Football Daily - MNC: Transfer deadline eve & Messi says goodbye to Argentina

Episode Date: August 31, 2026

Mark Chapman is joined by Chris Sutton, Stephen Warnock and Rory Smith. The panel discuss an eventful summer transfer window, with some potentially big transfers still to come. Football finance expert Dr Tom Bason talks about how NOT qualifying for Europe could benefit team's financial situation and how teams like Brentford are doing things the right way. The Athletic's David Ornstein has the latest on ongoing deals and says he won't be getting much sleep in the coming days. Plus, Lionel Messi has announced his retirement from international football, who will be the next great Argentina number 10? What will be the legacy of the greatest ever player on the international stage?0:20 Is this the most baffling transfer window ever? 03:00 Everton fans fuming over potential Armstrong sale. 06:45 Chris Sutton likes what Ipswich have done! 09:30 Football finance expert Dr Tom Bason. 12:10 Squad cost ratio explainer. 13:50 Praise for Brentford. 18:10 Shearer would be worth £240m now? 20:00 Does higher transfer fees benefit everyone? 22:50 Is qualifying for Europe a bad thing, finances-wise? 26:50 Round-up of other transfer news. 36:10 The Athletic's David Ornstein joins the chat. 38:45 Mudryk to Spurs? 47:25 Messi's international retirement.

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. Get more with BBC podcasts, wherever you listen. Be the first to listen to your favourite shows, like evil genius, good, bad billionaire, and You're Dead to Me, with a subscription to BBC Podcasts Premium on Apple Podcasts. You can also enjoy a range of our podcasts ad-free with an Amazon music subscription. Monday Night Club on the way, Glenn, in the company of Chris Sutton, Rory Smith and Stephen Warnett. We're going to do transfers, really, for the first half hour or so as we get closer to the window closing.

Do you find this, Stephen? I'll come to you first. Is this the most baffling transfer window you have ever seen? Yes. And could you put a reason why on that? Honestly, no. I find it bizarre how much prices have been inflated and how much people are going for. I find it, we were just talking off here, weren't we saying that?

I find it incredible how players who were signed last year by clubs have scored one goal, i.e. DeLap, goes for 10 million pound more. I look at James Trafford and I think went to Manchester City, they sell them for what, $30 million more. I find it incredible that clubs are actually willing to pay. pay those inflated prices for players. I think there's a lot of panic buying going on. I think there's a lot of pressure now to get within the top four,

top five of the Champions League places to make sure there's more money coming into the football club. But I think what we're seeing in England between clubs and certainly for homegrown players, I feel really sorry for homegrown players at the moment because I just think you go to an academy and to an academy and ideally you go to the academy of the team you support if you're lucky and that becomes your team and you want to play for that team as soon as you get in the first team they look at you and go well there's a value in you and there's full there's full profit in it and then look at harrison armstrong you

really think harrison armstrong wants to leave everton after just breaking into that first team going out alone to preston working hard getting his opportunity and then they get a call and say by the way everton have accepted a bit it's not would you like to go it is they've they've accepted a bid. How can you accept that bid for a homegrown player? Don't get me wrong, it's big money. It's astronomical money for a homegrown player. But, yeah, I think we need to reevaluate what's going on because a lot of homegrown players. I actually had this conversation with someone the other day at the Liverpool game. And I thought, what a great point this is. It was, could you imagine Stephen Gerard coming through the academy and he plays a handful of games. towards the end of the season and Nottingham Forest come in with a 40 million pound bid and Liverpool go

we need that money because it's full profit and you potentially lose a great of the club all because of PSR. But the interesting thing about that Rory is that the fans were furious about it. Now I don't know in how many examples of transfers

because there have been a lot of transfers between clubs where you go whoa, where's that come from? Or actually, aren't the fan base fuming that that's happened? Now, I think the fuming, the Chelsea fans are not happy with Fernandez, but I think that's as much comments over the last six months as necessarily going to city. But the Everton fan base, hang on me, you can't do this,

is one of the few examples of real anger this summer. Is everybody just becoming more immune, do you think? to, oh, well, they're just going to go there from there. Well, yeah, I think the Harrison Armstrong one is a slightly unusual case because, as Stephen says, he's a homegrown player at a club that's got a really proud tradition of having Liverpoolians and Evertonians in that team. And I think he's the only one, and that hurts fans. You know, that would hurt at Man United.

It would hurt at Liverpool, you know, to see a kid who's a boyhood fan come through, get into the team and then just be sold because he represents pure profit. that is, that's damaging. I think fans find that really kind of, it calls into question what the purpose of the club is effectively. I think in most of the cases, if you've got a player who's not in that circumstance, who's been kind of brought into that team for money,

I think we've all got a little bit, like, inured to the figures. I mean, T Cody Gapotow now looks like it's about to not go through, but Lord knows. But, you know, that's 85 million quid for someone who at City would be a squad player, that's almost a meaningless amount of money. And I think it's maybe a split. There's fans who I think are kind of bamboozled by just the sheer scale of the spending.

And there's other fans who think, well, look, that's fine because that means you can spend that on somebody else. And as long as that dopamine hit of a new player coming in keeps rolling, they're okay with it. But I'm the same as you, Mark. I found it, I don't understand what's happened in this window, partly the inflation, partly why everyone's left. it's so late. Forrest made a bid for two

goalkeepers yesterday. Did they not think they needed a goalkeeper in July? Why? I mean, I get that you can try and drive a bargain. Well, and also, Rory, less than forget, as Chris very helpfully told me two or three weeks ago, you can't play two goalkeepers because until that part, I was quite confused by that.

Well, it's a tactic that only sort of managerial visionaries can see. No, I presume they went for Mamadashvili because they got told no by Dean Henderson or by Palace, but why are you doing that on Orders the 3rd? to you. It doesn't make any sense.

