It really isn’t.It isn’t. It’s the going rate.
It really isn’t.It isn’t. It’s the going rate.
Is it heckIt isn’t. It’s the going rate.
Even The Athletic’s Chelsea correspondent has said “Cucurella is costing considerably more than £52.5m”.So now we believe Romano, who we usually call a bullshit merchant?
He seems to be the only one with those numbers, all others saying 52.5m
It isn’t. It’s the going rate.
Nice false equivalence. I also have no idea about lording it over any club be it allegedly bigger or smaller than our club.Some people have short memories.
Where were we just over 20 years ago?
It's good to crow when you get one over a "bigger" club - we've all done it.
Not every battle is won, it's how you learn to prepare for for the next one.
I was pissed off when we sold David Wagstaffe, but I've now got over my disappointment.
We go forwards.
We shouldn’t have wasted so much time and resource on him though, even I knew that it’d take £50+mil to get him, just Chelsea were the ones stupid enough to pay it.That’s an insane fee really, given his relative lack of experience. Fair play to Brighton for getting that amount, but don’t blame City for walking away. We’d have been absolutely panned for “distorting the market” if we’d paid that.
Who?£62m is ridiculous.
City quite rightly pulled out of that. We could sign a better player for less than that.