I can’t see us buying someone just to cover Afcon (this is the last mid season one) we will have multiple options that can play false 9 and a couple of kids that will sit on the bench but not play.
As I said, I don’t think it should be seen as purely cover. The ‘sit on the bench’ argument was often used as reason for not signing a Rodri deputy, an argument that fell to pieces this season. If Haaland suffers a similar season-wrecking injury in September, which is not unthinkable given the amount he’s been asked to play, we’d have to revert to one style of play and still know Marmoush will depart. The multiple options that were to cover Rodri have all faltered and the same could be true for those tasked with replacing Haaland. For me, we need someone who can push Haaland but who can also lead the line in his absence. Whether we have learned from our planning mistakes, however, will soon become apparent.
I'm not sure what the rules on this are? Can someone comment? He could fetch 75m in the open market easily.
Who’s a top level striker that would be willing to be Haalands back up?
I'd like us to sign him as hell be a decent back up to Haaland. If it doesn't woek out for him here then sell him on for a profit.
Doubt he would be interested in coming to be a back-up, especially when he seemingly has other options.
That would be great, but just dont see him agreeing to that after his break out season. Deserves to play, wish it wasn't the Rags if that's what happens, but he ain't going nowhere to be a back up imo...
I'd be activating that buy back and selling him to Everton or West ham instead of letting him go there
Them lot never learn do they, delap looks the part, but scratch beneath the surface and he really isn't all that which I'm sure our lads know, hence us not being interested.
I don’t think he is compelled to come back.
And how would you propose to do that?
