Erling Haaland | Dortmund player

Pogue Mahone said:
If that’s true then our scouting department (and his former fecking manager) are as bad at spotting talent as Woody is at signing it!
Click to expand...
They are scouts, not gods. I´m not even sure Haaland himself thought he would be this good.
 
Schmeichel's Cartwheel said:
it’s crazy to think in hindsight so many (myself included) weren’t fussed we didn’t get him because “we have martial” :lol:

it’s almost reached “we have Cleverley” (for not getting Sneijder in 2011) levels of ridiculousness.
Click to expand...
It was more so Greenwood.
Pogue Mahone said:
Assuming that’s true and the only reason we didn’t sign him it would still be an absolutely awful decision.

Get the player to the club ffs. If it works out well there’s every chance he’ll want to stay for a few years. Assuming we’re winning things then it’s a step down from United to almost every club on the planet.

And even if we do lose him for 40m in a couple of years time we’ve doubled our money and had a cracking striker on our books meanwhile, helping us win trophies and become a top CL club again. Which could make a massive difference to our ability to sign a top quality replacement.
Click to expand...
Shamana said:
Still better than not getting him at all. He might have wanted to renew his contract anyway if he was scoring goals for us which would actually put us in a proper title race.
Click to expand...
ThierryHenry14 said:
to me stepping stone or not doesn't matter. I would just look at the cost and the level of the service the player can provide to the club. For comparison, just compare the overall cost and output for BVB to have Haaland for 1.5 years vs Man Utd to have Ighalo and Cavani for the same time period(Jan 2020 to June 2021).
Click to expand...
Wilt said:
IMO not such a ridiculous release clause If we had signed him....

Worst case scenario (assuming he would still want to leave) we are forced to sell after 2 years, but without doubt we would still be in the CL and would probably have won some silverware during that time.

Best case scenario, he would want to stay at Utd and we would have the Worlds best striker on our books.
Click to expand...
Jim Beam said:
Excatly. If, let's say, his release clause kicks in 3 years time, you have 3 years to build around him and convince him to sign another deal while the whole club is going up a level. You have him here on daily basis and your negotiation position is pretty much the best it can be. As opposed to go after him with the whole Europe along where the chances aren't great to put it mildly.

That said, I don't think anyone was expecting him being THIS good and if they knew it in the time of the decision the club would probably make a different one. Doesn't make it less wrong, just somewhat more understandable.

Edit: In the end probably mix of things and the player could have easily been more keen going to Dortmund as the next step in his career which is pretty logical and looks like a cracking choice so far.
Click to expand...
That release clause is an insult and points to a lack of commitment. United don't sign top players for 2.5 seasons. I also highly doubt he would have won us major silverware like champions league as he hasn't done for Dortmund either. They are 6th. I stand by the decision not to let players insert low release clauses at our club. its a sign of their intentions. Why not make it 100mill? why so low?
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Assuming that’s true and the only reason we didn’t sign him it would still be an absolutely awful decision.

Get the player to the club ffs. If it works out well there’s every chance he’ll want to stay for a few years. Assuming we’re winning things then it’s a step down from United to almost every club on the planet.

And even if we do lose him for 40m in a couple of years time we’ve doubled our money and had a cracking striker on our books meanwhile, helping us win trophies and become a top CL club again. Which could make a massive difference to our ability to sign a top quality replacement.
Click to expand...
Matriac said:
Ed, Judge and the team said we pulled out cause of the clause.

Haaland's team said they chose Dortmund cause it was a better fit for that stage of his career development. They were also worried about the at the time insecurity of Ole, it's never great to join a new job that gets a new boss right after you join, you don't know where you stand. They felt Ole was pushing more for him than the club did.
Click to expand...
Shamana said:
Still better than not getting him at all. He might have wanted to renew his contract anyway if he was scoring goals for us which would actually put us in a proper title race.
Click to expand...

Wilt said:
IMO not such a ridiculous release clause If we had signed him....

Worst case scenario (assuming he would still want to leave) we are forced to sell after 2 years, but without doubt we would still be in the CL and would probably have won some silverware during that time.

Best case scenario, he would want to stay at Utd and we would have the Worlds best striker on our books.
Click to expand...
hasanejaz88 said:
The release clause is 75 mE or 65 mP. A pretty decent amount and given that they managed to sign him for only 18 mP with that clause.
Click to expand...

I think some posts here are answering points others have made. Stand corrected that the release clause wasn't what tanked the transfer.

