Erling Haaland

Status
Not open for further replies.
decmancity said:
Apart from Donnarumma, Hakimi, Nuno Mendes and a ton of some of the biggest talents in Europe at u19 age group etc. Yeah, never signed any young stars.

Raiola took Donnarumma there because there was millions on the table for both of them. How is Donnarumma not at the top of his respective food chain? just won best player at Euro 2020 and the best young keeper in the world with a potential career of 15+ years.
Click to expand...
Hakimi is never going to be a contender for the Ballon D’Or. Mbappe realized he needed to leave to take his career to the next step. Nuno Mendes’ agent wanted him to leave Sporting asap. He wanted him to come to us. PSG was the possibility left on the table. But he too won’t be the star of the decade. I am talking about that level. I think with goalkeepers it’s a different situation because only so much can happen for them and places to fit. It’s not the same for a young striker destined for the top. Neymar would never have gone to PSG instead of Barcelona first for instance.

Maybe I will be wrong and he will end up there, in which case I will apologize. But at this point it looks extremely unlikely with everything I understand. They are likely to replace Mbappe with a Richarlison, for instance
 
Haaland has always had an unreal goal scoring record as a kid.
Why did we not bring him in when he was 15, 16, 17?
Why did Salzburg get him over us?

We buy kids from all over the world.
We have databases made with stats for nearly everyone in world football.

This is not just hindsight.
If you have a kid whose Dad played for us, goes watching some of our games with his Dad, great scoring record, you’d think someone would have picked up on that and thought let’s get him in.

Anyone who is clearly decent with City roots/connections should surely be given priority.
And I don’t mean any City fan gets a trial ha, just that we want kids with talent who have ‘City blood’ like Phil.

Id just like to know if we were aware of him and if not why?
 
BerkshireBlue said:
why would Dortmund hold on to him when they know he's going for half the price in the summer. Surely it makes sense for them to sell in January for more money.
Click to expand...
It makes no difference because the clause has already kicked in
 
BerkshireBlue said:
why would Dortmund hold on to him when they know he's going for half the price in the summer. Surely it makes sense for them to sell in January for more money.
Click to expand...
Only way Haaland agrees to leaving in Jan is if Dortmund give him the difference in fees. The whole point of the low release clause was so clubs would top him up personally with a huge signing on fee.

X having to pay 125m to Dortmund for Haaland means less to give him and his dad (and Raiola) as well.

X having to pay 65m to Dortmund for Haaland means they have 60m to split across the others and make them happy.

So unless Dortmund sell for 125m but give Haaland 60m anyway it just allows them 65m to buy someone in Jan which is very unlikely imo.
 
GX Blue said:
Haaland has always had an unreal goal scoring record as a kid.
Why did we not bring him in when he was 15, 16, 17?
Why did Salzburg get him over us?

We buy kids from all over the world.
We have databases made with stats for nearly everyone in world football.

This is not just hindsight.
If you have a kid whose Dad played for us, goes watching some of our games with his Dad, great scoring record, you’d think someone would have picked up on that and thought let’s get him in.

Anyone who is clearly decent with City roots/connections should surely be given priority.
And I don’t mean any City fan gets a trial ha, just that we want kids with talent who have ‘City blood’ like Phil.

Id just like to know if we were aware of him and if not why?
Click to expand...
You could ask the same for another Dortmund kid like Reyna. Why did we let him go? It happens
 
GX Blue said:
Haaland has always had an unreal goal scoring record as a kid.
Why did we not bring him in when he was 15, 16, 17?
Why did Salzburg get him over us?

We buy kids from all over the world.
We have databases made with stats for nearly everyone in world football.

This is not just hindsight.
If you have a kid whose Dad played for us, goes watching some of our games with his Dad, great scoring record, you’d think someone would have picked up on that and thought let’s get him in.

Anyone who is clearly decent with City roots/connections should surely be given priority.
And I don’t mean any City fan gets a trial ha, just that we want kids with talent who have ‘City blood’ like Phil.

Id just like to know if we were aware of him and if not why?
Click to expand...
Why did no one in world football bring him in?

Its not that simple.

Delap is tearing apart the u23 league and still can't get any game time. Haaland was given first team football at 18.
 
GX Blue said:
Haaland has always had an unreal goal scoring record as a kid.
Why did we not bring him in when he was 15, 16, 17?
Why did Salzburg get him over us?

