Leicester City are understood to have ended their interest in Town striker David McGoldrick and are turning their attention to other targets.

The Foxes made a renewed bid - believed to be £7 million - for the 26-year-old yesterday, having had an initial offer of £6.5 million turned down on Friday.

Town owner Marcus Evans is understood to have wanted £8 million for the former Nottingham Forest man.

Leicester are now reported to have made a bid for Manchester United striker Tom Lawrence, while they also hope to sign his team-mate Nick Powell on loan.

McGoldrick continues to be linked with Crystal Palace, however, the Eagles are said to have made a bid for Leicester’s Chris Wood and are also being mentioned in connection with Norwich’s Gary Hooper and Wolves’ Kevin Doyle.

Meanwhile, the Blues are claimed to have turned down an offer of £2.5 million from Palace for left-back Tyrone Mings, according to one report. Whether or not that figure is an exaggeration it does appear that the 21-year-old won’t be joining the Eagles.

Elsewhere, new academy addition Adam McDonnell was at the club this morning to sign his two-year pro deal. The 17-year-old central midfielder was previously with Dublin side Shelbourne and spent time on trial with Town in the summer, featuring in the friendly at Braintree.

In what currently looks like being a quiet final day of the transfer window at Portman Road, one switch which may happen is Byron Lawrence joining Colchester United following his recent trial, despite U’s manager Joe Dunne having been sacked earlier today.

The 18-year-old, who is available on a free transfer, is well-known to Colchester’s academy manager Tony Humes and development coach Richard Hall from their time with the Blues’ youth set-up.

Photo: Action Images

howdonblue added 15:43 - Sep 1 Good I'm glad he is staying ... But there will be loads on here probably whinging all day about it
3

blues1 added 15:45 - Sep 1 mojo. he is actually contracte till the end of this season. the 3rd season is only an option. unless that option is on the clubs side he can walk away at the end of the season, for nothing. jwm. I agree totally that clubs like Bournemouth, and forest are disregarding the ffp, but if you think that's a smokescreen, you need to wake up and smell the coffee. man city have already been punished by fifa for breaking their ffp so if you think that the football league will now not do the same to clubs under its own version then that's ur prerogative. if they do then clearly something is wrong, but somehow I doubt it. and if/when these clubs do get punished we will be in a strong position. and, if, by some chance ur right, then we will have free reign to ignore it next time around too

0

blues1 added 15:46 - Sep 1 yes david, and that's why keane wanted rid of him. which is exactly the point I made
0

JWM added 15:47 - Sep 1 So we are not allowed to spend any of the Cresswell money on players due to FFP?
0

Jimmy86 added 15:48 - Sep 1 I think we may now have an unhappy player on our hands. Chance of premier league football, having had 1 decent season at championship level and a decent loan spell in league 1. Yea hold out for 8 but if they offer 7 negotiate and have wood included in any deal. If he has had his head turned he wont ever be the same for us again. 7 million is still a good amount for someone we signed for free

-1

Len_Brennan added 15:49 - Sep 1 I'd imagine there is legs in this story yet & Leicester will be back. Unitl the window shuts there will be frantic action. Would be well pleased if McGoldrick stays as he is a top forward in our league & would be happy enough with a fee of £8m if it materialises. If he does go, we need one or two in immediately though. If he did go to Palace it might allow for Murray & Williams to come the other way, which would be decent compensation.

1

MrDiddle added 15:53 - Sep 1 some of these comments are ridiculous. MM has stated that neither he or ME wish for McG to leave but will not stand in his way should the right offer come along. If ME thinks McG is worth £8m then why is it bad business to turn down an offer of £7m? You're talking £1m difference, a massive amount of money by any FL clubs standards.
2

Jimmy86 added 15:58 - Sep 1 Because 7 million is still a hell of a lot of money for a player we signed for free and has not signed a new contract and who suffered a nasty injury that could go again at any time
0

blues1 added 15:58 - Sep 1 jwm. as ive said on previous occasions regarding the cresswell money. while we haven't paid ne transfer fees, we've signed 4 players since cresswell left, all of which would have involved agents fees and substantial signing on fees for the player. where do you think that money came from? yes, the cresswell money. yes, we've more to come from w,ham obviously but not until cressy fulfils the criteria connected to those add ons. sure there is still a bit left from the original fee paid but not enough to be going out paying a transfer fee. a loan fee maybe, and we'll have to wait and see what happens loanwise. also suspect that if collision and ambrose impress in under 21 match tonight trhat we may well offer 1 or both a deal, which will use more of that money

