What Does £9.65m Buy You These Days? Not Ashley Young For Starters
January 16th, 2007 by Alan HylandsWorking on the internet as I do I’m well used to overuse of the phrase “bubble” and the scaremongering tactics that go with it as those with memories that run back to 1999 cower in fear of another financial meltdown based on over exuberant acquisitions at ridiculously inflated prices.
Watching football as I also do is becoming eerily similar especially as the January transfer window gets into full swing and silly season is well and truly under way.
I wrote a post a few days ago about Arsenal’s lack of English players and Arsene Wenger’s long list of excuses for why he doesn’t buy British and one which I glossed over a little was the fact that transfer prices in England are exorbitant. I don’t think anyone can argue with that logic when we’ve seen players with only a year or two’s first team experience such as Glen Johnson and Shaun Wright Phillips move for astronomical sums and then fail to even make the bench for the purchasing club although the Chelsea / Abramovich factor certainly hasn’t helped matters.
After the financial difficulties faced by clubs such as Leeds United, Chelsea (under Ken Bates they were reputedly weeks, if not days, away from bankruptcy before the Russian stepped in) and many lower league clubs, transfer fees had begun to come back down to Earth until Chelsea’s chequebook was opened and things started getting ridiculous again. Many pundits say that the Chelsea money has been good for the game overall as it spreads money out to other clubs such as West Ham and Manchester City but this ignores the fact that it pushes up prices for everyone else at the same time.
If a club chairman sees rookie Glen Johnson move for £9m and then gets an offer of £2.5m for his experienced international centreback from another club, he’s not going to accept a second rate offer when fee inflation has risen to Chelsea style levels and it’s in this second tier area of the Premiership where problems are starting to occur.
West Ham’s final accepted bid for Watford’s young striker cum winger Ashley Young was a reported £9.65m when the player hasn’t exactly set the Premiership alight and has only a few months top flight experience under his belt. Having signed the infinitely more experienced and tried and tested Luis Boa Morte for half that amount I’m sure West Ham fans are wondering where the difference is made up. Is it because Young is English or just because he’s young (boom, boom)?
I can’t blame Watford for holding out for as much money as they can get (until the player turns the deal down of course) but this is one concrete offer in a long line of inflated fees touted over the past fortnight. We’re always sceptical when it comes to paper talk but when rumours of £25m offers being needed to prise one season wonder Darren Bent from Charlton and £20m for young defender Micah Richards from Manchester City, not to mention £12m for Curtis Davies from West Brom, a player who has taken so many backward steps since arriving at The Hawthorns that he’s in danger of regressing completely, it’s easy to see how scaremongering talk of an English transfer market bubble is able to grow.
West ham need something to invigorate their season but if they start flashing their new chairman’s cash in such large amounts for very little proven return player-wise they may find themselves in even worse trouble next season, regardless of whether they survive or not this year.
Explore posts in the same categories: West Ham United
January 16th, 2007 at 10:51 am
Another factor you have not considered Alan is the effect on the loan system. Implemented as a method to cover injuries and emergencies, it is now been used by clubs as a temporary boost to push for promotion particularly in the Championship - step forward Bham and the Sheep. Its a well documented fact that there have been more transfers this year than this point last year and that is down to the high number of loans being transacted.
This allows clubs such as Arsenal etc to groom their youth in the lower division (who needs a B team Jose?) but more importantly means that Bham can benefit from the skills and talent of a player they dont actually own, and could never indeed afford to own.
How then, can Bham honestly claim to have won the Championship when the player who scored them the goals to get them there was in fact from Arsenal? Derby for example may look back at this season and marvel and reminisce at the scoring exploits of Lupoli - except he’s not even a sheep - he’s a Gooner!
This may not be considered a bad thing - especially by both beneficiaries of the agreement but there is a danger of setting the groundwork that MSI (with Tevez and Maschiano - sp?)would like to see - where players are not contracted to clubs but to agents who loan players out.
Is this a possible result of rising prices leading to clubs having to rely on loans opening up the opportunity of transacting a transfer system whereby the clubs do not own players at all?
January 18th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
And the high transfer charges for young English players means some clubs may end up going for cheaper players from abroad. English Football… it’s a game, but not as we used to know it!
January 19th, 2007 at 10:21 pm
great article man