Saints attempts to sign Wesley Hoedt from Lazio are being held up, not because of anything that Saints can do, but because Lazio have an issue with the players agent.

Saints signing of Hoedt is a deal that all three parties seem happy with, Hoedt wants to come and Lazio are quite happy to sell him, however the Italian club have an issue concerning Hoedt's agency and another player on their rosta Stefan De Vrij.

Media reports in Italy are suggesting that no deal will be done though until Lazio and De Vrij's agent come to an agreement.

De Vrij like Hoedt is represented by SEG and Lazio want clarification about Van Drij and could be using holding up the Hoedt deal as leaverage.

De Vrij's current deal ends next summer and as of yet he has not signed a new contract and Lazio want clarification from SEG about the players intentions, the players is allegedly demanding a 20 million euros release clause in any new deal and Lazio are reticent to put in a figure that low feeling that if they sold him now they could get 30 million euros.

They feel that the agent is trying to push through something that they are not comfortable with and that being the case want to sit down and reach agreement, not being happy with having to either sell him cheaply or see him run down his contract.

The only real leaverage Lazio have is to hold up the Hoedt deal to force SEG to the negotiating table and loosen their demands regarding the release clause.

Once again nothing is simple with a Saints transfer, although in this case this is something that has nothing to do with Saints and is beyond their control.

Photo: Action Images

Anon98 added 12:27 - Aug 18 who is Van Drij when he's at home...?
0

Lazz added 12:35 - Aug 18 Southampton boss Mauricio Pellegrino has been told he has to sell to buy with 13 days left of the transfer window. The Times report that the new Chinese owners have no plans to inject any funds into the club, having purchased an 80% stake for £210m via a bank loan. (How is 80% of Southampton only worth £210m when just one of their players is valued at £70m?!) The Argentine manager has been alerted of this fact and will now surely have to decide whether it could make sense to offload wantaway Virgil van Dijk and reinvest the money before the end of the transfer window. I hope this is just paper talk really hacked me off

-5

SaintNick added 12:37 - Aug 18 I dont know who he is when he is at home but whn he is in Italy he is a centre back for Lazio
2

Anon98 added 12:46 - Aug 18 Pretty sure de Vrij plays for lazio, never heard of Van Drij.... XD
1

mgprobert added 12:48 - Aug 18 I wonder if theres any scouser involvement in this hiccup?
2

helpineedsomebody added 13:01 - Aug 18 the new owners have no money left
1

BoondockSaint added 13:09 - Aug 18 Usual Saints transfer trouble with a player coming in. However, when a player leaves, the deal is done and he is at the other team in a day....
2

StRipper added 13:38 - Aug 18 Who created auto correct. They should be shot... Lazz... Please , don't come on here just pumping out shit that you have read in LFC fan sites and the Express like it carries any weight. Next thing you'll be saying Steven Gerrard claims a deal for Van Dijk is close. I try and avoid such nonsense clearly driven by people who's knowledge of Saints set up extends to thinking about how it could still be possible for the big clubs to buy our players, despite everything our board have said. Nothing to do with any facts, just bull shit

6

redandwhitedee added 13:55 - Aug 18 No rush.. He would only sit on the bench anyway right now pushing Bednarek into U-23's
0

Lazz added 14:09 - Aug 18 StRipper it was in the times and it's on other websites and on now news take a look
-3

TeamCortese added 14:12 - Aug 18 Thumbs down aside, if what the Times is saying is true then why did KL let Gao and co invest in the first place? That simply doesn't make sense to me. We shouldn't have to sell our prized assets if they're suppose to provide extra cash stream. Worrying signs in my opinion. Especially when they said 'business as usual' in their official statement...
1

IanRC added 14:19 - Aug 18 The Times article is very confusing. How does a party that loaned money to the buyer have any interest in whether Saints trade profitably, provided their interest payments are met. Certainly hope I am not missing something here as this would be a very surprising and disappointing development if true.
1

StRipper added 14:50 - Aug 18 Lazz, the point is, our chairman has categorically ruled out selling VVD only 2 days ago. But we are now expected to doubt his word based on one unsubstantiated story in Rupert Murdochs Times that is more being relayed in every other media outlet. Like the media have been right in every other bit of aimless speculation on the back of interviews with Liverpool players. I'm not going to attack fellow Saints fans, but surely you should have learnt something by now that the media is not our friend and so far this season, unless it's in favour of the big clubs, certainly aren't interested about us in the whole. That's what is good about this site, it's for Saints fans. Not for just sharing media nonsense like NewsNow publishes that we can all read

3

highfield49 added 15:32 - Aug 18 Lazz I have no experience in business ownership but I believe player valuations are not included in the value of a club. If that were the case then Pompey could have been bought for £3.50.
1

redandwhitedee added 15:38 - Aug 18 We have to sell players. It is basic economics. We cannot survive on 31,000 people gate receipts, a few shirt sales and TV income alone. Our nearest competition above us (top 7) have vast revenue streams from global support networks.. we dont. Les Reed and team are doing a great job in last few years selling for big profits and 90% of the time replacing with better than we sold for less money. That is part of the expertise in running a football Club and is essentially what Rupert Lowe got wrong. He sold at reasonable prices but always replaced with worse players, so we gradually deteriorated and then sank.

0

SaintBrock added 16:22 - Aug 18 Lazz - the Times report said no such thing! Did you actually read it?
0

helpineedsomebody added 16:26 - Aug 18 rupert lowe spent alot of money getting the right young players playing for us in the youth teams thats the one thing he got right mr dof has been here 8 years where is all these young players he said would be able to play for the 1st team after spending 40million pounds on a new training centre.
0

Saintsfc added 16:29 - Aug 18 @redandwhitedee that is A way of running a football club not the ONLY way, there are in excess of millions of football clubs around the club that have less commercial and ticket income than saintsfc. They don't have a constant revolving door. The owners have even stated they want to reduce that.
0

redandwhitedee added 21:01 - Aug 18 Saintsfc.. if there any clubs with lower revenue than us which are not selling clubs It's maybe because the are not doing as good a job as we are at creating added value and buying/ selling at profits. I.e. No-one wants any of their players. This is how we got where we are since the liebherr family and, in particular, les reed took over.
1

pete_boggs added 23:20 - Aug 18 I see Reed has concocted several more aliases on here. Nobody could be that easily fooled by Reed surely. No wonder nobody bothers to post.
-1

PlasticBertrand added 23:51 - Aug 18 Everton have "vast revenue stream" nope they have a new sugar daddy. Pretty sure the actual revenue is very close to ours. Money come from benefactors, sky/BT, sponsors ...gate receipts are way down the list.
1

Jesus_02 added 23:54 - Aug 18 Weird comments on here tonight. Started off thinking that they where Liverpool Trolls that where too did to know that the Times is basically the Sun with longer words. Then all of a sudden there's someone defending Rupert Lowe?!?! Maybe there have been a few too many after work shandys?
1

Blogs 31 bloggers

York City Polls