You can kind of make a case that you hold and hold and hold and hold in the hope of strengthening your negotiating position. But then if you put a bit in this late on, it does kind of look desperate. And when you look desperate, what happens is the price grows up. Can I just go back to the talk about the homegrown players very quickly? So when Liverpool sold Curtis Jones, the next squad was the first time in 134 years they hadn't had a scouser in the team. And that matters.

It's huge for the fans. But it's not only the fans chappers, it's the academy. Because you draw players to the academy by the fact of, well, we progress our players into the first team. Now they'll be looking at it going, we progress our players to sell them. How do you see it, Chris? I think Stephen makes a great point actually about homegrown players and that and that feeling and that connection. you know, if this carries on, will it, you know, will there be the same sort of feeling for young players,

you know, going into their boyhood club and really cherishing that? It has been wild. I quite like some of it. I quite like what Ipswich have done. I love clubs who come up and they spend and, you know, and they're having a go. They evidently had a plan in the summer. This is what they were going to do.

And you could probably say that it feels like maybe Hull have had a plan as well. But there are, and who knows what to believe and what not to believe? And a little later on, we'll talk to David Ornstein. But, well, hang on a minute. If you're city, well, so you've sold Savino and you brought in Alan.

Savio. Sorry, Savio. You've brought, well, they sold Savino, but Spurs. That's mad in herself, isn't it? if you want to be really factually correct. But they've done that. And then they've sort of pivoted to, oh, we'll see if we can get Cody Gapo,

but then they can't get code, don't appear to be able to get code. So we might then go for... There's no plan. No, we might then go for NJai, who's also on a spurs list. But now, I mean, and these bigger clubs are the ones

with the, well, they've all got sporting directors. But we're told we're living in age of sporting directors and carefully planned squads. Yeah, but there's, I mean, they're just all pretenders, aren't they? You know, essentially, clubs pretend they plan, but they don't.

The Cody Gakbo thing, I mean, I've got to say, I thought he'd gone to Sydney the other, I thought that was done and dust. I only saw before I came on tonight that Liverpool until you did your research. So you didn't research that bit today? But that's incredible in itself, really, what Liverpool's mindset was in letting him go.

I never understood that. And, you know, Iriola's gone in. And you think, well, you know, what's wrong with Cody Gakpa? I think he's, you know, been pretty reliable for them. I don't understand why Manchester United haven't brought a left back. I think that that is, that's pretty alarming in itself. But there are stories, you know, all the way through, the Aston Villa situation where, I mean, I thought they'd beat Brighton Lowe's.

last week based on their results against Brighton the previous season. And then I saw they had half a team. And that is, I mean, if you're a villa fan, you're thinking, what on earth is going on? I mean, they've sold half the team who won the Europa. And I mean, stuff like Ollie Watkins, that winds me up, 30-year-old going to Saudi. I know people can talk about the Saudi League maybe getting better.

But I think it's a horrible look for him. So there's a lot which has annoyed me. about the window. But it does seem wilder than ever. Let's talk about the money side of things and where clubs are getting some of this from. Dr Tom Basin joins us now. Do you look at some of these fees, giving your football finance expertise, and think, how are they managing to do this? Or does it make sense to you when you have the numbers in front of you? Well, I was talking to my dad about it yesterday, and he mentioned about Everton selling a player for 80 million or so. He's an Emerson fan and saying that that's maybe not enough. And I was saying that if

Everton had sold a play for 80 million two seasons ago, you'd have thought that would be ridiculous. That would fund the club for transfers for a couple of years. So the amount of transfers seem to have gone up this season, you know, the number of 100 million pound signings this season. Yeah, it's been surprising. But then the line goes up, you know, clubs revenues are going up. And for most industries, from revenues go up, that translates into profits, but football clubs aren't there to make profits. So when the revenues go up, so do the transfer fees and the salaries. And that's very much what we've seen this summer.

Where are the revenues going up? And maybe this is a bit difficult because I'm lumping a whole load of clubs together here who have spent a lot of money and they may have different reasons for their revenues going up. But if you take the outlay that Spurs have made, now their fans would probably go, We haven't done that much in previous year, so maybe that's why we're doing it now. But does that come from, basically having had Champions League football

every now and then over the last two years, does the new Champions League format immediately skew it to teams who have been in there, even if it's just been for a season or two? It definitely skews it, I think, to those teams that have been it for longer because we have, you know, the way that you have set up the payments

in the wake of the European Super League was that the clubs have been in the Champions League for longer, get more money than the clubs who've just been in for one season or two seasons. But yeah, even that, Aston Villa, I think, and 70 million or so from their run to the quarterfinals that was two, a couple of years ago, that's a huge amount of money for, you know, a mid-table Premier League club. You know, that's almost, you know, half of what Bournemouth earn in a season. So, yeah, I think those clubs that are in the Champions League and are in the Champions League

year after year are always going to have far more spending power than most clubs that aren't. Tom, can you explain the difference? between PSR in our league, and then am I right in saying that, in the Champions League, you can only spend 70% of your profit. So squad cost ratio. So that's different, isn't it?

So it's okay saying we make this money in the Champions League, but then for 70% of it, it's surely you're going to have to take a hit at some point. So, yeah, we've got the new squad cost ratio being introduced to the Premier League this season, which is broadly similar to UEFA's rules. And what it basically says is that a club can spend either 85% in the Premier League or 70% for UEFA, they can spend that percentage of their football revenues on their first team.

