James Tarkowski

[ALC Fox]

I agree he'd be an excellent addition and he'd certainly fancy himself as good enough to play a lot of games, and I think he would do so as well.

 

If any of those four were not to play a lot of games it would be because the other three were incredible and just wouldn't get injured or fatigued, which is very unlikely.

 

I think the old Alex Ferguson method of saying 'you're not playing today because I need you in the next game' would be needed to keep them happy  and Rodgers has shown he can do that to an extent with how he treated Hamza during and immediately after the winter transfer window.

[Tielemans63]

10 hours ago, ramadaone said:

Not happening

Never was happening 

Never will happen

 

This guy is very well-connected when it comes to Lancashire football. I think you're absolutely right.

 

Have to say I'm disappointed though. Would be an ideal signing for us imho.

[lcfc_forever]

8 hours ago, hackneyfox said:

BBC Sport, how accurate are they?

The Sun? As you say they claim 'we're very interested' no menation of actually making a bid.

Not sure either of those are gospel.

BBC Sport will only publish if they’re fully confident in the story (outside of the gossip page). That’s why they tend to publish transfer stories only when they are confirmed or pretty much nailed on to happen. Absolutely no doubt that we bid Tarkowski last summer. 

[UHDrive]

3 hours ago, An Sionnach said:

The problem with this is Tarkowski would never accept being fourth choice. Footballers like him have pride and confidence in their abilities. He would certainly rate himself to be at least as good as Fofana and Soyuncu right now. Of course Jonny is better as he is better than most in the premiership. It is a tricky one to keep four quality centre backs happy. Fofana is very young , so he would accept being benched I would have thought but Soyuncu is unlikely to be happy and we certainly don't want to unsettle him. Tarkowski would be an excellent addition and hopefully  Rodgers has a way of persuading him.

He might have to accept being fourth choice, at least on occasions for example if we switch to a back 4 and lose 1 CB. You could say on paper that all of our main 3 CB's are better than Tarkowski simply because they play in a quality squad whose emphasis is on its back line passing its way out from defence with ball to foot. Burnly are a 'head and hoof it out' club. Fofana is young yes, but not to the point whereby he needs benching due to learning the game and despite Soyuncu making the PL team of the year last year, I think fofana is 2nd only to Evans right now, undropabble.

[An Sionnach]

1 hour ago, UHDrive said:

He might have to accept being fourth choice, at least on occasions for example if we switch to a back 4 and lose 1 CB. You could say on paper that all of our main 3 CB's are better than Tarkowski simply because they play in a quality squad whose emphasis is on its back line passing its way out from defence with ball to foot. Burnly are a 'head and hoof it out' club. Fofana is young yes, but not to the point whereby he needs benching due to learning the game and despite Soyuncu making the PL team of the year last year, I think fofana is 2nd only to Evans right now, undropabble.

A valid argument but Tarkowski would disagree of course . Personally I think he would bring a level of physicality and maturity that we lack. When Jonny is unavailable our defensive shape is too often broken up. As I have said before Tarkowski is very underrated and without his leadership Burnley would almost certainly have struggled to retain their place in the premiership.

[dsr-burnley]

7 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

But you'll have the same dilemma every season all things being equal. If Tarkowski is the difference between survival or relegation then what happens next summer when he walks away for nothing after he's eased up in the last 6 months as he plans his lucrative move? 

 

You were right not to sell last summer for less than £30m but anything between £15-20m ought to be taken and used wisely this summer in exposed leagues such as France.

 

Your club has to have been planning for his departure?

If we can see a big problem coming next year, a problem worth perhaps more than £15m, there's no point bringing that problem forward.

 

We did make plans for his departure.  Two summers ago, we signed Ben Gibson for £15m from middlesbrough, almost certainly to spend a year or so learning the ropes before replacing Tarkowski or perhaps Mee.  But for the first 6 months when Mee and Tarkowski were a little off-form or missed the odd match, Gibson was injured; then for the next year Mee and Tarkowski were outstanding and never missed a match.  Then Gibson got tired of waiting and went home, later to sign for Norwich for £8m.  That was the succession plan, but it didn't work.

 

We now need to sign a successor this summer, ready to put in the side next year.  Unless he's good enough to go straight in, of course.