We buy kids from all over the world.
We have databases made with stats for nearly everyone in world football.

This is not just hindsight.
If you have a kid whose Dad played for us, goes watching some of our games with his Dad, great scoring record, you’d think someone would have picked up on that and thought let’s get him in.

Anyone who is clearly decent with City roots/connections should surely be given priority.
And I don’t mean any City fan gets a trial ha, just that we want kids with talent who have ‘City blood’ like Phil.

Id just like to know if we were aware of him and if not why?
Click to expand...
Probably because his dad thought Norway-Austria -Germany- ? was a better development path than trying to break into a team that was expected to win the league and already had Aguero. I say his dad was right.
 
blueparrot said:
Last summer was Kane or nothing and always was and we almost certainly made offer /s. The rumours of offers for anyone else were just that. We will have a pretty good idea now, or by January at the latest whether we think Haaland is an option, if not we will be looking at alternatives. History tells us how we operate we will have a budget for Haaland and a cut off that no bidding war will shift us from.
Click to expand...


How do you decide which rumours have something to them, and which don't?

We were constantly and repeatedly rumoured to be after nuno mendes, with fugures quoted and all. Nothing moved on it. It gets widely concluded we were in for kane or nothing, but plenty suggests others were looked at too, including vlahovic. And ronaldo for a brief moment too.

I can't possibly believe it was all kane and nobody else in the frame. Partly because of other rumours, but also because how little real effort was made and how much of the window was left when the club walked away. Mostly though, it doesnt make sense, and is not how the club have operated before. People argue we don't get involved in bidding wars or pay big fees (we do both, have done and will do), but happily accept we would gonfor just one single player, when senior members have previously openly claimed every transfer has multiple options.

On that note, I don't believe his release clause kicks in january. Not because the source is mince, and one speculative claim only, which is true, but because it doesnt make sense. Dortmund would not have played hardball the way they did and clubs would have teated them more if it was as soon as january rather than next summer. Also makes no footballing sense to have agree a release clause midway through a season.
 
Coatigan said:
On that note, I don't believe his release clause kicks in january. Not because the source is mince, and one speculative claim only, which is true, but because it doesnt make sense. Dortmund would not have played hardball the way they did and clubs would have teated them more if it was as soon as january rather than next summer. Also makes no footballing sense to have agree a release clause midway through a season.
Click to expand...
The report isn’t “mince”, it’s Marca, who doesn’t get this contract stuff wrong, and was corroborated elsewhere after the initial report. I strongly believe the leak came from Raiola’s camp. It’s probable no club made an offer near where they would start to consider acceptable. If they let him go for little, the standard for future transfers would have been set. It’s very much possible they believe he will stay until the summer despite the clause, because having the clause there doesn’t mean he has to leave necessarily, obviously. And it makes perfect sense to agree to two full years before a clause kicks in
 
Coatigan said:
How do you decide which rumours have something to them, and which don't?

We were constantly and repeatedly rumoured to be after nuno mendes, with fugures quoted and all. Nothing moved on it. It gets widely concluded we were in for kane or nothing, but plenty suggests others were looked at too, including vlahovic. And ronaldo for a brief moment too.

I can't possibly believe it was all kane and nobody else in the frame. Partly because of other rumours, but also because how little real effort was made and how much of the window was left when the club walked away. Mostly though, it doesnt make sense, and is not how the club have operated before. People argue we don't get involved in bidding wars or pay big fees (we do both, have done and will do), but happily accept we would gonfor just one single player, when senior members have previously openly claimed every transfer has multiple options.

On that note, I don't believe his release clause kicks in january. Not because the source is mince, and one speculative claim only, which is true, but because it doesnt make sense. Dortmund would not have played hardball the way they did and clubs would have teated them more if it was as soon as january rather than next summer. Also makes no footballing sense to have agree a release clause midway through a season.
Click to expand...
I don't beleive 90% of the rumours. However Kane was definitely trying to move , there was no other team linked at all.The clubbed never denied we wanted Kane, they denied others . In fact Pep more or less confirmed our Kane interest. Not one other striker was linked in the way Kane was.
As for bidding wars , we may put bids in but who have we carried on bidding for against multiple clubs and got. We always .it seems to me anyway, have a cut off from which we won't budge no matter what. Kane seems to be yet another instance of it.
 