So that's money that's spent on transfer fees, on player wages, on agent's fees, and on the head coach or manager's salary. So what it does is it directly links the amount of revenue a club makes to the amount that it can spend. PSR previously said that a club could lose 35 million of season. up to 105 million over three seasons. That was kind of a different question. That was asking how much a club can lose. And that 105 million was the same,

whether you have 500 million pound revenues like Manchester City or 100 million pounds revenues like Bournemouth. Now we have Premier League clubs can spend 85% of their revenues and 85% of Manchester City's revenues is an awful lot more than 85% are Bournemouth or Brentford's revenues. And yes, the clubs in New York, European competition, very, very similar regulations in UAE for their limited to 70%. I think for the clubs in the Champions League, the extra money they get probably mean that

that's broadly offset. Like I say, Gila made 70-odd million a couple of seasons ago. The clubs that I think are going to be really hard hit to the ones that are in the Conference League and the Europa League, because they're going to be bound by that you wait for 70% rule, but the revenues they make at a far, far less. Topham made half the money in winning the Europa League that Gila made in the Champions. Big League a couple of seasons ago. Which then brings us to this point. People are praising Brentford for what they have done, not just this summer, but in the past.

But actually, Brentford, by not qualifying for Europe, did themselves a favour on the squad cost ratio, didn't they, Tom? Because it means they can still be at the squad cost ratio of 85% where, say, Bournemouth and Brighton have to drop to 70 because they are in European football. Yeah, I suspect that Brentford have probably run well enough

that they're probably up towards that 85% anyway. But yeah, I mean, Chelsea, not in European competition this season. They don't have to abide. They've got some European restrictions because of how they've failed UEFA regulations in the past, but Chelsea broadly have this 85% rule

that none of their other title challenges have because they're all playing in Europe. Tom, is that partly what's happened then, that the clubs basically driven by the Champions League 5, I suppose, that they have basically looked at it and thought, well, we're no longer hidebound by this need to not make losses. We can just cut loose and do what we like. The part of SCR that wasn't passed by the Premier League was a bit that would anchor it

as a by a factor of 1.8 or whatever to the bottom club, which would effectively have put a cap on spending. even with the richest teams, that bit didn't get through. So now what you have is this kind of supercharged market where the big teams can basically do what they want as long as they kind of keep some money rolling in to offset a bit of it from sales. Yeah, or they get those revenues from playing in the club or cup,

for example, every two years, or the money they get from the Champions League every season. So yeah, we're now in a situation where the clubs at the top are going to have far more revenues coming in and can spend 70% of it. instead of 80% because they're going to be in the Champions League every season. Although UEFA's restrictions are stricter, their punishments are far less punitive than the Premier League's, you know, there tends not to be points deductions in UAFA.

I suspect that some of the clubs are in that are in European competition, I think they could probably ride out any UEFA restrictions if they fail. You know, Villa failed last season and had, I think, two-thirds of their fine suspended. So even that 70% restriction in UAFA competitions isn't necessarily a hard line. And even then you could take it as a luxury tax, which is not unfamiliar to people in US sport. The other thing I'd say, or I'd ask you, you mentioned revenues are going up, which is obviously true. They cannot possibly, even for the big clubs, we don't up at the rate of football inflation. Because you're looking at, if suddenly it's 70, 80 million quid for a pretty bodd,

standard right winner, that is a factor, you know, it's that maybe not quite doubled from a couple of years ago, but it's not far off. That for most clubs, their revenues are not going up that way. So is that just kind of an inflationary spiral that prices at the top are driving that and everyone's kind of saying, okay, well, we'll have to pay that to keep up, or is there something else at play? I suspect it's partly that. I also think that in the Premier League, We have the fact that the revenues are increasing for all the clubs, whereas they're not in other leagues. I think in the last Deloitte reports that there were 15 of the 30 richest clubs in the world

or playing the Premier League. And so it's not just the big clubs that are spending big money. These transfer inflation is being driven as well by clubs that are in the mid-table, whose equivalent clubs in Spain and Italy and France are probably spending 10 million this season. But is that a... Is it a bubble that won't burst as long as they keep trading between themselves? Possibly.

Possibly, that might be the case. I remember when I studied this like 20 years ago, my lecture then telling me this is a bubble that's going to burst in 2005. Because there is... Because the first match of the day of this season, we were talking about transfer fees.

And there is a website where you can look at what somebody cost back in the day and what it would cost now. And we may have mentioned this on the show before. But Shearer, for example, the $15 million that Shear went to Newcastle for in 96 from Blackburn, equivalent now would be somewhere around £240 million. So when you hear that, there is an element of perspective, but there weren't deal after deal.

remember they're being deal after deal after deal after deal back then at that. Well, that's the bit that I find bafflin is that you can say the big clubs revenues have gone up to six 700 million a year. But as a percentage of those revenues, the amount that these deals are costing is much higher because they're doing multiples of them. It's not just that they're, if they were signing one 75, one 80 million pound player each, that would be different. But they're trying, you know, Man City have spent or will have spent if they get Enzo through and they are now talking to Chelsea

will have spent 300 million quid just on midfielders in one summer and their revenue. That's half their entire revenue. Yeah, you only have to look at Liverpool, don't you? You look at Isak Vertz and then Barcola, all 100 million plus players

and that's probably more than 300 than the last, what, two windows or three windows if it's summer to summer. That's just my... It's absolutely baffling. But I do think that point you make about the clubs buying from each other is, is also driving this.

You know, Chelsea has spent 300 million or so on midfields, but they've sold 250 million odd of players. You know, they're sold Savio, they sold Rodgery. They've sold quite a few players this summer as well. So the fact that there is a transfer market that's been very, very

active means that that money is circulating through the clubs. So this may be a really stupid question then. Do the higher fees benefit everybody if they're and selling from each other. Because as Stephen made the point earlier,

how do you work out? We're not picking on him, but it is a... How do you work out? Liam DeLapp, scoring one goal in nearly 30 appearances, going for 30 million last summer and 50 million this summer. Or Savio going for 75 million, two years after going for 30 million. But if everybody's going... Well, actually, if we all pay more,

it helps us. Can it help them all? I think there's two interesting examples because the lap had a release clause, didn't he, when he went to Chelsea, and Savio was signed from another city group club. So whether the extent to which those two transfers were, what maybe we would say were the market value for those players at the time, I don't know. But I think because the transfer values are going up means that clubs are more willing to spend a lot of money on a young player because the values keep going up.