0

BlueSwede added 16:02 - Sep 1 Sometimes I don't understand the comments made here. First people complain when we sell Cresswell, then they moan when we don't sell Mings and McGoldrick. And if we would have sold them, there would have been comments about the owner and the club lacking ambition...
5

suffolkpunchdrunk added 16:02 - Sep 1 Plenty of time left for compromise and a move but if this deal does not come off and DM stays we should go all out to get him to sign new contract on enhanced terms, the price of maintaining his value.
1

blues1 added 16:03 - Sep 1 jimmy86. while like most, including you im sure, id be perfectly happy if he still here at end of the day, but I couldn't agree with ur comments more. turning down nething in excess of £4m imo is very surprising. not many clubs who would turn down a 100% profit of that amount for a player who may never be the same again. the trouble is, that even if hes on fire between now and the jan window, and some1 came in for him then, hed be worth much less than now as less time left on his contract

-1

thebeat added 16:07 - Sep 1 blues1 Cresswell wasnt the only player to leave, we also shipped out Loach, Ebanks-Blake, Edwards, Doherty, alomg with sending Green, Williams and Richardson back. Im sure the wages we were paying those especially Edwards and Loach who were signed by Clegg so would have been on good money along with Cresswells will more than cover the wages of the 4 new players. FFP is a crock and we hide behind it.

2

blues1 added 16:07 - Sep 1 exactly blueswede. u couldn't be more right. i wasn't one of those who moaned about selling cresswell. that was a no brainer at that amount of money. and that's why i do believe we should have accepted this offer too. but as i said in last post, quite happy for him to stay too
0

NicRams added 16:09 - Sep 1 We don't half moan. Why don't we appreciate that we aren't a big spending club, never have been, and just focus on the club moving forward step by step. I like McGoldrick but the financial stability of the club I love is far more important. Let's get behind our team, that is our role. I honestly think we are the most fickle fans and believe we have a given right to be in the Premier League.

0

mojo added 16:10 - Sep 1 Blues1 - but it has been widely reported that the option is with the club not the player. How pleasing it is to see as well and how it should be. We have had our fingers burnt too many times in recent years. I can imagine that McGoldrick will now be offered an extension of further year at least whilst retain the option of a further year still. If he doesn't sign then we should still take up the further year option and look to sell next summer.

0

suffolkpunchdrunk added 16:10 - Sep 1 I guess DM could also force the move if he really wanted to?
0

floridaboy added 16:10 - Sep 1 I think mcgoldrick is going to be one very very unhappy player. If he had gone he would have pocketed a lot of money, that is now not going happen which means he is going to be ticked Will be interested to see if he is injured for the Millwood game
0

Surco72 added 16:11 - Sep 1 blues1 ... why would the players signing on have received substantial signing on fees when they had no clubs ? Also we have cut down on agents fees considerably and the amounts spent on 4 player signing on would be nowhere near the money received for Cresswell . Also we have the savings on wages for the players that have been released or gone on loan since the end of last year that we were paying Loach, Edwards , SEB ,Vesali , Taylor, Marriott Wordy etc I see your point about Man City and the likes of Barcelona being fined under FFP by FIFA and transfer embargos, they have both really stopped signing players !!

1

TractorBeezer added 16:12 - Sep 1 Does anyone know exactly how McGoldrick's option for extension of his existing contract works?
0

karls_dad added 16:13 - Sep 1 Stupid rejection, should have taken the 7 million and run! then invest in the squad, crazy move, we will never ever get the chance like this again, Goldies 7mill plus what we got for Cressie, hmm we could have really done some good business, watch him get crocked again, its gotta happen, its our luck! or lack of it!
-1

blues1 added 16:13 - Sep 1 the beat. yes, we did release others, but ne money from them would have gone into the wage budget, which is separate from that used to actually sign the players in the 1st place. so while that would have gone towards paying the players signed it wouldn't have got them here in the 1st place. tht would purely have been the money form creessys departure and ne money already allotted to signings

0

Count_Arthur added 16:13 - Sep 1 Double the wages, closer to his roots AND a Premiership club, if I was DMcG I'd be a little p*ssed off. Players are never quite the same after a these sorts of injury, let's hope his heart is still in it and his knee is still up to it!
0

blues1 added 16:19 - Sep 1 surco. yes, we paid less in agents fees last season. no1 knows how much we've paid this season so far. as for the signing on fees. every player who signs for a club demands a signing on fee of some amount. that fee is considerably more if they are a free agent and thus no transfer fee is payable to a club, as they are able to demand more for their services. thought that was common knowledge? guess not

0

blues1 added 16:20 - Sep 1 oh and we will still be paying part of the wages for those players out on loan
0

Blogs 295 bloggers

Ipswich Town Polls