Bang on. Arsenal always do that because they are so starved of joy in the transfer market.
Transfer Tweets - Summer 2017 | Keep it on topic
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Not a tweet but I just had to post this bullshit from sky, talking about joses worries they said we've still spent more than Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs combined, statistically true but they have to have a dig don't they especially when 3 of those 4 haven't spent anything
No even so, how does that add up? They've quoted us as spending €45m euros for Lindelof (which is including the €10m potential add ons), but haven't done the same with Liverpool and Salah. I thought Salah cost €42m rising to €50m, which would be £36.9m rising to £43.9m.
Not a tweet but I just had to post this bullshit from sky, talking about joses worries they said we've still spent more than Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs combined, statistically true but they have to have a dig don't they especially when 3 of those 4 haven't spent anything
Was Linedlöf 40m pounds?
Not a tweet but I just had to post this bullshit from sky, talking about joses worries they said we've still spent more than Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs combined, statistically true but they have to have a dig don't they especially when 3 of those 4 haven't spent anything
Salah to liverpool was £36.9m without add-ons so they're wrong there for a start, and they've included all of the potential add-ons for Lindelof but not for Liverpool or City's transfers. Because obviously that wouldn't suit their dumb argument
No €35+5 bonuses.
BBC Sport say £31 million which = €35 million
That will rise to €40 million so rising to £35 million.
Sky sports are WAY off.
Last edited:
Salah to liverpool was £36.9m without add-ons so they're wrong there for a start, and they've included all of the potential add-ons for Lindelof but not for Liverpool or City's transfers. Because obviously that wouldn't suit their dumb argument
Exactly, what a bunch of cnuts?
Everyone loves to have a dig when we are either down or things not going to plan . Go and show them Ed and sign kane
That's what I thought it was but even @United Pro is mentioning €45m. Odd.
Edited my post to explain more.
They're overselling it to soften the blow of the inevitable departure of Sanchez to City.
Thanks. More expensive than I thought he was.Benfica released a statement saying he cost €35m with an additional €10m in add ons.
€10 million is performance and appearances so many sources got it wrong in the build up. So as it stands until he's met them we have paid £31 miilion for him.Benfica released a statement saying he cost €35m with an additional €10m in add ons.
Yes, I remember reading the first €5m add ons is quite easy to achieve and is based on appearances, but the last €5m is a lot more difficult and is at least part-dependent in getting in the Fifa team of the year.
These bonuses are always complicated either way £39 million will end up looking like small change if he excels to the stage where he is in the Fifa team of the year. If not we have a very good defender for £31 millions.
This would have less impact
Exactly, if we end up paying £39m, it'll be because Lindelof will be a top 2 CB in the world at the time, so it'll be well worth it.
Seriously?
You are aware we have lost Zlatan's massive wages and are in the champions league this season?
Same every year. They might as well add the wages on top of out players in the future.Salah to liverpool was £36.9m without add-ons so they're wrong there for a start, and they've included all of the potential add-ons for Lindelof but not for Liverpool or City's transfers. Because obviously that wouldn't suit their dumb argument
Always have to laugh when they use £ but use the figures we paid in € but for that couple of days the € was stronger we were finally quoted correctly.
Most probably, but how would they sell themselves otherwise?
When is that by the way?
This is truly hilarious. They just change a couple of names and have themselves "a great new article". How pathetic.
I can imagine Woody sleeping in on a Tuesday morning, having coffee at 11 in the morning, scratching his balls and scrolling through tweeter and some other "verified" sports media, thinking "That Jose guy is a pain in the buttocks, gotta go to work now
"The frustration article is bollocks. Easy story to make when things are quiet. If this was a World Cup/Euro year the transfer market would have barely kicked off yet.
Cissé joins Yverdon, a 3rd Division club in Switzerland.
Inter Milan offered Perisic a new contract for 4m euros per year but he rejected the offer willing to join united.
But it isn't a World Cup/Euro year, to be fair.
So what? The season starts around the same time.
So I'm that case, what was the relevance of your point?
It is odd to mitigate (or at least that's what you appeared to do) slow progress in a transfer window by saying, if the conditions were different, it wouldn't be a problem). I'm not taking any particular side in the debate here, I just don't see the relevance of what the narrative would be like if it were a tournament year when it isn't one.
You probably haven't watched closely enough most of our last games since Zlatan's injury, when Rashford or Martial as strikers were closely followed by another attacking player.
The point is that the transfer season is completely in it's infancy. The season doesn't start for 6 weeks. In some years clubs would do most of their spending in this time, for example if players were at the world cup. Many clubs haven't even signed anyone yet. The stuff about Jose being frustrated that we only have 1 player will be complete bollocks. 1 player is normal for this time of year, even with no World Cup.
good lad
If you believe your last line, then whether there is a tournament or not has no significance. And if there is a significance, then it would be irrelevant this summer as there is no tournament.
Anyway, excuse my pedantry.
Well Jose did say he'd only sign players that wanted to play for the club, if this is true as is Morata forcing through the transfer then they'll both be signed imo.
Not a tweet but I just had to post this bullshit from sky, talking about joses worries they said we've still spent more than Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs combined, statistically true but they have to have a dig don't they especially when 3 of those 4 haven't spent anything
Sky Sports News always come on with the dumbest statistics.
That's one thing people always seem to overlook. It's all well and good saying chuck a load of money at Dembele or Mbappe or whoever else. But if they aren't really in to us then what's the point? At least with the players we're after they all reportedly really want to join us. That counts for a lot.
I feel we aren't even trying Mbappé because of that, he doesn't fancy us and Mourinho won't put up with that.
That said, isn't it the job of the manager and others from the club to try to convince a player to join the club. It feels like a lazy way to make excuses. Many players have been swayed by a manager putting a word in a player's ear. We are not the only big club anymore. Not that I know if he is involved or not but just chucking a list at Ed and washing hands off the negotiation will not produce magic.
Sir Alex didn't manage it that often. He was of the same ilk. Either you want to play for us or not. We lost out on plenty through that and it didn't do us too much harm.