UK Edition
Mike Ashley and Amanda Staveley are both trying to drive a hard bargain - leaving Newcastle stuck in limbo
If things had turned out differently then Amanda Staveley would be in the directors’ box at Manchester City on Saturday evening to be reacquainted with the club she helped Sheikh Mansour buy back in 2008. But instead of running Newcastle United, who visit the Etihad Stadium, Staveley remains on the outside looking in.
She has been vilified this week, accused of being a time-waster by “sources” close to Newcastle owner Mike Ashley who – it should not be forgotten – put the club up for sale in the first place.
There have even been claims that Staveley, through her company PCP Capital Partners, is some kind of self-publicist who does not have the financial backing to support her attempts to buy Newcastle.
Those suggestions have extended to alluding that she has not made any kind of bid at all - although Staveley was very clear in an interview on Friday in claiming that three offers were made, with the most recent amounting to £250 million to be paid without any conditions or clauses.
It is Ashley’s right to say no, of course. If Staveley has not offered anywhere near what he deems a fair price (£350m, it seems) then fair enough. But the aggressive nature of the way the story was handled this week was not necessary. Why did Newcastle not simply release a measured statement to update its fans and say it had not reached an agreement with any interested parties? Why did it have to be so confrontational and so messy? Where is the thought for those supporters who are left in despair to pick over the words?
“Attempts to reach a deal have proved to be exhaustive, frustrating and a complete waste of time,” the ‘source’ dramatically told Sky Sports News with the justification for this approach appearing to be that Ashley had grown fed-up at what he perceived as persistent, undermining, anonymous briefings that Staveley had made offers.
Well, now she is claiming that publicly. The story goes back and forth and the battle lines are drawn. It is a truism that takeovers that happen are usually the ones that are rarely reported beforehand – such as Sheikh Mansour’s purchase of City – but that does not mean that Staveley’s interest is not genuine. It probably just means she wanted to drive a hard bargain, as does Ashley although his loveless ownership of Newcastle would suggest it is in everyone’s interests – including his own - that he gets out sooner rather than later. And Staveley knows that also. Her offer probably also reflects the uncertainty over Newcastle’s Premier League status, the need for investment and the lack of other bidders.
Where does this all leave Newcastle? It is a nightmare scenario. More than halfway through the transfer window they have not signed a player and now they face the league leaders who will want to bounce back after losing for the first time this season.
The ownership issue has unsurprisingly elevated Rafa Benítez’s status with the fans higher still. They have to have something to believe in, to trust in, to cling to, and that has become Benítez. So Ashley needs to back him before January 31. And he probably should park any takeover until the summer and then cut a deal to get out. He owes the fans that.
Play to the whistle or gamble on VAR?
The general consensus is that it was a bad night for ‘VAR’ – the Video Assistant Referee – system at Stamford Bridge on Wednesday, 24 hours after it was a good one at the King Power Stadium. In the first match the VAR correctly overturned the decision to disallow a goal by Leicester City’s Kelechi Iheanacho for offside. All well and good.
In the second FA Cup replay there was much debate over whether Willian should have been awarded a penalty. But there was an even ‘greyer’ area in the first-half when Chelsea’s Michy Batshuayi was put clear but was pulled up after also being flagged for offside. Replays, again, showed he was just onside. The only difference was that Batshuayi, because he was further from goal, did not go on and put the ball in the net.
If he had, the VAR would have been used and the goal stood. But Batshuayi did not know that and would have risked a caution by carrying on. Should he have then ignored the whistle? And what if the goalkeeper had stopped because of that whistle, letting the ball in, then only to find out it was a goal?
Seven years in the making
Manchester United’s gazumping of Manchester City’s deal to sign Alexis Sánchez is the second time it has happened. Back in April 2011 his representatives met with City officials to thrash out personal terms and the club, having tracked him for some time, were confident he would join them. But the very next day Sánchez’s people turned up at United and indicated his preference was, actually, a move to Old Trafford. There was even talk of a personal intervention by Sir Alex Ferguson to swing it.
Sánchez was at Udinese, who had accepted that he could leave that summer, but eventually both Manchester clubs were beaten to his signature as he joined Barcelona for £23m. Finally, and almost seven years later and via Arsenal, United appear to have got their man.
Merseyside restoration projects
Theo Walcott probably took one look at how Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain’s career has been revived on Merseyside and thought: I’ve got to get out of Arsenal. The 28-year-old’s £20m move to Everton makes sense. Although there is a tinge of concern: what does it mean for the promising England Under-21 international Ademola Lookman?
Conte in the departure lounge
Chelsea’s January transfer plans – not least the search for a back-up striker with, quite remarkably, the merits of Andy Carroll and Peter Crouch being discussed – point to some inevitable conclusions: they are thinking short-term; they are thinking of just getting through this season; they are thinking of life after head coach Antonio Conte.