Thought this was a fantastic watch.
Gary Neville vs Jamie Carragher on Sanchez
- Thread starter KM
- Start date
Thought this was a fantastic watch.
Spot on from Gary there as much as he annoys the shit out of me this last while wholeheartedly agree.
Carragher just not listening to the fact that we are apparently offering arsenal more cash so may not even have city’s bid accepted at that point player can agree whatever he wants
Carragher just not listening to the fact that we are apparently offering arsenal more cash so may not even have city’s bid accepted at that point player can agree whatever he wants
Can someone please type those tweets? I am in China and twitter is blocked here. Tnx
If a top player turned down United 10 years ago to go to City, that is what we call going for the money. It baffles me how people say the opposite now about Sanchez.
Its youtube not twitter.
I agree with Neville though I don't believe for one minute City are really taking the moral high ground here and refusing to pay. I expect something else has gone on and the disagreement is over something other than money. 30m is pocket change to City.
It was a good watch. Funnily enough, I found myself agreeing with both arguments.
Carragher is right in the sense that City had a deal in place and for Sanchez and his agent to ask for more, well, maybe that soured the whole thing for them. At some point, as a club, they have make a stand and stop being bent over on transfers.
Neville is right in the sense that Manchester United are just as an attractive prospect as City and they are offering more money all round. So why shouldn't Arsenal/Sanchez take our offer.
Opposite to City, who maybe have to tone down their transfer activity, at some point, we, at this stage have to flex our muscles in the transfer market, to build a squad that gets us back where we belong. It makes sense for us to offer more.
Carragher is right in the sense that City had a deal in place and for Sanchez and his agent to ask for more, well, maybe that soured the whole thing for them. At some point, as a club, they have make a stand and stop being bent over on transfers.
Neville is right in the sense that Manchester United are just as an attractive prospect as City and they are offering more money all round. So why shouldn't Arsenal/Sanchez take our offer.
Opposite to City, who maybe have to tone down their transfer activity, at some point, we, at this stage have to flex our muscles in the transfer market, to build a squad that gets us back where we belong. It makes sense for us to offer more.
I'm still confused as to where this idea came from that Sanchez pulled out of a deal. City never actually agreed a fee with arrenal, let alone Sanchez. So how exactly has he backed out? What they did last summer is irrelevant to this window.
I am an American so forgive me if this question is our of line. Are Manchester and Liverpool accents that different? i thought they were like 30 miles from eachother. i could barely understand Carragher.
I know this adds nothing to thread, but for my own curiousity...
OK I will add something. I agree with Neville on everything how, financially, it makes more sense to sign for United. This City taking the moral highground shows how short memories are today considering the money they have recently spent.
I know this adds nothing to thread, but for my own curiousity...
OK I will add something. I agree with Neville on everything how, financially, it makes more sense to sign for United. This City taking the moral highground shows how short memories are today considering the money they have recently spent.
GNev says you can’t expect to sign someone by paying the player 3m a year less, the agent 5m less and the selling club 15m less just because you have Pep Guardiola
JC23 says city are pissed off because Sanchez apparently went back on his gentleman’s agreement with city just for more money
Carragher is right on principle.
Has it been reported by anyone reputable that City had already agreed a contract with Sanchez?
Has it been reported by anyone reputable that City had already agreed a contract with Sanchez?
What does that matter unless they have agreed a fee with Arsenal?
Carragher's whole argument seems to be this hypothetical agreement between Sanchez and City that he's backing away from. Not only does he not know what went on behind the scenes, but he also completely disregards Arsenal's role in this. Don't they know they have to honour an agreement that may or may not have been struck between the player and the club offering less?
Hugely different. In England you can drive just a few miles from Manchester to Liverpool and it's like going to another world. Or back in time 30 years.
Clubs nowadays, usually agree contracts before deciding fees.
If a contract had been agreed, City have the right to say feck off.
Of course nothing matters until papers are signed but clubs offering more money than their competitors is normal.
It must be noted, Carragher isn't saying Sanchez is choosing us because of money.
It's all moot though. City are not willing to pay what Arsenal want.
Last edited:
I don't see how Carragher is right. You can't sign a pre-contract that early so whatever the "deal" was wasn't vetted and approved by the PL. Therefore other clubs have every right to bid higher in the one remaining window before his contract expires and prise him away.
