Jump to content

Transfers


Recommended Posts

They got their player. If they agree to enter into the buy-back clause they knew there was a chance the selling club could take the player back.

Exactly, so a loan deal more or less. Its great for the selling club, just not for the buying club imo.

Hate spanish and italian teams transfer dealings, so confusing :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, so a loan deal more or less. Its great for the selling club, just not for the buying club imo.

Hate spanish and italian teams transfer dealings, so confusing :(

Valencia will be happy with what they get out of it and, in the end, Canales doesn't have to move back to Real if fees are agreed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s down to money that Lucas has rejected them while losing out to Hazard I’m not so sure as his agent claimed Chelsea’s project excited him more than United and he had a better chance to play in his position.

If they lose out on RVP then that’s 3 major transfer targets lost, but the money is a factor.

PSG can outbid and outspend everyone it seems with City, the 2 Spanish teams and Chelsea not far behind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you see the Bojan transfer to Roma last summer? Roma paid €12M for him, but after two years, Barcelona are obliged to buy him back for €13m. However, Roma can buy out this clause by paying Barcelona a further €30M <cr>

That would irritate me. I think De Rossi would smash the EPL though.

Yes! That's what was in my mind when I was posting this, absolutley ridiculous. All this co-ownership pish aswell (td)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really considering they have lost 2 players, potentially 3, to other clubs.

That has absoloutly nothing to do with the pull Manchester United have. It is financially driven. Moura, RVP and Hazard all stated they wanted to play for Man U, RVP in particular. So clearly the pull is there.

What isn't is the finances. Man U lost out on Hazard because Chelsea offered him a lot more money, the lost out on Moura because they weren't willing to go to 45 million euros which is fair enough, paying that is stupid. I don't think they will lose out RVP unless Arsenal decide they wont sell him to them.

You cant say they have lost their pull. If they had the money some of these other clubs had I doubt their would be a player SAF couldnt sign.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That has absoloutly nothing to do with the pull Manchester United have. It is financially driven. Moura, RVP and Hazard all stated they wanted to play for Man U, RVP in particular. So clearly the pull is there.

What isn't is the finances. Man U lost out on Hazard because Chelsea offered him a lot more money, the lost out on Moura because they weren't willing to go to 45 million euros which is fair enough, paying that is stupid. I don't think they will lose out RVP unless Arsenal decide they wont sell him to them.

You cant say they have lost their pull. If they had the money some of these other clubs had I doubt their would be a player SAF couldnt sign.

Thats my point, they dont have the pulling power because other clubs have more money. (tu)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...