton reported Liverpool early. They asked him to kick off in hope saints would put him on the market, then Liverpool would have made an offer. As for other clubs, it's just the way modern transfers are conducted. Eg the reps of arsenal will contact vvd reps and enquire, the word allllll summer was no sale. Respectful clubs respect that. Liverpool on the other hand.. We all know what they attempt to do and are also the first ones to kick off when other clubs play the same game for their players lol | ![](/images/avatars/0.gif) | |
saintpp added 12:08 - Sep 8
Better to start him at an away game as it will keep him away from any st marys morons who think booing him helps. | ![](/images/avatars/0.gif) | |
pintsizedsaint added 14:17 - Sep 8
Saintsfc post above hits the nail on the head. I know this will grate Liverpool fans, but the tactics they employ are so because, whilst they are a big club, they are by no means the biggest club – both in EPL and abroad. What I mean by that is that there are other clubs (notably the likes of Man City, Utd and Chelsea and then Barca, PSG and Real Madrid) that offer greater firepower in terms of transfer budget, salary spend, and (let’s face it) opportunity to win silverware. As a result, Liverpool (just like Saints) have to adapt to help them compete bearing in mind their current status. I’m not comparing Saints with Liverpool (because we are not as big as Liverpool by any means) but rather looking at what strategies the clubs take to compete in a dog-eat-dog environment. That is why Liverpool have been more ‘aggressive’ in pursuing targets and is perhaps best illustrated in their attempts to get VVD and say Chelsea or Man City’s attempts to secure Bertrand or Cedric. Liverpool (via FSG) do not operate like Man City for example, because they don’t have the same licence to spend mega bucks willy nilly. In addition, due to a number of years of playing second fiddle to the top teams, it makes it harder for them to attract the truly ‘elite’ talent. As a result, Liverpool look at ‘lesser’ clubs like Southampton – as they offer the 2nd tier potential (i.e. those players who have done well in the EPL but reside in a team in the lower strata). Here they can compete better than they can compete to – say – prise away a top/elite player from a club on a similar (or better) stature than Liverpool. In addition, it means they do better to avoid trying to compete with the likes of City/Utd in getting players – knowing it is more than likely they will not go to Liverpool in the face of that interest from a ‘bigger’ club. Southampton offered (I use the past tense purposefully) Liverpool the ideal market opportunity: SFC have expertise in identifying and developing talent that quickly becomes top-class potential, who are often (but not always) seen by the bigger clubs as maybe 2nd or 3rd choice transfer options. This allows Liverpool to invest at a lower financial level but get the kind of player they need to compete with the big boys and their elite players. It has worked to a degree: whilst Mane is their biggest coup, Lallana and (to a lesser extent) Clyne have added value. Yet Lovern and Lambert have not done so well. Yet this has not deterred Liverpool from continuously browsing through the SFC catalogue. The bigger clubs don’t operate in this way: they have so much money and clout that they identify elite talent alongside picking up the occasional ‘gem’ that they think may do well but isn’t at the elite bracket yet. On the ‘occasional gem’ side, they make enquiries and (often enough) will get what they want by paying huge sums. If they don’t they quickly move on to the next target – because they have enough money and talent. This isn’t the case with Liverpool – they can’t get the elite so easily and they have to rely on carefully identifying the ‘gem’ bracket to support them. And so along comes VVD. Liverpool clearly see him as huge player that fits the bill. Yet, in this case, it is clear that so have the bigger clubs (Man City and Chelsea) and probably see him as the ‘gem’ as he is not proven at elite level (yet). Liverpool are worried – knowing that City and Chelsea will easily outpower them in any bid. So they sneak around meeting with the player. Whilst it is obvious all clubs meet with Players’ reps before making a bid (it happens) Liverpool did a lot more – because they needed to. They needed to get VVD to get his head and ar*e into Liverpool so that the bigger clubs would shrug their shoulders and move onto their next choices. Hence the public proclamations from Liverpool earlier in the summer. They were brash – but it was part of a strategy rather than pure foolishness. They wanted to avoid a bidding war. Trouble is, SFC have had enough of being Liverpool’s catalogue. This is clear from the rush of long-term contracts (although this wouldn’t be just aimed at Liverpool but at all clubs). I think Liverpool just forgot (or chose to ignore) that SFC may actually want to keep their star player. We then know what happened. As predicted, City and Chelsea moved on (probably because they enquired and SFC said no – leading them to move on because they know they can buy just as good somewhere else). Compare the VVD affair to Chelsea’s enquiries for Bertrand/Soares. They enquiried, SFC said no. They moved on. No silly b*ggers. They could have clearly used their weight to push the issue but that’s not in their strategy. These guys can easily move on to find alternatives (and probably pay more). Liverpool can’t do that – so they resign themselves to trying to force VVD into moving. They haven’t identified a VVD alternative: not because there isn’t any, but because there isn’t any that they can afford and whom will be attracted to Liverpool (because they are likely attracted or already playing for one of the bigger clubs). It will be interesting to see what Liverpool do now. Their transfer dealings indicate they are still doing well in identifying 2nd tier talent (albeit without elite or EPL experience). But now SFC have shut up shop, where will they get their EPL proven bargains from? | ![](/images/avatars/0.gif) | |
You need to login in order to post your comments |
Blogs 32 bloggersKnees-up Mother Brown #19 by wessex_exile February, and the U’s enter the most pivotal month of the season. Six games in just four weeks, with four of them against sides also in the bottom six. By March we should be either well clear of danger, or even deeper in the sh*t. With Danny Cowley’s U’s still unbeaten, and looking stronger game on game, I’m sure it’ll be the former, but first we have to do our bit to consign Steve ‘Sour Grapes’ Cotterill’s FGR back to non-league. After our shambolic 5-0 defeat at New Lawn, nothing would give me greater pleasure, even if it meant losing one of my closest awaydays in the process. What’s the excuse going to be today Steve – shocking pitch, faking head injuries, Mexican banditry or some other bit of sour-grapery bullsh*t? Derby County Polls |