Spurs might be thinking that if they spend, however much they're spending on Savio, that if he's great for them, brilliant, that works out. If he's middling and the value of players continues to go up in two, three years, you know, when he's 24, 25, he's not going to be past it. There's still going to be a market for him then, and they'll still be able to move him on. I find it incredible because if you had two bad seasons at a football club, your value just completely fell off the edge of a cliff

and that was the way it was why are you laughing why did you look at Chris because I was just going to ask him what Celtic paid for it it? No it was that is it quite interesting really so I went for 10 million to Chelsea

from Blackburn had a bad season and went to 6 million which was a Scottish record fee at the time mark so I've been an English record fee and a Scottish but so I devalued four million pounds

and then the lien collapse thing is astonishing really and I get what you say about the release clause but it still was 30 million and you know people looking that a layman looking at that situation which just think is absolutely mad I mean I looked at that I couldn't believe it that you know

that someone can you know can nearly double in value after having such a poor season. It's just, I mean, it's absolutely wild. And the stuff about, you know, listening, the stuff about the difference with the sort of Champions League revenue and the Premier League revenue, basically, if you're a football fan, you're thinking the dream is for our club to qualify for Europe. Yeah, actually. But then the club will think, well, maybe we don't want to qualify for Europe. That's bonkers. And if I'm right in saying that,

Yeah. When we were doing this last season, talking about PSR against squad cost ratio, and we were going through the vote on it, Bournemouth, Brentford, Brighton, Palace, Fulham and Leeds, all voted against squad cost ratio. And at the time, we were like, oh, really? And then when it's all explained, you can, go on, Rory,

you can see why they did. I just wanted to say I did make that point last season. You did. I did. PSR had many, many, many faults, but what it did was keep some sort of lid on this thing.

SCR, what they replaced it was because they didn't pass the anchoring, SCR is free rank. And the thing that will limit them to some extent is the UAFA rule. So Chris is totally right. The Europa lead and the conference lead are basically a punishment

for doing well but not well enough. But if you didn't have that, if you were said, okay, well, you can have 85% as well, then you can't, then it just, kind of solidifies that hierarchy, whereas PSR was,

it had checks and balances in it that certain teams didn't like as they were in specific circumstances that meant it didn't work for them. But for the clubs that were quite well run, Palace, Brentford, all those, it was quite a good thing, I think. Just a final one, Tom, then.

With all these regulations, are there benefits with clubs for the clubs if they trade between each other, several times. Potentially. I mean, we saw in PSR a couple of seasons ago, we saw that the final day transfers

between Notting and Forrest and Villa and Chelsea and Everton and all those transfers that went on. That doesn't work quite the same under SCR because under PSR under the profitability and sustainability regulations, the when you sold the player,

you've booked all that profits in this season. In squad cost ratio rules, that's not quite the same. So I think you were talking about Armstrong from Everton went by and joined. If they sold him for say 45 million, just for the sake of arguments, that wouldn't be 45 million profit booked onto this season. That would be 15 million one season, 50 million another, 50 million another. So they have changed that in the score cost ratio regulations to try and avoid these

last minute sales, the old pure profits of academy players to solve the financial issues. Clubs don't quite have that same out anymore. But do you still book a purchase over the duration of the contract? Yes, up to five years. The transfer fee is still amortized over the duration of the contract up to five years. And then the sales spread over three years to smooth it out. So even if you gave someone a six or seven-year deal, you can only do it over five years. Yes, that changed after Chelsea were giving their eight-million, eight-year deals to Mudrick and to play in Alabama.

Tom, thank you very much for coming on this evening. Appreciate it. Very welcome. Thank you, Dr. Tom. Boston, Assistant Professor in Sport Management at Coventry University. This is the Monday Night Club with Mark Chapman. On the Football Daily Podcast. Five Live Sports.

So here's the first ball of this series. All the cricket you laugh. Shagrelby-dobics lives on BBC sounds. Smash straight back down the ground. This girl. Here ball by ball coverage of the biggest competitions on the domestic and international circuits. It's a ball cricket and it's the huge one.

Tris. Settle down. Cricot on five-life sport. Oh, I've living every ball of this. Listen on BBC Sounds. This is the Monday Night Club on the Football Daily Podcast. Chris Sutter Roy Smith and Stephen Warner on the Monday Night Club. It is being announced that Manchester City have reached an agreement to sign Illamon and Jai from Everton for around 65 minutes.

million pounds. So 60 million plus five add-ons. I think that's an actually, that's a sensible figure. It is, but why is Ilamalanjai, who is Everton's best player, worth 20 million pounds less than Cody Gatpar? I've got no idea, because my other point was going to be. I mean, Liverpool have, I don't know whether it's gone through, but he's the Genk goalkeeper, has just signed after playing 12 games for 35 million. I mean, what's going on here?

He must be good. He must have been really good in those 12 games He must have been incredible Scouts must have been impressed, yeah But what is it with younger players now who've got potential that suddenly I mean even Harrison Armstrong Do you think people in the officers

of these football clubs In the sporting directs offices and whatever Think the same I've got no idea Because they are They're not sort of new to football they've been around. I'm not just saying Liverpool.

At any point, do they sit back and think, blimey, 35 million for someone who's played 12 days? It's not their money. It's not their money. They don't care. I tell you who's having a great time.