I really don't understand how City are expecting a player to give 6 months of his life to a club he doesn't want to play for just because they had a "deal" when his options were limited. Sanchez has options now and he is a valued footballer - City should wake the feck up and stop imagining themselves as the last bastion of sanity, morality and rational thought in a footballing world doped by United's money when they themseves were the club that broke all established structure in the hope or legitimizing a regressive regime as forward and modern thinking.
I am totally distraught with the amount of lies and deceit these journalists will use to make you forget the origins of the great club of City, being coached by the apostle Pep.
Are you tring to say that Uniteds position now in comparison to Citys current position is the same as Citys position to United was 10 years ago?
Bare in mind when you answer 10 years ago United were the strongest team in Europe and City finished 14th in the league.
There must be drugs involved here...
They kept going on about "principle," but not touching on why that's relevant in this saga. Is it not Sanchez's prerogative to choose his next destination? To my knowledge, he didn't sign a contract with City. Even if he had, Arsenal did not agree on the fee so it's an entirely moot point. The word is only being brandished around on social media and the like to paint Manchester City as some virtuous, bastion of football morality while simultaneously demonizing Manchester United for even daring to make an offer. It's odd, they speak of principle, but it's as if the media has come down with some sort of collective amnesia in regards to how City propelled themselves into their current, fruitful position in the first place. Why should Manchester United, one of the biggest (if not biggest) sports entities on the entire planet be villainized for flexing their financial muscle? You'd think we were in plodding around in 12th place, or that we're the johnny-come-lately with bags of cash to throw around. We spend what we make! City's recent success is based entirely on copious amounts of effectively endless oil money. Honestly, the current attempt at revisionism is Orwellian-esque.
Based on what's been reported, a more lucrative offer was placed on Sanchez's table and he went with it. It's not as if we're kidnapping the guy.
Based on what's been reported, a more lucrative offer was placed on Sanchez's table and he went with it. It's not as if we're kidnapping the guy.
Last edited:
Maybe, just Maybe, Sanchez prefers United over City and made clear his choice even if City were to match...
And how could City agree deal with Sanchez ages ago without going via Arsenal?
Sanchez leaving Arsenal as free agent to City is not a good assurance for Sanchez given he may ends up with a big injury in the meantime and City can pull out like certain Victor Valdez. Shite can happen. That's few more months staying at Arsenal where he doesn't enjoy. Clearly Sanchez can't take the assurance by extending with Arsenal, so he is in situation where he would consider a good offer to get away. Here we came in. Put yourself in Sanchez' agent position. You are to take care of your client so you would want to take the safe route for him than leaving exposed for all those risk and damage your own reputation.
They are both right even though they seem to be disagreeing.
Yes. They are arguing based on different scenarios.
Carragher seems to forget Arsenal's role in this.
Gary is right in that it would cost City a lot more to find a similar level of player.
What is this principle, going behind other club agree deal with player before making official approach to the club and agreeing fee?
I know clubs try to work around to see how interested the players are for the move before making the official approach all the time. However, to the point of agreeing deal outside the official law, isn't it something classified as tapping up?
I know clubs try to work around to see how interested the players are for the move before making the official approach all the time. However, to the point of agreeing deal outside the official law, isn't it something classified as tapping up?
Didn't Carraghers mate Slippy G agree to join Maureen at Chel$ki, only to change his mind?
Maybe Sanchez is not happy with what happened last summer, and that's when he made his decision to look at other options.
Both made good points but what Carragher is ignoring/missing is everyone wants the best deal for themselves. ManCity were ready to pay 60 Million to sign him in summer now they don't want to pay more than 20 Million. Reason? They have favourable circumstances. Similarly Sanchez might have said ok for x million, but that doesn't mean he should agree for same in Jan. Reason? There is one more club who is willing to pay more.
Tnx
Yeah that's how I see it too.
If the gooners accept the offer from us, then any gentleman's agreement between Sanchez and Shitty is irrelevant.
Firstly, Carragher says he is speculating about a deal agreed.
Then he ignores the fact that the deal was agreed last summer when United were looking at other players and Sanchez had a year left at Arsenal and wanted out.
6 months on, there is more interest in Sanchez and he is in a stronger negotiating position because of our interest AND his contract running down.
That same deal wont work. Ever. For any player.
Chelsea paid Everton less for Barkley but paid his agent more and almost certainly paid the player a bigger signing on bonus. That is just how it is.