[Pliskin]

He’s one of the best defenders in the league. I see a bit of Canavaro in him, no the biggest but knows what he’s doing at the back. 
 

I would love it if we managed to sign him, if we played a back three he would be formidable! 
 

I think he ideally wants to go, and we all know eventually no matter how much a club tries to stop moves they happen. He won’t be with Burnley by the start of season, even if is not with us. 

[Billy Big Balls]

9 hours ago, st albans fox said:

 

Yes - billy, you’re living in the past ......a long time past ...... agents agree the personal terms with clubs all the time because players may need to move at short notice and clubs accept this saves precious time.  
 

I guarantee that several of our players have loose personal terms agreed with several clubs out there on the off chance that they may move to them. Similarly, we will have the same with our targets. 

I disagree. I agree that agents do a lot of talking and get transfers moving, which I referred to in my post, but to have an absolute agreement behind the back of the club is not normal. If Burnley were aware that we've agreed terms with Tarkowski behind their backs (which would be the case as Ashley's information has came from the Burnley side) then they would be kicking up a fuss. Imagine Leicester found out Tielemans had agreed a deal with Liverpool. We'd be fuming. 

 

An example of this is Liverpool approaching Van Dijk in 2017. Liverpool talked to the player directly without consent and Southampton reported them for it. 

 

"Saints are aware direct and indirect approaches for players are commonplace – even if the practice is forbidden – but, in this instance, they felt they needed to take a stand, believing Liverpool to have been too blatant in overstepping the mark." 

 

My point is that there are limits to what agents and clubs can do and having an absolute agreement is too far for Burnley to see as acceptable. 

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

12 minutes ago, Billy Big Balls said:

I disagree. I agree that agents do a lot of talking and get transfers moving, which I referred to in my post, but to have an absolute agreement behind the back of the club is not normal. If Burnley were aware that we've agreed terms with Tarkowski behind their backs (which would be the case as Ashley's information has came from the Burnley side) then they would be kicking up a fuss. Imagine Leicester found out Tielemans had agreed a deal with Liverpool. We'd be fuming. 

 

An example of this is Liverpool approaching Van Dijk in 2017. Liverpool talked to the player directly without consent and Southampton reported them for it. 

 

"Saints are aware direct and indirect approaches for players are commonplace – even if the practice is forbidden – but, in this instance, they felt they needed to take a stand, believing Liverpool to have been too blatant in overstepping the mark." 

 

My point is that there are limits to what agents and clubs can do and having an absolute agreement is too far for Burnley to see as acceptable. 

As if Burnley don't do it as well?

[HighPeakFox]

5 hours ago, Pliskin said:

I see a bit of Canavaro in him, no the biggest but knows what he’s doing at the back. 

Oooo matron... 

[moore_94]

 

[Bryn]

13 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

 

 

I agree with that really. I think this is just paper talk, we've been linked every year. But I like him and would be happy to sign him, especially at a cut price if his contract is winding down.

[Gerard]

It does look an obvious one, Tarkowski to Leicester and maybe the ones reporting it are guessers. There doesn't seem to be any substance about it.

[KingsX]

On 04/06/2021 at 06:37, Unabomber said:

Thought Burnley were getting taken over buy some rich guys? 

 

Burnley were taken over by chancers on borrowed money (and the cash hoard from their last few years of transfer profits).  Loans from private capital, at a much higher interest rate than Spurs are paying the banks.  If you thought the old Burnley were cheap, wait ‘til you see this version.

 

On 04/06/2021 at 11:31, dsr-burnley said:

But why would we sell at a low price?  It's not a matter of "we must sell, we can only get £10m net £7m, so that's what we must sell him for".  It would take tens of millions to get him, that's what I'm saying,.  Not that he will be sold for that amount.  If the new dodgy owners (I'm with you there) decide that the most profitable long-term future is in keeping Tarkowski rather than selling him for less than £20m, then he will stay.

 

Burnley’s options with JT are torching the remaining value of their asset … or taking the best offer also acceptable to the player, using some of the proceeds on the debt, and the rest for a cheaper replacement with everything to prove.  My guess is they'd have to choose the latter.

