Erling Haaland | Dortmund player

Even if we get Sancho I don’t think Woodward will have the strength to ever sign a player from Dortmund again so we can forget this.
 
Even if we get Sancho I don’t think Woodward will have the strength to ever sign a player from Dortmund again so we can forget this.
Not much Dortmund can do when Haaland's release clause becomes active.
 
Haaland is an absolute beast of a player. I've been watching Dortmund for 20 years and he is far and away the best player I've seen play for the club. Other players his age show that they have potential, but watching him you can instantly tell he's pure class. The only comparison I can think of is a young Brazilian Ronaldo.

Doubt he will be going to United though. He was reportedly planning on using United as a stepping stone the same way he's using Dortmund now. His next club will definitely be one that can challenge for the Champions League title every year and i don't see United getting to that level in the next two years. My money is on Bayern or Real.

:lol:
 
The issue is this, given the attitude of the club (Woodward) who treated Dortmund with almost contempt during the Sancho saga, are we still an attractive proposition for ambitious young players? We are for older players after a two year pay check who will score a few goals and then bugger off for nowt, but would a Haaland or Sancho want to come after the continuing transfer fiasco? Liverpool and Chelsea would be a more attractive proposition for them.
 
The issue is this, given the attitude of the club (Woodward) who treated Dortmund with almost contempt during the Sancho saga, are we still an attractive proposition for ambitious young players? We are for older players after a two year pay check who will score a few goals and then bugger off for nowt, but would a Haaland or Sancho want to come after the continuing transfer fiasco? Liverpool and Chelsea would be a more attractive proposition for them.

Of course good young players want to go to Utd. This ‘transfer saga’ has no impact.
 
Missing out on him is going to be worse than sancho or Bellingham. I hope we are back in strong for him next summer and the club is doing well so are as attractive a destination as possible. Pay the release and give him the big wages.
His agent will still ask for a release clause in the contract. That's Haaland's "get out of jail" card if things don't work out for him.
 
Missing out on him is going to be worse than sancho or Bellingham. I hope we are back in strong for him next summer and the club is doing well so are as attractive a destination as possible. Pay the release and give him the big wages.
We turned down a release clause. We would have had 2 seasons at most from him.
 
We turned down a release clause. We would have had 2 seasons at most from him.

I still think we should have done this. All goes well and there would be a decent chance we could renew and remove the clause.
 
The issue is this, given the attitude of the club (Woodward) who treated Dortmund with almost contempt during the Sancho saga, are we still an attractive proposition for ambitious young players? We are for older players after a two year pay check who will score a few goals and then bugger off for nowt, but would a Haaland or Sancho want to come after the continuing transfer fiasco? Liverpool and Chelsea would be a more attractive proposition for them.
How do we know how our club treated BVB? The decision makers at BVB have a reputation of playing games during negotiations. Woodward has earned himself a similar reputation. Nothing strange about playing hard ball when 10's of millions are at stake, don't you think?

A lot of the fuzz we see in the media is just hot air. Yeah, we may have burnt our bridges with BVB and/or Sancho. If so, let's hope that is an indication to other clubs that Manchester United won't always give in and pay silly, extortionate prices.

I think we did right not caving in to the demand for a release clause for Haaland. Of course, a change in power and how deals are agreed between clubs and their players may warrant a reassessment of the "no-release-clause-stance". But for now I'm OK with the clubs position on this.
 
Last edited:
Haaland is an absolute beast of a player. I've been watching Dortmund for 20 years and he is far and away the best player I've seen play for the club. Other players his age show that they have potential, but watching him you can instantly tell he's pure class. The only comparison I can think of is a young Brazilian Ronaldo.

Doubt he will be going to United though. He was reportedly planning on using United as a stepping stone the same way he's using Dortmund now. His next club will definitely be one that can challenge for the Champions League title every year and i don't see United getting to that level in the next two years. My money is on Bayern or Real.
But maybe United first. With a release clause. I think he wants to move around. When he is 32, he´ll probably be playing for Leeds.
 