I dont think Sanchez told City he wasnt going because United were interested. I am sure his agent wanted to see if he could get City to pay more.... may have a bit of an auction and get the most he could.
We just avoided that and offered a lot more instead of getting into a bidding war. Buy it Now!!
Then he ignores the fact that the deal was agreed last summer when United were looking at other players and Sanchez had a year left at Arsenal and wanted out.
6 months on, there is more interest in Sanchez and he is in a stronger negotiating position because of our interest AND his contract running down.
That same deal wont work. Ever. For any player.
Chelsea paid Everton less for Barkley but paid his agent more and almost certainly paid the player a bigger signing on bonus. That is just how it is.
I dont think Sanchez told City he wasnt going because United were interested. I am sure his agent wanted to see if he could get City to pay more.... may have a bit of an auction and get the most he could.
We just avoided that and offered a lot more instead of getting into a bidding war. Buy it Now!!
To me, it’s pretty clear that Sanchez has demanded to be a starter. Pep will never agree to that to destabilize what he has going for him.
I can't be 100% sure but I kinda feel the same.
Use a VPN man but it wasn't twitter anyway.
Carragher is as bitter and angry about this as Sounness. You can see the scowl on his face and the indignation. The scouse pundits seem particularly enraged at us landing Sanchez.
And then I remember he's already snubbed Liverpool. Now he's about to join us. This is triggering a Ballague-esque meltdown. Amusing to watch.
And then I remember he's already snubbed Liverpool. Now he's about to join us. This is triggering a Ballague-esque meltdown. Amusing to watch.
It's bizarre from start to finish.
City didn't manage to reach an agreement in the summer with Arsenal. United have now offered Arsenal 15mil more than what City have.
Why exactly would Arsenal accept City's offer?
Seeing as they obviously won't and Sanchez is desperate to leave, why the feck would he not say Yes to a club of United's stature when they're offering a better financial deal on top of everything?
City didn't manage to reach an agreement in the summer with Arsenal. United have now offered Arsenal 15mil more than what City have.
Why exactly would Arsenal accept City's offer?
Seeing as they obviously won't and Sanchez is desperate to leave, why the feck would he not say Yes to a club of United's stature when they're offering a better financial deal on top of everything?
Which is my point. Unless arsenal and city have an agreement whatever the player agreed is moot. He can’t say Sanchez turned his back on a deal which never could have happened unless city and arsenal agree first (I know the player and clubs negotiate in spite of that but first step for the transfer to go through by right is clubs agree fees)
Btw, you gotta laugh at the logic which demands exclusive rights to a transfer while offering 15mil less than competition after you failed to reach an agreement last window!
Where is Carragher bringing that handshake on a deal nonsense from? When exactly did Sanchez shook on a deal with City?
This whole high moral ground agenda needs to stop, after all it's bloody City we're talking about here, a club that have been injected will oil money and used to throw huge lumps of money way out of proportion on every man and his dog. Only because they sit at the top of the league and having a historic season (which they bought, let's not forget that none of their players let alone Pep would ever even consider them if not for cash) does not mean that Sanchez, his agent and Arsenal all should take a pay cut to honor Sanchez's privilege to play for the best team in the history of football and saint Pep.
Gary is absolutely spot on and Carragher is spouting nonsense.
This whole high moral ground agenda needs to stop, after all it's bloody City we're talking about here, a club that have been injected will oil money and used to throw huge lumps of money way out of proportion on every man and his dog. Only because they sit at the top of the league and having a historic season (which they bought, let's not forget that none of their players let alone Pep would ever even consider them if not for cash) does not mean that Sanchez, his agent and Arsenal all should take a pay cut to honor Sanchez's privilege to play for the best team in the history of football and saint Pep.
Gary is absolutely spot on and Carragher is spouting nonsense.
Nasri anyone (didnt watch yet).
Also somehow you can agree deal with player before the last 6 month despite failing to get official permission from the player's current club, and it's considered gentleman deal.
What if the Vpn's are also blocked? Ya, I can only see a blank space there. Thought it's a tweet. And buy the way, YouTube, Twitter, Google, Facebook, all are blocked.
I don't know if he evolution of accents is as steep in the states, but accents in England change perhaps not every 30 miles but let's just say you don't have to travel far to hear a different take on the language.