tolmie's hairdoo
Well-Known Member
I doubt we played sane to push bayern to up an offer they hadn't made and repeatedly said they wouldn't make. We played him because he is our player. That isn't a gamble.
I don't beleive any of that, i'm sorry and no offense, but 110m is so far off both, and wven if i could see us accepting it (that soon after saying 135 so resolutely), i can't see bayern having offered it. It would have beem 72m, then 75, i doubt they'd have gone over 80. They made their bed, they'd look supid if they didn't lie in it. I doubt they had hoped for anything more than unsettling him, making sure he doesn't commit to a new deal, and trying again this season for a lot less.
It was Bareda who did the pooled brief!
We would not accept less than £138m. Two days later Bayern were back on at £100m including add-ons.
We wanted more and insisted we didn't need to sell, hence deciding to start him and try and get Bayern up one last time before the deadline.
The injury meant Bayern had to quickly arrange 12-month loan deals for other players as a stop gap.
What City were saying in public and the reality, was very different.
We had already spoken to other clubs about a replacement.