Missing out on him is going to be worse than sancho or Bellingham. I hope we are back in strong for him next summer and the club is doing well so are as attractive a destination as possible. Pay the release and give him the big wages.
Despite turning out to be a huge talent, Utd were absolutely right to turn down this deal due to the insistence of a release clause.

He went to Dortmund because they were happy to have the clause in. He has excelled a lot more than even Dortmund probably expected. But due to the release clause they would have no option but to sell him next summer if they want to command a fee that they “want” otherwise he goes for significantly less than what he’d be worth the summer after due to the clause.

Dortmund can afford to take those punts but we would never sign a player and develop them with the potential of losing them for a cut price fee.
 
Would clubs really buy him now if they were forced to put a buy out clause under or at 100million?

I'm not so sure because if he is going to keep his consistency then that's just a come and get me approach to nearly everyone.

Say if Raiola did force his next club to include a buy out clause then what would be the safest price as a club to gain some loyalty from the guy?

120? 150million? More?
 
Despite turning out to be a huge talent, Utd were absolutely right to turn down this deal due to the insistence of a release clause.

In some ways, I agree with you on principle but is this pragmatic in reality? In January, we supposedly spent 4 million on loan fees for Ighalo. He has scored 5 goals for us. We will have him 18 months and get nothing back for him. £4m spend = 5 goals (I doubt he'll get many more).

I dare say Haaland would've done significantly better for us and given a big boost in terms of results, the excitement of having a new global star and so on. If we'd have signed him at 17m and sold him at his release clause of 63m (supposedly), yes it'd be a kick in the teeth but, aside from our pride, that's a 46m profit on a striker that would've likely scored far more goals than the 5 goals Ighalo has scored for us for a 4m loss.

I would also assume we would pay lower wages for Haaland than what we pay for Ighalo's inflated Chinese team wages. Maybe I'm wrong there. Also, there's a chance Haaland would've loved it so much here he'd sign a new deal without the release clause.

Educate me, someone, because maybe I'm missing the obvious but what would be so wrong with this? I know I'd rather have signed Haaland all day long. Better to have loved and lost, and all that.
 
Despite turning out to be a huge talent, Utd were absolutely right to turn down this deal due to the insistence of a release clause.

He went to Dortmund because they were happy to have the clause in. He has excelled a lot more than even Dortmund probably expected. But due to the release clause they would have no option but to sell him next summer if they want to command a fee that they “want” otherwise he goes for significantly less than what he’d be worth the summer after due to the clause.

Dortmund can afford to take those punts but we would never sign a player and develop them with the potential of losing them for a cut price fee.

I would disagree up to a point. If they are good enough you tell the talent you love them and you do what it takes to get them in the door. If they are setting the world alight you start offering them new deals without the clause from the very start. If not let him leave for the clause? If things were going well I’m sure it would be something we would have figured out easily enough. We leave these things to chance too much when we don’t just close the deal when it’s there for the taking. Haaland would have been such an important signing. Great price. Great profile. We’ve hopefully only been messing around with Ighalo and Cavani and other stopgap options because we want to go back in for him. he’s the best long term option out there by far. i doubt we’ll even get him at this stage.
 
In some ways, I agree with you on principle but is this pragmatic in reality? In January, we supposedly spent 4 million on loan fees for Ighalo. He has scored 5 goals for us. We will have him 18 months and get nothing back for him. £4m spend = 5 goals (I doubt he'll get many more).

I dare say Haaland would've done significantly better for us and given a big boost in terms of results, the excitement of having a new global star and so on. If we'd have signed him at 17m and sold him at his release clause of 63m (supposedly), yes it'd be a kick in the teeth but, aside from our pride, that's a 46m profit on a striker that would've likely scored far more goals than the 5 goals Ighalo has scored for us for a 4m loss.

I would also assume we would pay lower wages for Haaland than what we pay for Ighalo's inflated Chinese team wages. Maybe I'm wrong there. Also, there's a chance Haaland would've loved it so much here he'd sign a new deal without the release clause.

