Blogs

Hughes rejects ‘derisory’ bid for Chelsea and Man United target

|
Image for Hughes rejects ‘derisory’ bid for Chelsea and Man United target

Asmir Begovic

According to reports from the Stoke Sentinel yesterday morning, Stoke City have rejected a ‘derisory’ bid from Aston Villa for in-demand goalkeeper Asmir Begovic. 

The Bosnian international has demonstrated a remarkable consistency during his five campaigns as the Potters’ No.1, in that time winning the club’s Young Player of the Year, Players’ Player of the Year and Player of the Year awards.

He’s widely expected to leave the Britannia this summer with just a term remaining on his current contract. Stoke City chief executive Tony Scholes admitted earlier this month that the 28 year-old is most likely holding talks with potential suitors already.

Chelsea and Manchester United have both been linked with the 6 foot 6 shot-stopper, requiring replacements for Petr Cech and David De Gea respectively, whilst Stoke boss Mark Hughes is allegedly attempting to negotiate a swap deal with the Blues that would see loanee Victor Moses join the club permanently.

But according to the Stoke Sentinel, Aston Villa have attempted to steal a march on their Premier League rivals by launching an early bid for Begovic.

However, it has been branded as a ‘derisory’ offer by the club’s hierarchy. The Potters reportedly value the former Portsmouth youngster at around £10million, but Villa’s bid is believed to be worth around half that sum – leading them to reject it outright.

Also in the news this week:

Copa America star snubs Arsenal and Man United for La Liga move

McClaren steals a march on Arsenal and Liverpool with £12m bid

Brazil star set to snub Chelsea and Man United for £25m Bayern move

Liverpool set to increase offer for Man United strike target

Share this article

0 comments

  • Son Lyme says:

    I hear the bid was around the £5 – 6 million mark. Which I personally don’t find ‘derisory’ but perhaps in the world of premiership football it is? More to the point is the simple question – Do Stoke want to lose the player for nothing? He can make an agreement with a new club before Christmas and Stoke then won’t get a penny. Butland is the number 1 and a good player he is too but the truth remains, for a player who is unlikely to play, and whose contract is running down, demanding the sort of money reserved for strikers is pointless. You can after all only play one GK – surely Stoke and Hughes would be better getting what they can and investing that in outfield talent?

Comments are closed.