malg
Well-Known Member
Ooohhhh......... you're in trouble fella!£63M done !
Ooohhhh......... you're in trouble fella!£63M done !
I wasn’t as much a fan of that move, either, to be honest.We would have broken it to buy Sanchez. Why not here? I think Pep will get him flying in our system and he wants to come to play not to count bank notes.
I am sure we will go to our record here. But not way over. we would not have done that for Sanchez either.
All noble stances.
However, you don't factor he will be worth £40m less in four months time?
This is it for Mahrez, he's making it very clear a deal gets done, he won't be putting a shift in for Leicester ever again.
Can the club justify keeping a player who has effectively gone on strike indefinitely?
Everyone else is picking a number so thought I'd have a go
Been on since 2008, were practically twins£63M done !
All noble stances.
However, you don't factor he will be worth £40m less in four months time?
This is it for Mahrez, he's making it very clear a deal gets done, he won't be putting a shift in for Leicester ever again.
Can the club justify keeping a player who has effectively gone on strike indefinitely?
Rubbish, City wanted Sanchez long before Sane got injured, so its a lot more obvious that they have identified Mahrez to replace Sanchez, not Sane.
I'm talking about the value he'd be for you in the summer if you signed him.
You don't seem to mention VVD or your new defender. £57m for an uncapped, untried defender in this league... bidding less than that for one of the best attacking players is a joke when you're talking about the owners of him being cash rich.
lol...i'd have to share a beer if i was right Bob !Been on since 2008, were practically twins
I believe you