Or they may care. European sports and directors. Who must be sitting there thinking, hang on, they're going to pay how much? Yeah. They will be, I mean, they have different issues and if you look at the French clubs,

they're all having to kind of ship players out. Monaco, Leal as well, to meet their debts, just the collapse of the media rights and stuff. But they must be, they've always preferred selling to Premier League clubs because Premier League clubs generally pay up front. And now there is very clearly a system

where there is one fee for other European teams, there is one fee for mid-range Premier League teams, and there is one fee for the big Premier League teams. And I don't think they're even pretending that it works any other way now. They are plucking figures from the sky. It's the easiest thing in the world with younger players as well,

because you can say, well, they're going to develop, I mean, goalkeepers especially, well, he'll be a good keeper in 10 years. But he has to play? Yeah, but the other side of it, Chris, is that you buy them, and then if they win trophies, it leads to a bigger fee, or if they play so many games. But now it's like, it's a fixed fee plus add-ons,

and you think, it's like, it's absolutely insane. Do you think that's a, on the NGI one then, you said, Roy, you think that's fair enough? Do you think it's a fair enough fee, or do you think that's a good move for both city and player? When you look at what else, and I spoke to Moreska on Friday night, and I said to him, pre-match,

yeah, pre-match, when you are looking at your squad, what is your ideal balance when you are looking at the makeup of it and versatility? And he said, two players for every position. But depending on where they play him, they may have more than two players for his position.

Yeah, and Gianni, I think you probably play maybe all three of the roles. He could play as a 10, he could play as a right way, to play wide right, to play wide left. He'd be fine in any of those positions, I think. It made sense for him as a player who, you know, who has been Everton's best player, I think that's probably not too controversial to say for a couple of years. He probably has earned that natural step up.

I mean, 65 million pounds. 65 million pounds. How much were Spurs going to pay for him? Because I saw a totally different figure, unless I'm getting it wrong. I'm so confused. Yeah, I thought they were going to pay 75. Some good handling from Man City. Yeah, but from my point of view, I look at it and think

Everton have undercooked themselves there. A little bit. Yeah, I mean, I would say it's a good move for Jai. I think it's a smart move for City. Yeah. I'm not sure it's a brilliant price for Everton. No, I don't think so. all because they're losing, like you say,

they're the best player, the player who retains possession for them, the player that gets them up the pitch, you lose a player of that quality and you go, okay, so what are you bringing in? Now, whether there's a deal behind the door, that's getting done for Jack Greilish to go the other way. That was getting done. Yeah, but

I don't know, I just, I mean, when I first saw that deal where it was in Jai to Spurs and Rachalus into Everton, and it was like 60 million, or 70 million for an Jai and 30 million for Richarlson. I was thinking you've only made £25 million

pound on that deal. It's really strange. 35 for a Charleston's good. He'll play three games this season. But then they're also just on City. They're also reporting tonight. Sky are reporting tonight that they've opened talks out with Chelsea to sign Anzo Fernando.

Who is the play they've been looking out all summer and there are 27 hours of the transfer window left? But that... It's nonsense. But then where do you... What do you mean it's nonsensical?

What do you mean by that? If Enzo Moresco has targeted him and wants him and knows him, why wouldn't he want to be as strong as he could possibly be? Oh, no, no, no, it's not that I think he's about... I think Enzo's a... I don't think he's worth 120 million quid, but he's a really good footballer. I get that Marester trusts him, he likes him,

obviously has a profile that Maresta thinks he can work with and he needs, despite the presence of Elliot Anderson, Bwadi, fine, not a problem. They can afford it, they've got the revenues. What I don't understand is why you're doing that now and not, for example, when the price was exactly the same in July. It's a bit like the question I actually with Liverpool and Barcola on Saturday.

Do they need it? Am I flogging a dead horse by saying, do City need all of these players? Because I'm sure city fans have come back going, while we're in all of these competitions, we can mix and match. Yeah, I think from a manager's point of view, if your director of football is saying I can give you this player

and you're not, as a You're not bothered about the fee because it doesn't matter to you. You just want the player through the door. So that fee is irrelevant. As long as the football club agree to get the player through the door, they're happy with the wages, they're happy with the fee, the manager goes, give me as many players as I can have through the door of high quality. A million percent.

Manager does not, you know, he wants as many in as possible. Manager's not bothered about how much they spend. It's about having the strongest team, the strongest squad to give them the best possible chance. The money really doesn't matter. There's a difference in where you are as a manager. I think if you're David Moyes and you're getting told you have to wheel and deal a little bit at Everton, then you would be looking at fees and going,

well, I don't want to spend all that on him. It's completely different from Moreska. Mariska's going, give me everyone. But that's why they handed control and why over the last 10, 15 years, we've seen basically every club, I think now without exception in the Premier League, hand control to what Americans would call a front office.

You have one to seven, sporting directors. You've got heads of recruitment, you've got the head of analysis, you've got all these people who are meant to be making these decisions collectively and long term because they are thinking about the club's interests, not just this summer and this season,

but into the next two, three years. They're the ones who are meant to be thinking, well, we've got this 15 year old who if he fulfills his talent, we need to make sure there's a pathway for him. Who do you think's doing that in the Premier League at the moment? Well, I think they all start with B and we all end up having to quote them endlessly. Does nobody, everyone else seems to have given up in it. I think Liverpool and

city did it to an extent and now seem to have stopped. And I think that is something that I find complete. It seems to be this summer something has changed. And Tom, kind of, that is the most coherent and complete explanation for it. Can I throw someone out there who might be doing it? Go on. Which may seem ridiculous. You may all laugh at me, I don't know.

Newcastle? Yeah, but yes. Yeah. I mean, what Newcastle have done has been really impressive, but it's reactive to a situation they maybe wouldn't have chosen. But yes, I think that's absolutely fair. In what way wouldn't they have chosen it? Because they were the ones who chose to get rid of the manager.

But they didn't want to sell Tanali and Bruno. I think if they could have kept hold of those people, they would have. Do you really think that, though? Because I think 100 million. What do you mean they chose to get rid of the manager? Well, by not backing him. They didn't, but that's not choosing to get rid. That's slightly different.

