Riyad Mahrez

[Dax777]

I think Dax777 is going to be made to look very foolish in a few years time.

How so?

 

[BlueS]

I take it this might be next week then

£100k next week?

 

[Dreadzone]

I take it this might be next week then

Imminent my blue friend!

 

[Robinho's Subbuteo]

Why is he not entitled to a loyalty payment?

He asked to leave and Leicester said no. He retracted his request and stayed at the club.

Now he seems to be leaving on Leicester’s terms.

It’s very easy to always blame the player in situations like this but Mahrez has wanted to leave Leicester for the past 2 seasons now and they have refused to let him go. He’ll no doubt think he is entitled to a payment for not being allowed to leave.

So he wants a loyalty bonus because Leicester stopped him being disloyal? Twice?

Is that what loyalty looks like these days?

 

[Camberwell Fox]

So he wants a loyalty bonus because Leicester stopped him being disloyal? Twice?

Is that what loyalty looks like these days?

No, your approach in the last transfer window was at best ‘cheeky’, very late on and perhaps designed to unsettle Mahrez. Even if this wasn’t the intention it was definitely the result.

If you were serious about getting him then, might I suggest a bid of £65 million plus would perhaps have got your man.

 

[Camberwell Fox]

As others have said, if Mahrez was a Chelsea or Arsenal player you would have stumped up the asking price.

 

[Withnail]

As others have said, if Mahrez was a Chelsea or Arsenal player you would have stumped up the asking price.

Totally disagree, City will have their own valuation of a player and that is not dependent on the selling club

 

[The Riot Club]

As others have said, if Mahrez was a Chelsea or Arsenal player you would have stumped up the asking price.

Not true, just like with Sanchez if an agent or player takes the piss and gets greedy we move on. The club has its valuation of players and we don't need to let clubs take the piss. We're not desperate, unlike our neighbours in Stretford.

 

[richards30]

No, your approach in the last transfer window was at best ‘cheeky’, very late on and perhaps designed to unsettle Mahrez. Even if this wasn’t the intention it was definitely the result.

If you were serious about getting him then, might I suggest a bid of £65 million plus would perhaps have got your man.

We first approached you the second week of January!

 

[Marvin]

No, your approach in the last transfer window was at best ‘cheeky’, very late on and perhaps designed to unsettle Mahrez. Even if this wasn’t the intention it was definitely the result.

If you were serious about getting him then, might I suggest a bid of £65 million plus would perhaps have got your man.

I know its dangerous to believe what's in the press but what was reported at the time was that Leicester wanted £90m for Mahrez in the January window which was clearly not going to happen.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...rges-late-man-city-transfer-target-leicester/

You keep commenting that Manchester City are undervaluing Mahrez but we will offer what we think it takes to get the player, and because he wants to leave that means that it is much less than what we would typically have to pay for a player of his quality. If it fails then City will have to reassess their offer.