 

IF we want Tarkowski and he wants us, we’ll either get him for our price now, or for free soon enough.  This is a take-it-or-leave-it negotiation for LCFC.

 

Player of character that JT may be, if not allowed to leave, do you really think he'll be contesting the dangerous tackles and 50-50 balls like he used to?  He's months from that one life-changing contract.

 

[Gazza M]

For me Soyuncu still has his "bomb scare" moments, especially when pressure is on. Another steady head option would be ideal especially when we need to battle away at somewhere like Watford or under intense pressure v a Chelsea or Liverpool for example. 

[Babylon]

14 minutes ago, Gazza M said:

For me Soyuncu still has his "bomb scare" moments, especially when pressure is on. Another steady head option would be ideal especially when we need to battle away at somewhere like Watford or under intense pressure v a Chelsea or Liverpool for example. 

He’s not playing Soyuncu and Wes in a back four anytime soon or I think we’d have seen it tail end of last season. 
 

His comments about Evans being the brains back there said a lot. Without him, we are in trouble.

 

So rather than look at Tarkowski as 4th choice, it’s more likely he’s competing with Evans for his spot, and Wes and Soyuncu competing for the other. 
 

Or he really does want to stick with the three at the back, god forbid. 

[Ric Flair]

25 minutes ago, Babylon said:

He’s not playing Soyuncu and Wes in a back four anytime soon or I think we’d have seen it tail end of last season. 
 

His comments about Evans being the brains back there said a lot. Without him, we are in trouble.

 

So rather than look at Tarkowski as 4th choice, it’s more likely he’s competing with Evans for his spot, and Wes and Soyuncu competing for the other. 
 

Or he really does want to stick with the three at the back, god forbid. 

To be fair, he wasn't interested in a back 4 when Soyuncu had covid and we had Amartey and bull shit in instead.

[Gerard]

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

To be fair, he wasn't interested in a back 4 when Soyuncu had covid and we had Amartey and bull shit in instead.

I was hoping that was because of our attacking wide options rather than the reluctance to go to a back four.

 

[snoopy87]

On 04/06/2021 at 16:31, dsr-burnley said:

But why would we sell at a low price?  It's not a matter of "we must sell, we can only get £10m net £7m, so that's what we must sell him for".  It would take tens of millions to get him, that's what I'm saying,.  Not that he will be sold for that amount.  If the new dodgy owners (I'm with you there) decide that the most profitable long-term future is in keeping Tarkowski rather than selling him for less than £20m, then he will stay.

What's the mood and talk up there about it all? From the outside, it certainly doesn't look great. There's a couple of Burnley fans I follow on twitter & they're certainly not happy with it

[Ric Flair]

1 hour ago, Gerard said:

I was hoping that was because of our attacking wide options rather than the reluctance to go to a back four.

 

That must have been the main reason and why we have to get 2 wingers this summer, it's staggering if we make the same mistakes a 3rd seasoning running under Rodgers.

[Dan LCFC]

Yeah, for all I am for us signing him, the caveat is it probably means more 3 at the back. Nobody will convince me it worked. Hardly any clean sheets, generally poor going forward.

[Ric Flair]

7 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

Yeah, for all I am for us signing him, the caveat is it probably means more 3 at the back. Nobody will convince me it worked. Hardly any clean sheets, generally poor going forward.

Agreed. Take the Man City away game and the Man Utd FA Cup QF and I don't recall any other standout performance.

[Dan LCFC]

1 minute ago, Ric Flair said:

Agreed. Take the Man City away game and the Man Utd FA Cup QF and I don't recall any other standout performance.

You have Sheffield United & West Brom but you only have to have a glance at the league table. If we played that over a whole season we'd finish midtable.

[OhYesNdidi]

18 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

You have Sheffield United & West Brom but you only have to have a glance at the league table. If we played that over a whole season we'd finish midtable.

Two of the most clapped football teams to grace the premier league 

[Ric Flair]

1 hour ago, Dan LCFC said:

You have Sheffield United & West Brom but you only have to have a glance at the league table. If we played that over a whole season we'd finish midtable.

And if you dissect those games, 1st half we were very workmanlike vs Sheff Utd and 2nd half vs West Brom we couldn't have been less interested in going forward if we tried.