It's pushing him, isn't it? It's helping him. it's giving him an option or a decision to make. If you don't back your manager and you're there thinking, well, hang about, I need money here to strengthen and your tie in his hands behind his back and then suddenly you go, well, hang about we're going to sell all the best players. Then you've got a decision to make as a manager

and think you're not actually getting the backing you want. But the decision, Rory, I was going to say with Bruno was, not Bruno, sorry, Tenali. 100 million pounds for Tenali. Yes, please. Absolutely. Yeah. No, I would agree.

So it's not a forced decision that, is it? That's a decision where you just go, well, yeah, someone's stupid enough to pay it. David Orn Siener's joined us from the Athletic. So Njai is done, is it, or nearly done? I thought you were going to say joins us from a toilet or something because I'm in a hotel room preparing for a transfer deadline day. With the athletic, it does look a bit suspicious. Yeah, evening all.

The Illaminen Gai deal from Everton to Manchester City is agreed in principle. It's a 65 million pound package, 60 plus 5 million in add-ons. And I'm expecting him to undergo a medical tomorrow morning. Tottenham, of course, had agreed a deal in principle that would have seen it and die come to them and Richarlison go in the opposite direction. But that was subject to personal terms and medicals. And ultimately, my information this evening is that Richarlison did not. agree personal terms with Everton for a return there. And Die favored Manchester City,

obviously playing European Champions League football, which wouldn't have been the case at Tottenham. Spurs weren't the only other team interested in him. There was a lot of very serious interest. And I think Everton needed to do this at this price point as well. Manchester City first targeted Cody Gakpo. I know you were just speaking about him. That was their priority. And that gave a window for others to get and die. but when the Cody Gapo deal was called off today and he'll be staying at Liverpool, Manchester City executed on that and I deal

that had been lined up some days ago and now they'll be adding him to their squad on a long-term contract. And now they'll get Fernandez as well, will they? So they have open talks. I heard you just mention it there, club to club, pretty much for the first time all summer. And so now we're at crunch point, obviously in terms of timings,

but in terms of the fact that there's actual direct communication between Chelsea and Manchester City, Chelsea will want to receive a fee that they feel is appropriate, which I would imagine in their mind will be higher than the £120 million that they set a deadline on a couple of weeks ago that wasn't met. But they will also want to reinforce and be able to come out of this situation stronger than they went into it. And that means turning to the market for another signing. We don't know if it will be like for like. They have been linked with the likes of Manu Kone in the last 24 hours, Kamara at Monaco, but I don't think that's so likely.

And they'll have other options too. So would you believe it? It's going to be a busy 24 hours as the window shuts at Stamford Bridge. Which also includes Mudrick going to Spurs. Yeah, I broke that story a while ago. I'm trying not to ask every question with an element of disbelief in my voice, but I feel like I am doing at the moment, so I apologise. But Madrid to Spurs.

Yeah, so they have inquired about taking him on loan. He's a favourite of Roberto de Zerbi from Shattar Donetsk, of course. There were multiple clubs interested in him, despite the fact he's not played competitively since his ban. Leeds were one of them. But it is Tottenham who really need that winger now because they needed one more attacker in their mind. And that's why they were so keen on first Gakpo then and die. They've lost out on both of them. Will it be Mudrick now?

It seems that situation is accelerated. at the time of us coming on air, I don't know of it being done, but it wouldn't surprise you if it got there now. Balagon to Everton? Balagon to Everton is a possibility. It has legs, as people say in this industry. There are talks, but I'm not sure it's going to happen. It's difficult.

Well, I'm not just saying leaving Monaco for Merseyside, because I love Merseyside, but he earns a very handsome salary there, and I'm not sure that Everton can make the numbers work. Let's see, it's not impossible. They've got to make the numbers work with someone, haven't they? They can't just allow Illamina and judge to go and not have anybody. I mean, I know that's a different position.

Well, Mark, they would like to think that they could get Jack Greelish done, and that's one that they've been on for a long time, and it's believed that it's his preference. They've got to make the numbers work on that one, because there's interest in Greelish from elsewhere too. But you would imagine that would be the and die replacement. And then let's see whether they can do Balagan or another striker. Balagans into the last two years of his contract.

This was always the summer in which he was going to move, irrespective of the Good World Cup, controversial World Cup he had and Monaco are open to it but the numbers will need to be right for them as well and that's where the challenge will lie for Everton I've stopped asking questions now I'm just going to fire names at you

Julian Alvarez that one hasn't been a goer in my mind or my information for quite some time because Arsenal were really keen of course they have been for a long time it precedes this window but the player

does not share that keenness on a return to English football he wanted Barcelona and Barcelona only. The doors are closed to Barcelona, but it doesn't seem that he has opened them to England and Arsenal. We believe that there's been conversations

between him and Mikhail Arteta, but I don't think Arsenal have come away with a good feeling. We'll have to wait and see what happens right up until the deadline because I do think Arsenal would have been prepared to reach an agreement

with Athletico Madrid, and I'm sure Athletico would have, as well, to avoid selling him to Barcelona. But it doesn't seem one that's going to happen. And maybe you could say, fair enough, If Arsenal are going to commit something like 150 million euros, do you want to be doing that on somebody that ultimately has major reservations?

Not only now, but what might happen further down the line. So they went big this summer Arsenal for the attacker. Of course, the well-documented pursuit of Vinicius Jr. Prior to that, it was Morgan Rogers, then now Julian Alvarez. It doesn't look like they'll get any of them. They have made an inquiry to Leon. There's some conversations about Malik Fafana, another 21-year-old Belgium international winger.

He plays to the left side. So let's see if anything develops around that. I think they would see that as a sort of future, potential development, opportunity, stroke, investment. There's no guarantee it will happen, but they are sort of weighing it up tonight and have been over the last 24 hours. They looked at him last year as well.

