Erling Haaland

Status
Not open for further replies.
Coatigan said:
Not really. We had wages agreed with sanchez. And a fee for him, his agents, and even arsenal. We let him go on holiday and let arsenal take the time to secure his replacement till the last day of the window. Arsenal's failure to convince his replacement to move there had them pull out last minute, and the move fail.

There was an expectation he would then move here for the same wages but for free the following summer.

Sure, then in the winter window Utd came in with an insane offer of wages and an offer arsenal would accept to not lose him for free. He chose to accept it rather than waiting 6 months to take what was on the table. We wentnfor Mahrez for better value, which again didn't happen till the summer.

Our club were absolutely right not to offer any more than he had previously agreed. But the two are in no way comparable, in the slightest.

Besides, we Have broken our wage structure, many many times, and will continue to do so. Whether it is on Haaland or someone else. It is total kidology that we have some aribtrary set limit across the board. It is done on a player by player, value by value, sogning by signing basis, in the context of that and the next few seasons and overall financial situation. Otherwise the club would not be run professionally and would not be as successful both on or of the pitch if it were any different.
Click to expand...
So why did Pep at the time say City couldn’t afford to have disharmony in the changing room ,this would have happened if we would have signed Sanchez on the wages that that lot over the road were prepared to pay him. £400,000 I believe that would have meant having players knocking on Pep’s door asking why they wasn’t on the same wages.
 
eastmanc said:
So why did Pep at the time say City couldn’t afford to have disharmony in the changing room ,this would have happened if we would have signed Sanchez on the wages that that lot over the road were prepared to pay him. £400,000 I believe that would have meant having players knocking on Pep’s door asking why they wasn’t on the same wages.
Click to expand...

He was rightly calling out and drawing attention to the perverse amounts Utd were paying to get him there. And it was lovely, having been the ones at the other end of that finger so many times before.

And I suppose in some ways you are right, in that at that particular point we wouldnt have matched wages utd were offering him. We also wouldn't have paid arsenal anything having decided to wait till the summer. Where it differs is that we had actually previously agreed wages with him, and they were higher claimedly higher than what others were on at the time, we just refused to further up them because he got a better offer elsewhere. Which is my point is, they are not comparable.
 
All the talk of finances is just boring. As a supporter I want to see City score as many goals and win as many matches as humanly possible. Does Haaland improve the odds of both things happening? Yes. Great that's all that matters. Leave the finances of the club to the very few people that it actually matters to and just enjoy the football. Give em all £1billion a week who the fuck cares. I sure as shit don't it's not coming out of my pocket.
 
Coatigan said:
He was rightly calling out and drawing attention to the perverse amounts Utd were paying to get him there. And it was lovely, having been the ones at the other end of that finger so many times before.

And I suppose in some ways you are right, in that at that particular point we wouldnt have matched wages utd were offering him. We also wouldn't have paid arsenal anything having decided to wait till the summer. Where it differs is that we had actually previously agreed wages with him, and they were higher claimedly higher than what others were on at the time, we just refused to further up them because he got a better offer elsewhere. Which is my point is, they are not comparable.
Click to expand...
Yes City quite rightly didn’t want up our offer. City shouldn’t be seen as a pushover to any club.
 
Coatigan said:
He was rightly calling out and drawing attention to the perverse amounts Utd were paying to get him there. And it was lovely, having been the ones at the other end of that finger so many times before.

And I suppose in some ways you are right, in that at that particular point we wouldnt have matched wages utd were offering him. We also wouldn't have paid arsenal anything having decided to wait till the summer. Where it differs is that we had actually previously agreed wages with him, and they were higher claimedly higher than what others were on at the time, we just refused to further up them because he got a better offer elsewhere. Which is my point is, they are not comparable.
Click to expand...

I forget about Sanchez sometimes. At that time he was absolutely on fire for Arsenal. Pep would have taken him up a level and he'd have been a Premier League great. As it is he's seen as a symbol of United wasting money.
 
Marvin said:
For a period Alexis Sanchez was one of the best players in the Premier League.
Click to expand...
He was a good player but I always found him overrated, a bit like I do with Kane. Even at Arsenal I don’t think his best period lasted long
 
If we pass up the chance to sign a willing Haaland over penny pinching principles over wages, and he goes to a rival, it'll be the biggest mistake we make as a club post takeover. We'll regret it for decades.

It can't happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.