Erling Haaland

[Tangled up in blue.]

We can sign him and pay Dortmund the transfer fee whenever we want. We cant register him as a City player until 1st of July as that's when the transfer window opens again

Exactly

 

[Stoned Rose]

I swear he said the same about KDB when we bought him.

Writing in his Daily Star column, Merson said: "City getting Erling Haaland won't make them unstoppable - I'd rather have Harry Kane! Kane is a better player in my opinion. Haaland is lightning quick. But Kane is better all-round player who is proven in this league and you know he'll be a hit for you.

"City could spend all the money in the world on Haaland. I still don't know if he'd be a hit. Sign Kane? Bang - 30 goals. No worries. And how many assists as well? This League title would have been done and dusted if City had had a centre forward. If they'd signed Kane last summer it would already be over.

"Haaland has plenty of pace and is a good finisher. He will score goals for City if they get him, and it looks like they will. But there won't be a lot of grass in front of him at City. Look at Romelu Lukaku. He has the same problem.

This is the same Harry Kane who’s only scored 12 league goals all season?

 

[JewelZee]

I hear what you're saying , but I also think what he said was also true to an extent. RM and Barca are massive draws for the majority of players.

Massive???...

 

[FantasyIreland]

Kane would be great for us… but Haaland will be better

and he has years on Kane and will cost half as much

Not when the vultures had had their feed,i suspect we will be paying something very similar.

 

[Sunset]

Kane would be great for us… but Haaland will be better

and he has years on Kane and will cost half as much

haaland is much more of an athletic phenomenon. like a viking from the northman. huge and strong yet acrobatic and obscenely fast at the same time

 

[J.G.Blue.]

Kane would be great for us… but Haaland will be better

and he has years on Kane and will cost half as much

Spot on, if we sign Haaland & decided to sell him in say 5-6 years all things being equal we would probably make a profit, in 5-6 years kane will be more or less finished, For me its a no brainer.

 

[r.soleofsalford]

 

[r.soleofsalford]

View attachment 41045

This is Haalands weedier puny brother.

 

[glyntowen]

I swear he said the same about KDB when we bought him.

Writing in his Daily Star column, Merson said: "City getting Erling Haaland won't make them unstoppable - I'd rather have Harry Kane! Kane is a better player in my opinion. Haaland is lightning quick. But Kane is better all-round player who is proven in this league and you know he'll be a hit for you.

"City could spend all the money in the world on Haaland. I still don't know if he'd be a hit. Sign Kane? Bang - 30 goals. No worries. And how many assists as well? This League title would have been done and dusted if City had had a centre forward. If they'd signed Kane last summer it would already be over.

"Haaland has plenty of pace and is a good finisher. He will score goals for City if they get him, and it looks like they will. But there won't be a lot of grass in front of him at City. Look at Romelu Lukaku. He has the same problem.glad he

glad he doesn't think it will work out, we should be onto a winner

in 2010 his comments on Yaya Toure

"The Ivorian is an average player who is rumoured to be on £200,000 a week. Does he score goals? No. Does he create them? No. Is he an OK holding midfield player? Yeah - but De Jong, Vieira and Barry do that job already!"

too much peruvian marching powder me thinks

 

[Sky Blue]

Crackhead Merson thinking he won't suit us means 40 goals next season for Son of Alf.