The Siege
Full Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2016
- Messages
- 283
I can't believe SAF still humours this prick. Didn't realise that 'No player is bigger than the club' came with exceptions.
Why is the club so insistent he must stay and why is he so hell bent on leaving? Surely he must have an offer on the table considering the dynamics of things. Just doesn’t make sense
Why would it be easy? There also is an obligation to buy.Easy for them then. Unless there is an obligation to buy.
I thought they had some deal with Barca where they had to buy him? Imagine Atleti and Barca getting into itYeah he's on loan but might be an obligation to buy. If not, they can just terminate that loan and offer 350k a week to Ronaldo. Wouldnt be that hard to do.
2 wrongs don’t make a right. And we’re both going by reports form newspapers.
Feck doing Atletico and their anti-football a favour. That spectacle at Old Trafford last season was an utter disgrace from them. I wouldn't entertain doing any business with them.I think he and Mendes want us to give our “blessing” to let him go — in other words, forego any transfer fee and help facilitate a move as best we can. As it stands only Atletico are truly interested and I doubt they’ll do a transfer fee + his current wage if they are going to go for him. They’ll want him on a free, or as close to as possible
They have an option, not an obligation apparently. The irony is if they send Griezmann back Barca will be truly fecked as they cannot afford his wages. Might not be able to register their new signings.I thought they had some deal with Barca where they had to buy him? Imagine Atleti and Barca getting into it
You make a solid point!It will likely never happen. We had a moderate circus under SAF and most top clubs have one. No club has zero controversy, zero players/managers that set out of line.
Griezmann going to Barcelona ended up in a tedious court case first time round, I doubt there’s anything left to chanceI thought they had some deal with Barca where they had to buy him? Imagine Atleti and Barca getting into it
Absolutely. But it’s either that or keep a stroppy old striker who thinks he’s bigger than the club for the first season of the brand new manager…Feck doing Atletico and their anti-football a favour. That spectacle at Old Trafford last season was an utter disgrace from them. I wouldn't entertain doing any business with them.
That's how I read the situation as well. Hope the club stands firm and says NO. You want to leave, get us our transfer fee, or sit your ass down and do your job. After dragging this situation out into the public, I would have no mercy. We don't need this. I would make him suffer in a World Cup year. In the meantime, we go on with our business and training. The longer he faffs about, the longer it takes for him to be match fit.- again in a World Cup year. His choice.I think he and Mendes want us to give our “blessing” to let him go — in other words, forego any transfer fee and help facilitate a move as best we can. As it stands only Atletico are truly interested and I doubt they’ll do a transfer fee + his current wage if they are going to go for him. They’ll want him on a free, or as close to as possible
We can always send him away from the first team if he pulls any shit. Again, it's the World Cup coming up. What's he gonna do? Sit on his ass when he needs match fitness?Absolutely. But it’s either that or keep a stroppy old striker who thinks he’s bigger than the club for the first season of the brand new manager…
Wait so you’re now refusing to do business with a team… because they beat us fair and square?Feck doing Atletico and their anti-football a favour. That spectacle at Old Trafford last season was an utter disgrace from them. I wouldn't entertain doing any business with them.
You make a solid point!
I was thinking more along the lines of staying away from signings that might cause issue (di maria, ronaldo etc). Just ones that we create a rod for ourselves really.
Just speculating (so don't shoot me).
It's not unthinkable that Mendes wants United to - say - yield on the current contract terms to some extent.
For instance: we agree to terminate the contract but on favourable terms to Ronaldo: as in, he gets some kind of severance deal, which means that he can accept a pay cut at his new club without losing too much money.
Hypothetically: should we yield?
On the one hand, I would very much like to see United playing hard ball here: if you want out, fine. But we're not paying for it.
On the other hand, I would very much like to escape a scenario where we get stuck with Ronaldo.
(Yeah, yeah - a Ronaldo who doesn't want to be here, but frankly I just want him gone.)
If he is open to a contract termination, then we should do it. It would presumably save money over keeping him here for another year. Treat it as sunk cost.
Just speculating (so don't shoot me).
It's not unthinkable that Mendes wants United to - say - yield on the current contract terms to some extent.
For instance: we agree to terminate the contract but on favourable terms to Ronaldo: as in, he gets some kind of severance deal, which means that he can accept a pay cut at his new club without losing too much money.
Hypothetically: should we yield?
On the one hand, I would very much like to see United playing hard ball here: if you want out, fine. But we're not paying for it.
On the other hand, I would very much like to escape a scenario where we get stuck with Ronaldo.
(Yeah, yeah - a Ronaldo who doesn't want to be here, but frankly I just want him gone: the scenario in which he stays and becomes a grand success under ETH strikes me as a fantasy.)
Yes - if it's simply a contract termination, mutually agreed, perfect.
What I fear, though, is that he's after some kind of compensation: realistically, he won't be paid as well as he is per now anywhere (unless he goes to the Saudi league, which he won't) - and if he thinks that's important, well...there you go.
I mean, it would be the absolute height of...I don't even know what to call it...if he expects United to effectively cover the difference (in salary), but then again I wouldn't be shocked.
Are you suggesting we should pay Ronaldo to leave and effectively subsidise his wages so he can go and play for a “better” club who might win some trophies this year?
If he wants out, it should not cost United one single penny
What?
Did you read the post?
Honestly though, if no one wants him he's got no choice. The club can't take another stance if there's legitimately no buyer so he'll be stuck between a rock and a hard place
feck off Ronnie. You got enough money to turn down 250M from Saudi Arabia. Just pay Atleti if you're that desperate.
Just speculating (so don't shoot me).
It's not unthinkable that Mendes wants United to - say - yield on the current contract terms to some extent.
For instance: we agree to terminate the contract but on favourable terms to Ronaldo: as in, he gets some kind of severance deal, which means that he can accept a pay cut at his new club without losing too much money.
Hypothetically: should we yield?
On the one hand, I would very much like to see United playing hard ball here: if you want out, fine. But we're not paying for it.
On the other hand, I would very much like to escape a scenario where we get stuck with Ronaldo.
(Yeah, yeah - a Ronaldo who doesn't want to be here, but frankly I just want him gone: the scenario in which he stays and becomes a grand success under ETH strikes me as a fantasy.)
feck off Ronnie. You got enough money to turn down 250M from Saudi Arabia. Just pay Atleti if you're that desperate.
Renew his contract? He's got a year left, why would it need renewing?
Yes, I even highlighted the bit where you seemed to suggest it.
Nah he sat in the corner watching Paw Patrol while Jorge sorted his next activities.But, did he train?