Virgil van Dijk: Southampton defender hints at January exit

Last updated on 3 October 2017.From the section Football186

Southampton defender Virgil van Dijk has hinted he would still like to leave the Premier League club when the transfer window reopens in January.

The Netherlands centre-back, 26, handed in a transfer request in August and said he wanted to move to Liverpool.

Southampton refused to sell the former Celtic player, who returned to their starting XI for the first time this season on Saturday.

"Halfway through the season, maybe we can see what's possible," he said.

Saints manager Mauricio Pellegrino ordered Van Dijk, who signed a new six-year contract in May 2016, to train alone in July amid speculation over his future.

He made his first appearance of the season when he came on as a substitute against Crystal Palace last month, and then started Saturday's 2-1 defeat at Stoke.

Liverpool ended their interest in the player in June after Southampton said they were going to report them to the Premier League for making an alleged illegal approach.

However, Van Dijk - who was also linked with Chelsea and Manchester City - says he has "no regrets" about asking to leave Saints, who signed him for £13m in September 2013.

"I wanted to go one step up, but eventually Southampton did not want to let me go," said the Dutchman.

"You're a professional, so now I'll give everything to the club."

.view-comments-button-wrapped-component {display: block !important;} .view-comments-button-wrapper {display: none !important;}

Comments

Join the conversation

These comments are now closed.

186 comments

Comment posted by Skeckersley, at 17:29 3 Oct 2017
He has to knuckle down and perform for the Club and Fans who pay him something like £4 million pounds a year, instead of keep whining about being hard done by. He has almost 5 years left on his 6 year contract, he needs to show respect to those he represents. He has to see the season out, then the future will take care of itself. He will be forever blighted if he continues with his great sulk.
Comment posted by josemis medals, at 17:47 3 Oct 2017
Southampton did not seem too morally outraged at prising him away from Celtic while he had a contract & not their first raid on Parkhead either.

Does anybody genuinely think that any transfers are not sounded out by agents beforehand these days ?
Comment posted by Leask27, at 17:28 3 Oct 2017
He would certainly get a game at Liverpool! I would be surprised if no one else was in for him though
Comment posted by Nicky, at 17:29 3 Oct 2017
Having cheered him at Stoke .
I, for one will boo him at St Mary's .
These comments are disrespectful to the club.
I expect him to be sold, but he should keep his thoughts to himself.
Comment posted by pete, at 17:28 3 Oct 2017
id let him go if liverpool come in with a £60 million offer, he is a good defender but not worth anything near that amount.
Comment posted by NoCLsince2008noPL2013hahah, at 17:30 3 Oct 2017
Gave away a soft penalty at the weekend....

Still think his mind isn't right....

..... then he's out saying this early doors. Hardly bodes well!?
Comment posted by U16650765, at 18:04 3 Oct 2017
From where I'm standing, the only person talking up VvD....is VvD ? Just move on ya big lunk and give us the 10% sell on !
Comment posted by Ronnie, at 18:30 3 Oct 2017
This vvd saga has to end in the January transfer window for all of our sakes . Whether it's Liverpool city Chelsea or staying at Southampton. Put this to bed
Comment posted by U16688859, at 19:38 3 Oct 2017
if liverpool value coutinho at £180 million then southampton should value VVD at £100 million minimum if liverpool come calling.
Comment posted by D1679666141937, at 19:40 3 Oct 2017
85. jamesjamerson. "Liverpool don't need him".

Are you joking? They need a keeper, back 4, 2midfielders and a striker.
Comment posted by stellatorty, at 20:40 3 Oct 2017
"You're a professional, so now I'll give everything to the club." - Surely you mean CONTINUE to give everything to the club?
Comment posted by Rocket 1, at 20:52 3 Oct 2017
If I win that euro millions tonight £167 million, I will buy him, then put him in a Supermarket as a trolley boy, that will show the ungrateful, big headed egoist what real work is all about, and £7.00 per hour, cocky person.....
Comment posted by BLAGADON1, at 17:28 3 Oct 2017
Would have been happy for him to leave at end of the season but we increased his wages and paid them while he was injured last season then he asks to leave as soon as he is fit. He's a great player but he isn't considering the club or supporters with that decision.
Comment posted by Ally, at 18:14 3 Oct 2017
only 4.5 yrs to go Virgil old pal - keep trying your best and stop giving bloody penalities away!!!!
Comment posted by WizardXel, at 20:41 3 Oct 2017
I really badly don't want us (Liverpool) to sign him for two reasons, one is that 60 million is too much and the other being that I like the fact they are sticking it too us! Needs to happen more in football to make the key focus the club not the money!
Comment posted by D1710786190612, at 18:25 3 Oct 2017
@41. Mark. The difference being we cant sign a contract for a company that guarantees us a certain salary for a defined length of time. When was the last time you got a 6 year contract from an employer? If you are crap at your job then you are out. These guys get paid whatever. Poor form, injuries, illness or simply refusing to play, the cash keeps rolling in.
Comment posted by Red Star, at 17:54 3 Oct 2017
Well he isn't exactly going to be challenging for the league title at Liverpool is he?
Comment posted by Philip Allen, at 19:31 3 Oct 2017
In view of the length of his contract, if I was Southampton , I'd say £100m, with £25m more if it's Liverpool for tapping him up
Comment posted by D1710786190612, at 18:19 3 Oct 2017
He claims to be a professional but he was happy to sign a 6 year deal last May, giving him security, then in the next transfer window he wants to "Go one step up". What if he had been happy to play for them but got injured, sat at home still being paid, but they decided to tear up the contract, stop paying and get rid of him.? Contracts should be binding, at least for half of the agreed term.
Comment posted by CR14, at 17:39 3 Oct 2017
@14 Agree 100% but that goes both ways. Players sign contracts and clubs then want them gone if their form drops / they don't develop. In VVD's case they have a depreciating asset who if they leave to rot will cost them £20million over those six years, alternatively they can get £50million for him. It's sadly the way the sport has gone, but you're better off rid of him from every aspect I guess.