Educate me, someone, because maybe I'm missing the obvious but what would be so wrong with this? I know I'd rather have signed Haaland all day long. Better to have loved and lost, and all that.
Yes we could have got a good couple of years out of him but Utd would never put themselves in a situation where they develop an asset into a superstar and then have to sell him significantly less than he’s worth.

If Haaland continues his trajectory, he will be worth 100m euro by the time his clause kicks in. In which case you are then put in a situation where you have to entertain bids the summer before that if they are significantly more than his release clause and he doesn’t wish to sign a new contract in order to keep his options open.

It’s just not a good situation to be in and especially not for a big club in the premier league. Just imagine if he becomes a superstar at Utd within a couple of years and then Liverpool or Chelsea tap him up and take him on his release clause. That’s an incredibly difficult situation to accept and deal with. You’ve just made him into a premier league proven player and have no ability to stop him going to a rival.
 
I would disagree up to a point. If they are good enough you tell the talent you love them and you do what it takes to get them in the door. If they are setting the world alight you start offering them new deals without the clause from the very start. If not let him leave for the clause? If things were going well I’m sure it would be something we would have figured out easily enough. We leave these things to chance too much when we don’t just close the deal when it’s there for the taking. Haaland would have been such an important signing. Great price. Great profile. We’ve hopefully only been messing around with Ighalo and Cavani and other stopgap options because we want to go back in for him. he’s the best long term option out there by far. i doubt we’ll even get him at this stage.
But on the same note you would question why a player who is getting the opportunity to to play for Utd is insisting on a release clause. It’s not a clear sign of dedication to want to join the club or showing a sense of desire. If you’re happy to join a club you would happily waive any release clause.
 
The problem was never Haaland - it was Raiola.

The agent is on a completely different level to other agents. The point that certain clubs ban his players say alot. As much as I think Haaland is a fantastic player - I do devalue players who go with Raiola as their agent. It tells me a bit about their personality and even their mindset.

Do I still want him here, yes - but Raiola is absolutely horrible. That buy it now price would have been made hard to deal with not because of the player but because of his agent.
 
Serbia´s coach seems to have the game plan ready for the upcoming match against Norway:

"I believe in God, and God is going to help us against Haaland".
 
Serbia´s coach seems to have the game plan ready for the upcoming match against Norway:

"I believe in God, and God is going to help us against Haaland".
Fair enough nothing else seems to work.
 
The issue is this, given the attitude of the club (Woodward) who treated Dortmund with almost contempt during the Sancho saga, are we still an attractive proposition for ambitious young players? We are for older players after a two year pay check who will score a few goals and then bugger off for nowt, but would a Haaland or Sancho want to come after the continuing transfer fiasco? Liverpool and Chelsea would be a more attractive proposition for them.
We signed twin young RW just this window. We also have the youngest forward line in the PL. We are absolutely the right fit for ambitious young players.
 
I have a feeling we signed the 2 young Rw's in the hope that at least 1 of them can kick on before next summer as Haaland is going to be our No.1 target, not Sancho.
 
We signed twin young RW just this window. We also have the youngest forward line in the PL. We are absolutely the right fit for ambitious young players.

The difference is Haaland is offering his service to clubs under his terms. If you don't like it, then next please. He will move around clubs like Ibra. Also, Raiola is his agent/Representive that works for him, not the other way around. All the terms are agreed and approved by the player and his family, especially his dad.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Fortitude
Biggest feck up Ole/Ed will ever do is not signing this guy...should have done whatever it took.
 
The difference is Haaland is offering his service to clubs under his terms. If you don't like it, then next please. He will move around clubs like Ibra. Also, Raiola is his agent/Representive that works for him, not the other way around. All the terms are agreed and approved by the player and his family, especially his dad.
We and Juventus have experience with Raiola. We should know what to do when the release clause gets activated. Haalands next move will likely be a longer term one.
 
The difference is Haaland is offering his service to clubs under his terms. If you don't like it, then next please. He will move around clubs like Ibra.

Agree with this, and I think that United would have felt the same way too. He'll certainly play in the PL one day and hopefully having Ole and that relationship might put us in pole position, but who knows.

