It's Quiet Thread 15 - Txiki Blinders

[andyhinch]

Why is that your point or a feasible issue?
It is the club who pointedly made Kane their only choice in replacing Aguero - as Khaldoon stated was a goal and Pep alluded to. Either the club need goals and a no 9 (in which they should have multiple targets if Plan A fails - i.e Dias scenario) or Kane is the only/perfect choice and they believed (falsely) they could get the deal done. The former allows lots of options; The latter was a risk and it didn't pay off for them.

By all accounts, Spurs made it clear early on what the price would be to start a conversation (more than we were willing) and by, Pep's account, didn't enter any negotiations. The morning that Kane tweeted that he was staying, Jack G, one of the most well briefed & connected City journos, wrote that City were still confident. City journos and others on here also stated the high confidence - everything being set up for his arrival. Transfers often fall apart but this was a massive misjudgement of the situation - coming from the same board who misjudged the Super League.

In contrast, Chelsea wanted Haaland realised he was unobtainable at a price they were willing to pay and moved onto Lukaku. Messi went on a 'free' to PSG. Ronaldo went to United (after we flirted). Ings went to Villa. Daka to Leicester etc If goals were the need, there were options; if it's only Kane, then there are not.

So you wanted Ings or Daka ?

 

[Le Havre Oswald]

chelski got lukalukaloo, madrid: mbaps, psg: mess, rags: trannytwat. Bindippers and barca are skint haha. munich wont be able to sell lewodonk

Can you make up a cool nickname for me please

 

[JustAnotherCityFan]

chelski got lukalukaloo, madrid: mbaps, psg: mess, rags: trannytwat. Bindippers and barca are skint haha. munich wont be able to sell lewodonk

PSG will lose Mbappe next summer so you can be sure they will be all in for Haaland. Money is no object to them it seems so I'd say he's more likely to go there than to us.

 

[blue oli]

So you wanted Ings or Daka ?

I think the point is that any of the options available at what would represent market value and not letting city get ripped off were no better than playing with the talented players we have already.

What was available potentially - (Kane & Haaland this summer, fake Ronaldos wages - which believe me are more than the advertised 500k per week). Messi is an odd one but I do think we had drawn a line under that one and wouldn’t enter into negotiation from a deal previously on the table.

Anything else out there wasn’t worth it - unles you really think Daka or ings et al are an upgrade on Jesus, Torres or even Delap.

I think this summer was about value for money, grealish aside (still think him and foden is a pairing from hell for opposition defences). And there was nothing near value for money this summer.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

10

 

[andyhinch]

I think the point is that any of the options available at what would represent market value and not letting city get ripped off were no better than playing with the talented players we have already.

What was available potentially - (Kane & Haaland this summer, fake Ronaldos wages - which believe me are more than the advertised 500k per week). Messi is an odd one but I do think we had drawn a line under that one and wouldn’t enter into negotiation from a deal previously on the table.

Anything else out there wasn’t worth it - unles you really think Daka or ings et al are an upgrade on Jesus, Torres or even Delap.

I think this summer was about value for money, grealish aside (still think him and foden is a pairing from hell for opposition defences). And there was nothing near value for money this summer.

That was kind of the point of my question.

 

[Oldham Exile]

Why is that your point or a feasible issue?
It is the club who pointedly made Kane their only choice in replacing Aguero - as Khaldoon stated was a goal and Pep alluded to. Either the club need goals and a no 9 (in which they should have multiple targets if Plan A fails - i.e Dias scenario) or Kane is the only/perfect choice and they believed (falsely) they could get the deal done. The former allows lots of options; The latter was a risk and it didn't pay off for them.

By all accounts, Spurs made it clear early on what the price would be to start a conversation (more than we were willing) and by, Pep's account, didn't enter any negotiations. The morning that Kane tweeted that he was staying, Jack G, one of the most well briefed & connected City journos, wrote that City were still confident. City journos and others on here also stated the high confidence - everything being set up for his arrival. Transfers often fall apart but this was a massive misjudgement of the situation - coming from the same board who misjudged the Super League.

In contrast, Chelsea wanted Haaland realised he was unobtainable at a price they were willing to pay and moved onto Lukaku. Messi went on a 'free' to PSG. Ronaldo went to United (after we flirted). Ings went to Villa. Daka to Leicester etc If goals were the need, there were options; if it's only Kane, then there are not.

Sorry - we will just have to disagree - you seem to be going out of your way to criticise the club on this

I am sure that there would have been many posters criticising the club - perhaps yourself - if we had paid 100m for Lukaku, or offered a package to Ronaldo higher than the one the scum offered, or we opted for Ings instead of Kane etc.

I think criticism if one of those desperate choices had been made would have more validity than a choice - following our pursuit of Kane - to go with our current squad

 

[Oldham Exile]

I think the point is that any of the options available at what would represent market value and not letting city get ripped off were no better than playing with the talented players we have already.

What was available potentially - (Kane & Haaland this summer, fake Ronaldos wages - which believe me are more than the advertised 500k per week). Messi is an odd one but I do think we had drawn a line under that one and wouldn’t enter into negotiation from a deal previously on the table.

Anything else out there wasn’t worth it - unles you really think Daka or ings et al are an upgrade on Jesus, Torres or even Delap.

I think this summer was about value for money, grealish aside (still think him and foden is a pairing from hell for opposition defences). And there was nothing near value for money this summer.

Really well said - that is indeed the points as I see them

Why do people find it hard to accept that if Kane was unobtainable at a sensible price - going with our current squad is a better Plan B than disrupting it by buying some 'make-do'

 

[Ajm1985]

Sorry - we will just have to disagree - you seem to be going out of your way to criticise the club on this

I am sure that there would have been many posters criticising the club - perhaps yourself - if we had paid 100m for Lukaku, or offered a package to Ronaldo higher than the one the scum offered, or we opted for Ings instead of Kane etc.

I think criticism if one of those desperate choices had been made would have more validity than a choice - following our pursuit of Kane - to go with our current squad

Of course we'll have to disagree when you pluck strawman arguments out of the air about what I might have done in a hypothetical scenario. If you think the club is above criticism, fair enough, there's no point continuing a conversation.

 

[Oldham Exile]

Of course we'll have to disagree when you pluck strawman arguments out of the air about what I might have done in a hypothetical scenario. If you think the club is above criticism, fair enough, there's no point continuing a conversation.

OK