But it doesn't seem one of the big name attackers will come into the Emirates before the window closes. Just in case before anybody else has anything to fire, are you? you might want to throw anything else in yourself, David. And I don't know whether you know how much you're up on either of these. I've seen reports, Juventus might want to loan Voltaimada. I've seen reports that Juventus might want to loan Xerxes.

Is that one or the other, or are they going for the most enigmatic forward line in European football with two players who nobody's quite sure what they are? That should be thrown over to the hips, the Rory, or get James Horncast on the show. Yeah, very true, yeah. The desire of Juventus, I think, was on Xerxes, but I'm not sure that that one has developed,

either be it with the player or Manchester United. And so maybe they've pivoted to Nick Voltaumade. I think there's appeal on the part of Volta Marder as well. And clearly with Newcastle bringing in Fernandez Pardo from Lille, this really exciting 21-year-old winger, another Belgium international, which is in the process of being committed. completed for, oh, I think it's around 65 million euros.

I can't remember the exact fee, but he's flown in to Newcastle in the northeast this evening, so he'll undergo a medical. That was the deal that Newcastle wanted that would allow Nick Voltaimade to leave on loan. I think he was quite keen on the Dortmund opportunity, but I'm not sure the numbers were right around that. So it seems there's a real possibility in Juventus, but I don't have firm details on it just yet. Anything else, anybody?

Or David, have you got anything else? Well, there's loads going on. I think Villa will close out a deal very, very soon for Taylor Harwood Bellis. That is a 30 million pound package, and I think the medical was today. And I don't know if they've announced it yet, but Ibrahim and Bay, this coveted 18-year-old winger from PSG, that deal is done. And it's just waiting to be sort of formalized and announced. He was wanted by so many clubs. And I think that's a really interesting one after they part the Raphael.

Leao situation. He went from Aseman to Galatasarai. Yeah, there's probably loads more that I've forgotten. Will Manchester United sign a left back before the deadline? I heard Chris mentioning it earlier. I'm not hearing encouraging sounds around that just yet. Again, you never know until the deadline. But I don't think United are just going to bring in extra bodies for the sake of it. That's the word from Old Trafford. And, you know, they've addressed areas quite methodically. Last summer, you know, it was the attack this summer, the midfield. And they don't have unleashed. limited resources financially to do so. Well, also, if you go bring people in, you need to get people out

and they don't seem to be able to sell anybody. David, what about Sark, Mamadashvili, a sentiment fielder at Liverpool? Any talk on that? No, I think it will famous last words be quite quiet at Amfield now because it was linked to the GACPost situation. So there was the pursuit of Yankuba Minte, two offers, I think, £50 million, £60 million, pounds, both rejected. It seems maybe there was a deal to be done around 70 million pounds plus add-ons.

But, you know, he's out until October, November. And it's a pretty high price to pay. I think there was temptation to do it, given his vast quality and potential Premier League League ready. But it was steep. Ishmael Assar was explored. I think, as I understand it, there was one offer, but it fell way below what Crystal Palace would have considered to sell.

And he is 28 years old. So Liverpool, we're never going to go too high for the. that age bracket. And with those being the main options, I think they were in favour of Codi Gat post staying. So that gives them their full compliments of wingers now. And of course, they've got EKK to come back and they'll hope Ezek will hit form.

In terms of the midfielder, no, there was some suggestion of maybe Alexis McAllister going to Manchester City if they didn't get Enzo Fernandez. And if that was the case, I'm sure Liverpool would have brought somebody in a midfield. But in the absence of that, which we don't expect to happen, I think McAllister stays. I don't anticipate another midfielder coming in,

even though Curtis Jones left. It's just the young goalkeeper that is obviously a question. The Belgian goalkeeper 18 years old, I think it's about 35 million euro package. But that would be, I think, to come next year rather than now. When he's played a few more games. David, thank you very much. Do you put your phone on silent tonight?

I didn't. No, I don't know why you didn't hear it. No, when you go to bed, do you put your phone on silent? I won't go to bed tonight, so it's irrelevant. Are you why, do it? No, no. Don't come on here playing the tough guy. Come on.

No, no, maybe a couple of hours, but nothing, nothing serious. Will you at least have like a bath or something to relax? I had a shower before doing this, actually, but I sort of had to balance the phone on the shower frame so that I could see any messages or calls that were coming through. Oh, no, wow. That is the exclusive of the evening. David, thank you very much.

David Husty from The Athletic with us. Now, let's move on to Leonel Messi on the Monday Night Club with Rory Smith, Stephen Warnock and Chris Sutton. He's announced his retirement from international football. He said on Instagram, I love, have loved, and will always love being part of the national team. I've given my all. I've nothing left to give.

He said he'd written the statement two days after the World Cup final defeat to Spain and that the recent death of his father had convinced him to end his international career. So the numbers, 125 goals in 207 appearances, one World Cup, two player of the tournaments, two copper Americas, one finalissimo. And it's no surprise, Rory. No, it's funny, at the end of the World Cup in the summer, there was this idea kind of took hold that Messi might go for another one that obviously the 2030 tournament starts in, I think it'll probably start in Euro-D-Wa, but there's early games in Argentina that he might want to, that he might want to play for that one, that he's obviously quite happy settled in Miami, he's still

playing for into Miami. He, I heard Tim Victory earlier sort of saying that after the final Messi looked kind of as though he could see the gulf between Argentina and Spain. I'm not, I think that given what we now know about the context behind, kind of Messi's tournament and the passing of his dad, I think he maybe understand the emotional kind of fatigued that he was feeling. But then everyone seemed to kind of be ignoring the fact that he'd be 43 and he's not going to play in a World Cup at 43. So I, yeah, when it came through today.

What would his walking stats have been at the next world? Well, I think, Christ, did we not say during the World Cup, that the walking stat was slightly misleading because it was something like he walked for 36% of the time or, 76% at the time and ran for 20. But he was also standing round for like 18%. He was basically stationary until he had to move. I love the way Chris can say that when there wasn't those stats when he was playing.