I think his intention was always 2 years at whichever he club he joined, so im pleased United walked away at this point in his career
 
Biggest feck up Ole/Ed will ever do is not signing this guy...should have done whatever it took.
Like a release clause, and then off to Madrid in two years time.
 
Agree with this, and I think that United would have felt the same way too. He'll certainly play in the PL one day and hopefully having Ole and that relationship might put us in pole position, but who knows.

I think his intention was always 2 years at whichever he club he joined, so im pleased United walked away at this point in his career

United didn't walk away. Haaland chose BVB. You can believe whatever version you like. In the end he joined BVB.

https://en.as.com/en/2019/12/30/football/1577719114_944775.html
https://talksport.com/football/6877...tmund-manchester-united-ole-gunnar-solskjaer/


"If they want to blame someone then, fine, blame me, but the player is happy. He has made his choice and we went through a normal process.

"The club that had the most direct contact with him was Manchester United. They spoke to him the most. Everybody had the chance to talk to him in person. We let that happen especially when he knows Ole.

"Clearly [Haaland] felt that at this moment it was not the right step in his career. There is nothing against Manchester United or Ole.

"He chose Borussia Dortmund ahead of them and other clubs and I'm very happy because he is going to the club he wanted to go to and that is best for him right now. If he wanted to go to Manchester United I would have been obliged to take him to Manchester United but he did not."

Raiola also claimed Haaland's decision proved his client is prioritising regular playing time over money.

"When you are 19 then maybe you prefer not to go to the Premier League," said Raiola.

"The offer from Manchester United was good. It was not about the economics. It is just the player chose Borussia Dortmund at this stage of his career."
 
Last edited:
Biggest feck up Ole/Ed will ever do is not signing this guy...should have done whatever it took.
If there was any proof Ole has zero pull this is it. Couldn't even convince his own countryman that he trained before to join him
 
Wait hold on. There are people in here who actually think we are in with a chance of signing Haaland?
 
Wait hold on. There are people in here who actually think we are in with a chance of signing Haaland?
Haaland and his dad did talk to Man United so yes there was a chance. In the end according to his dad they felt only the coach want the player.

Quote from Alf-Inge
“You have to go to a club where the whole club wants you, not just the coach.
“I think that’s the most important thing, in addition to how the club has been over the last five or ten years and what direction they’ve taken.
“Because it’s dangerous to just sign for a coach, because he can suddenly be sacked.”

Edit
The blame is on Ed, not OGS. He tried his best probably already.
 
It is just my thought - as great as this guy is, he wont be the consistent hit for the biggest teams in the world with Raiola on charge of his transfers.

I can see him like Zlatan Ibrahimovic and Pogba - all the skills in the world but his mentality being showed by Raiola at a time when the biggest clubs dont need it.

Nothing with his ability but do I see him at a club for 4-5 years? Not really. If he doesnt win the league titles or the CL's required then he will move every 2-3 years assuming he is the exception of the team.
 
I think if he comes to the premier league it is more likely to be Liverpool than us to replace Bobby Firmino. It would be so like them to pick up a world class talent for a knock down price.
 
I think if he comes to the premier league it is more likely to be Liverpool than us to replace Bobby Firmino. It would be so like them to pick up a world class talent for a knock down price.

For that to be true they have to change atleast one of Salah & Mane. Theres no way those two would work with Haaland in the middle. As good as the guy is that will be a step down in team cohesion.

Only way I can see that is if Klopp leaves and they get another manager who requires that type of striker in all of his set ups so drops Firmino for him.

Klopp wouldnt do that.
 
For that to be true they have to change atleast one of Salah & Mane. Theres no way those two would work with Haaland in the middle. As good as the guy is that will be a step down in team cohesion.

Only way I can see that is if Klopp leaves and they get another manager who requires that type of striker in all of his set ups so drops Firmino for him.

Klopp wouldnt do that.
My guess is he will team up with Martin Odegaard in Real Madrid in 2022. Benz's legs will be gone at that time probably. Mbappe summer 2021, Haaland summer 2022. Makes too much sense for Real Madrid.