- Aug 2, 2004
- 5,892
- 1,185
I think there is a difference though. This is the first transfer window where there has been serious interest in Bale.
With Fabregas, Arsenal resisted for a couple of years before they sold and Van Persie only had a year if his contract left and wouldnt sign a new one. Left them with no choice.
We do have a choice though. Bale has 3 years left and if he wants to sulk then imo tough. He might be a bit distracted but once the season starts he will concentrate on football and get on with it.
Villa refused to sell Barry and we refused to sell Modric. Once Modric realised he wasn't going anywhere he just got on with playing football.
We need Bale for this season and we should refuse to sell for any price.
But (allegedly) he wants to go, if thats the case then he should go. I don't know of any/many clubs who have refused a sale and then got a quality season from a player. If Bale is happy to stay then I agree....I think he is very naive if he thinks this is a "take it or leave it" from Madrid.
I think your comments come from a time when player power wasn't as big and players were not paid as much money as they are now which makes leaving them to sulk or putting them in the reserves a very unrealistic scenario.
Ultimately it rests with the player, I for one am not overly bothered now if he wants to go really. Spurs will continue but we will have to learn to put up with talksport saying we have no ambition and are a selling club and newspapers saying we miss Bale every time we lose or draw.