I know, yeah. The, I think it's not a surprise. You know, time comes for everybody. And Messi has done incredibly well to last as long as he had. I think, you know, the one thing you missed out there, Mark, is that he's played in three World Cup Finals. There's not many people who are playing the three World Cup finals, and he lost two of them, both of them very narrowly, both them just about deservedly, I think.

I don't really remember the Germany game. But, you know, he has been, for Argentina, this has been the golden age of Argentinian football by any standard, certainly since 2020. And Messi, obviously, has been central to that quite late in his career. He has become, he's kind of delivered to his country everything he needed to deliver. And it's, it feels like. it's the right time for him to step aside. There's no point just sort of slogging on

for the sake of a happy ending that you might not get. I think it's incredible that you lose arguably the greatest player in the world as a number 10 in Maradonna, and then you arguably replace him with a greater player who holds that number 10 shirt, which is a heavy shirt to wear. And you just think, who's next? Who steps into that number 10 shirt? And there will be a lot of players who want to wear it because it's iconic.

But there would have been, no matter how good a player Messi was, there would have always been a pressure to put that shirt on and perform because of Maradonna. And he just embraced it and loved it. And I mean, for me, he's the best player that's ever lived that I've ever seen on a football pitch and being able to watch out. I didn't really get to see enough of Maradonna.

But when I look at him... I think Maradonna had it tougher. Yeah, no, I can imagine that, Chris. There was that physical element where we know people tackle that. But, I mean, if you look back at some of the, some of the footage and some of the tackles which Maradona had to ride, I mean, it was wild. That was, I mean, it's not to say Messi couldn't have done, but that test of your courage as well, you know, is different. To me, and it's one of those, there's no answer to it. It's personal preference.

There's no, there's no, there's no kind of objective truth to who is the greatest player of all time. But to me, that is out, and Chris's point is absolutely right, but it's outweighed by the longevity. of Messi, the fact that I watched the compilation of all of his World Cup goals today and on the BBC, I think. And he stored the first one in 2006 and they're all wearing those big billowing shirts that people used to wear in the olden times, Chris. And you kind of think about all the stuff that's changed in football while Messi has been there and he has been the best at it throughout until the last couple of years. longevity also partly comes down to how you live your life and what circumstances then mean you live your life in a certain way. I think we'd all agree that Deodor de Maradonna's commitment to his training regime was beyond a pro.

Yeah, but also circumstances played into things with Maradonna as well. Whether it be early injuries, whether it be being at Napoli. I mean, there were all sorts that played into it. Yeah, I mean, Napoli, Maradonna's life is probably a much more compelling tale than Messi's messy. I mean, Maradonna's life, Maradona lives about a million different lives, all of them really fascinating. And it's not to kind of impugn his memory. He is, like Stephen says, what's amazing about Maradona is that he was the, Maradona was the fulfillment of a prophecy. That's the mad thing about Maradonna, that he was described in 1928 as the spirit of Argentinian football.

and the 50 years later, the literal description of him, of that description is made flesh in Maradonna. And to have to follow that, he wasn't just the number 10, but was the kind of the spiritual ideal of Argentinean football, for Messi to follow that, build on it. And, I mean, early on in his international career, I think it did really weigh on him.

I think it took him a long time to get used to be in Argentina, the focus of that kind of the cult around the Argentine national team. Well, there was a lot of scrutiny as well, wasn't there? about leaving Argentina and being in Barcelona and not coming back and that will have weighed heavy on him as well but again to be able to put that to aside and to prove everyone wrong in Argentina that he was at arguably the greatest club in the world

when he was doing it. You know, football is just really, really quickly, Chapas, sorry. The thing on the three finals that I think is really important is that Messi has defined three world clubs. He might not have won all three of them but he dragged Argentina to the final in 2014. He dragged them in 2026. I mean, the half an hour that he produced against England

to knock them out in the semi-final was genuinely astonishing. It got lost in all the controversy over two-twil. He should have been taken off in the final. That's a good thing for the Argentinian manager. He won't have to wonder now whether he can, you know, take a player off or not. Also, if there was one person who I would probably have money

on knowing who might take, Messi's number 10 shirt who's, you know, 17 and playing in a suburb of Buenos Aires at the moment. No, I wish I did, Chapas. I really wish I did. I don't, I don't. Disappointing really that, that, Roaring. There were always, after Maradonna before Messi, there were endless new Marodonnas. Ariel Ortega.

Oh, loved Ortega. Yeah, yeah. Pablo Imar. Yes. Who's the, who's Stallone's assistant now. Riquel May. Yeah. But loads and loads came through between kind of 1919.

and 2005, 2006, there will now be endless new messies. Just make a name up. No, does that might look like I'm kind of being disparaging of kind of Argentine name. So I'm not going to do that, because it might create accusations of xenophobia. So absolutely not. I don't know. I would genuinely, I mean, I wouldn't because you're too much of a valuable member. But if your broadcasting career came to an end because you made up an...

You've made up an Argentine name It would also feel very kind of appropriate. It would be a fitting way to bow out If I made up a kind of really offensive Aerotypes Argentine name. So much sport today And all the goals as they go in up and down the leagues. This is five life sports.

It's all eight of the lights and fit in a floor. To bowl him. It's not to stop up. Everyone standing around the 18. Hey, three. Overhead, get on. These shows to the centre. Of the world's greatest sporting events.

Listen on BBC Sounds. Get more with BBC podcasts, wherever you listen. Be the first to listen to your favourite shows, like Evil Genius, Good, Bad Billionaire, and You're Dead to Me, with a subscription to BBC Podcasts Premium on Apple Podcasts. You can also enjoy a range of our podcasts, ad-free, with an Amazon music subscription.

You know,