blueparrot said:
The clubbed never denied we wanted Kane, they denied others . In fact Pep more or less confirmed our Kane interest.
Click to expand...
Did the club ever deny Haaland? Did the club ever deny Vlahovic? When Pep talked about Kane, at that moment I do believe he was our target. Was that motivated by him wanting to leave? We will never know. But it doesn’t for one second mean he was ever the only one
 
decmancity said:
Only way Haaland agrees to leaving in Jan is if Dortmund give him the difference in fees. The whole point of the low release clause was so clubs would top him up personally with a huge signing on fee.

X having to pay 125m to Dortmund for Haaland means less to give him and his dad (and Raiola) as well.

X having to pay 65m to Dortmund for Haaland means they have 60m to split across the others and make them happy.

So unless Dortmund sell for 125m but give Haaland 60m anyway it just allows them 65m to buy someone in Jan which is very unlikely imo.
Click to expand...

Agreed with much of your earlier posts today but bloody heck that is one perverse take on it.

The point od a release clause is to get a move rather than be priced out of one. Agents will ask and get what they can regarless. It makes it more palatable to the buying club maybe, having less to pay in transfer fee but by no is it a granted offset.

The way I see it, it is all back on for anyone now, last summer was last summer. I don't rule out any club myself.

PSG - a few seem to think he won't go there, because we are happy to look down on them and their league. But, they have the money and the fuck-all attitude when they want to seal a deal, and he fits right in with their ambition. They have pretty much guaranteed trophies, a shot at the CL, and top players to play alongside, including messi in his final years as a generational talent.

Barca, again, because we are happy to look down on them in their current financial state, but when has that stopped them before. Big name club, wil always be there and always make bug signings.

Real Madrid, after mbappe clearly. Has that ever stopped them signing other world class players, particularly if he goes there for free? a club that likes to collect them like figurines, has the money, the draw, the attitude, the lot.

Us, great manager, great team in our prime, the obvious need for a striker. Chance to win, play in this league. We do have the money too, let's not kid on. Maybe will be more prudent than others on principle, but it is there too.

Bayern,the assumption is they don't pay for players, they are like liverpool, never spend money on anyone, never will. Familiar league, long term prospects, challenging for trophies, idol status with them lot easlily.

Chelsea maybe least likely given they have lukaku.

Utd, supposedly their manager is a draw, not afraid to spend whatever it takes, can sell the whole ronaldo sancho playing alongside top wingers guff, and will clain on the up to return to being a real challenger again. Whether his dad's story would come into it who knows.


Unless he has already decided (why would he with so many options out there and all live and changeable), it is all to play for for any team really.
 
blueparrot said:
You think, you don't know.
Click to expand...
No that’s not what I think, it’s a credible report that is out there. You will never hear this stuff from the horse’s mouth, but depending om who’s reporting it, you can believe it and have a good idea of where it came from
 
ancoats said:
i think this is the key and its a pre-contract deal he can sign
city must get him signed on a pre-contract for the summer at £67million or just pay the money dortmund want now
i think £100million in the winter window makes them sell now
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone can sign him on a pre contract. that only applies to contracts coming to a natural end, not to release clauses which are optional, as i understand it.
 
blueparrot said:
I don't beleive 90% of the rumours. However Kane was definitely trying to move , there was no other team linked at all.The clubbed never denied we wanted Kane, they denied others . In fact Pep more or less confirmed our Kane interest. Not one other striker was linked in the way Kane was.
As for bidding wars , we may put bids in but who have we carried on bidding for against multiple clubs and got. We always .it seems to me anyway, have a cut off from which we won't budge no matter what. Kane seems to be yet another instance of it.
Click to expand...

Not arguing the kane interest, obviously we were in for him. I'm asking why you dismiss other rumours of interrat in other players, and accept the kane ones.
 
BrazilianBlue (Gus) said:
Did the club ever deny Haaland? Did the club ever deny Vlahovic? When Pep talked about Kane, at that moment I do believe he was our target. Was that motivated by him wanting to leave? We will never know. But it doesn’t for one second mean he was ever the only one
Click to expand...
No because they wre never seriously linked, is they denied every rumour they'd be doing about 5 a day through the summer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top