Liverpool drop interest in Virgil van Dijk after Southampton complaint
• Holland defender will not be moving to Anfield
• Southampton reported Liverpool for ‘tapping up’ Van Dijk
• Southampton reported Liverpool for ‘tapping up’ Van Dijk
Southampton are confident that Virgil van Dijk will remain at the
club next season after Liverpool were forced into a humiliating
climbdown over their pursuit of the player. The south-coast club were
furious to read stories on Monday that Liverpool were primed to complete a £60m move for the Holland centre-half and they reported them to the Premier League for an alleged illegal approach.
Southampton felt that Liverpool’s fingerprints were on the stories and they questioned how there could have been the belief at Anfield that Van Dijk wanted to join them given they had made no official approach for him. Moreover, they wondered how – as per the reports – Van Dijk might be so keen to play for Jürgen Klopp if he had not spoken to the Liverpool manager.
It has been reported that Van Dijk met Klopp in Blackpool to discuss the proposed transfer – which would have been in breach of the League’s rules on tapping-up. On Wednesday evening, Liverpool released a statement on their website in which they apologised to Southampton over “any misunderstanding” regarding the pursuit of Van Dijk and stated that they had formally dropped their interest in him.
“Liverpool Football Club would like to put on record our regret over recent media speculation regarding Southampton Football Club and player transfers between the two clubs,” the statement read. “We apologise to the owner, board of directors and fans of Southampton for any misunderstanding regarding Virgil van Dijk. We respect Southampton’s position and can confirm we have ended any interest in the player.”
Southampton wonder how Liverpool could have dropped their interest in a player about whom they had never formally enquired – a clear admission, in their opinion, of the Merseyside club’s guilt in terms of the alleged illegal approach.
The Premier League had written to both clubs on Tuesday to ask for their version of events with a view to deciding whether to launch an investigation and it is unclear, at this stage, whether Liverpool’s apology will bring an end to it. If both clubs agree that the matter is closed, it is unlikely that the League would take it further.
Liverpool are serving a two-year ban on signing academy players – the second year suspended – after they accepted making an illegal approach to a 12-year-old Stoke City player in April and it is Southampton’s contention that the Merseyside club were panicked by the accusation they made against them.
Liverpool have signed five players from Southampton in the past three years for a total of £96m – Adam Lallana, Dejan Lovren, Rickie Lambert, Nathaniel Clyne and Sadio Mané. But Southampton are adamant that Van Dijk will not tread the same path or, indeed, be prised away by any of the other clubs that covet him – namely, Chelsea and Manchester City.
Their robustness over the 25-year-old is based, in large part, on the strength of his contract; Van Dijk signed a new deal only last summer that tied him to St Mary’s until 2022. The chairman, Ralph Krueger, was typically strident when he outlined why the club had no need to sell.
“The trading in the last three summers was often out of necessity,” Krueger said. “We have contracts in place like never before. We go into the first summer ever where we do not have to sell a player. We built longevity in the contracts and that gives you a chance to move with a core of players into multiple seasons and build some synergy. Our goal is to keep the core in place.”
Chelsea and City will continue to monitor Van Dijk’s situation, although Chelsea might recoil at the £60m fee that has been mentioned. Van Dijk joined Southampton from Celtic in the summer of 2015 for £11.5m and he has been outstanding in their colours until a serious ankle injury sidelined him last January.
Southampton felt that Liverpool’s fingerprints were on the stories and they questioned how there could have been the belief at Anfield that Van Dijk wanted to join them given they had made no official approach for him. Moreover, they wondered how – as per the reports – Van Dijk might be so keen to play for Jürgen Klopp if he had not spoken to the Liverpool manager.
It has been reported that Van Dijk met Klopp in Blackpool to discuss the proposed transfer – which would have been in breach of the League’s rules on tapping-up. On Wednesday evening, Liverpool released a statement on their website in which they apologised to Southampton over “any misunderstanding” regarding the pursuit of Van Dijk and stated that they had formally dropped their interest in him.
“Liverpool Football Club would like to put on record our regret over recent media speculation regarding Southampton Football Club and player transfers between the two clubs,” the statement read. “We apologise to the owner, board of directors and fans of Southampton for any misunderstanding regarding Virgil van Dijk. We respect Southampton’s position and can confirm we have ended any interest in the player.”
Southampton wonder how Liverpool could have dropped their interest in a player about whom they had never formally enquired – a clear admission, in their opinion, of the Merseyside club’s guilt in terms of the alleged illegal approach.
The Premier League had written to both clubs on Tuesday to ask for their version of events with a view to deciding whether to launch an investigation and it is unclear, at this stage, whether Liverpool’s apology will bring an end to it. If both clubs agree that the matter is closed, it is unlikely that the League would take it further.
Liverpool are serving a two-year ban on signing academy players – the second year suspended – after they accepted making an illegal approach to a 12-year-old Stoke City player in April and it is Southampton’s contention that the Merseyside club were panicked by the accusation they made against them.
Liverpool have signed five players from Southampton in the past three years for a total of £96m – Adam Lallana, Dejan Lovren, Rickie Lambert, Nathaniel Clyne and Sadio Mané. But Southampton are adamant that Van Dijk will not tread the same path or, indeed, be prised away by any of the other clubs that covet him – namely, Chelsea and Manchester City.
Their robustness over the 25-year-old is based, in large part, on the strength of his contract; Van Dijk signed a new deal only last summer that tied him to St Mary’s until 2022. The chairman, Ralph Krueger, was typically strident when he outlined why the club had no need to sell.
“The trading in the last three summers was often out of necessity,” Krueger said. “We have contracts in place like never before. We go into the first summer ever where we do not have to sell a player. We built longevity in the contracts and that gives you a chance to move with a core of players into multiple seasons and build some synergy. Our goal is to keep the core in place.”
Chelsea and City will continue to monitor Van Dijk’s situation, although Chelsea might recoil at the £60m fee that has been mentioned. Van Dijk joined Southampton from Celtic in the summer of 2015 for £11.5m and he has been outstanding in their colours until a serious ankle injury sidelined him last January.
Since you’re here …
… we have a small favour to ask. More people are reading
the Guardian than ever but advertising revenues across the media are
falling fast. And unlike many news organisations, we haven’t put up a paywall – we want to keep our journalism as open as we can.
So you can see why we need to ask for your help. The Guardian’s
independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and
hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our perspective
matters – because it might well be your perspective, too.
Because I appreciate there not being a paywall: it is more democratic for the media to be available for all and not a commodity to be purchased by a few. I’m happy to make a contribution so others with less means still have access to information. Thomasine F-R.
If everyone who reads our reporting, who likes it, helps to support it, our future would be much more secure.
No comments:
Post a Comment