But overall, we made an honest attempt at the thing and apparently did not land him because of various factors (see above). I don't think it's fair to blame the club for this one, esp. considering (as others have said) he was playing in a smaller league and people were still viewing him as someone for the future.

ThierryHenry14 said:
to me stepping stone or not doesn't matter. I would just look at the cost and the level of the service the player can provide to the club. For comparison, just compare the overall cost and output for BVB to have Haaland for 1.5 years vs Man Utd to have Ighalo and Cavani for the same time period(Jan 2020 to June 2021).
Click to expand...

Again he was a relatively young player whose only record (apart from the Austrian league) was a few goals in the CL. I don't think we expected instant output from him even if we signed him. If we put in the release clause, at that point, it looked like we'd sign him - put up with all the inconsistent performances that a young player typically puts in and then sell him just as he started to peak.

Bwuk said:
Were you annoyed when we signed Cristiano Ronaldo?
Click to expand...

I don't think that's a fair comparison. Ronaldo certainly didn't insist on a get out of jail free card when he first signed. And yeah, I was annoyed by his constant flirting with RM.
 
Stacks said:
That release clause is an insult and points to a lack of commitment. United don't sign top players for 2.5 seasons. I also highly doubt he would have won us major silverware like champions league as he hasn't done for Dortmund either. They are 6th. I stand by the decision not to let players insert low release clauses at our club. its a sign of their intentions. Why not make it 100mill? why so low?
Click to expand...

We don't and shouldn't do that unless the boy looks like a generational talent which he does. Then you get him in the club at all costs and try to find a way to extend a deal. For example, I would go for young Il Fenomeno under those conditions once he moved from PSV (am not comparing them like for like as Ronaldo was undoubtedly far more certain to reach greatness than Haaland, am just explaining that for every rule there are exceptions and they pretty much moved at similar age). Yes, the release clause looks low, but they also bought him for 18 million. That is crazy low too.

Of course, we can go with a more routine way of how we go about things and now throw 130-150 million at him. Mind you, we can still lose him in 3 years time even then. Players commitment tends to go to shit if your team isn't playing great anyway. And you won't get much more than 150 back for sure.

As I say, am more in line with @Dve explanation anyway - meaning player choosing Dortmund in this particular case.
 
Bwuk said:
Were you annoyed when we signed Cristiano Ronaldo?
Click to expand...
If he had a release clause of 20 million I would be. feck developing these talented young players for 2-3 years. Manchester United is bigger than them. They wouldn't helping us win anything major that quickly anyway.
 
Teja said:
Any source / do you know why he didn't come here? Ole ended up talking to him trying to convince him to come here etc. so the interest was definitely there. AFAIK it wasn't his wages either.

If we lost the player because he wanted to play for Dortmund over us, then fair enough. If we lost him because we didn't want to put a release clause in that's fine as well.
Click to expand...
Why would we have a problem with a release clause? Because we mignt not be able to keep him for more than two years? Can't we use a striker to achieve things for two years? Isn't that what we are doing with Cavani?
 
UnofficialDevil said:
Why would we have a problem with a release clause? Because we mignt not be able to keep him for more than two years? Can't we use a striker to achieve things for two years? Isn't that what we are doing with Cavani?
Click to expand...

Responded above but apparently the release clause thing isn't really true.

But the logic there was Haaland wasn't really an established player when we made a bid - was playing in the Austrian league + had a few CL goals. Viewed as a bit of a project than someone who can come in and instantly deliver. If we built him up and put up with his inconsistencies and sell him just as he was about to hit his peak, then that'd be a bit of a bummer.
 
Teja said:
Responded above but apparently the release clause thing isn't really true.

But the logic there was Haaland wasn't really an established player when we made a bid - was playing in the Austrian league + had a few CL goals. Viewed as a bit of a project than someone who can come in and instantly deliver. If we built him up and put up with his inconsistencies and sell him just as he was about to hit his peak, then that'd be a bit of a bummer.
Click to expand...
I see, fair point.
 
UnofficialDevil said:
Why would we have a problem with a release clause? Because we mignt not be able to keep him for more than two years? Can't we use a striker to achieve things for two years? Isn't that what we are doing with Cavani?
Click to expand...

Cavani is a stop gap while we find a permanent solution to the striker position. You wouldnt sign someone like Haaland to use for a season or 2 while you look for a replacement, you'd build a team around him for years of success
 
EvilChuck said:
Cavani is a stop gap while we find a permanent solution to the striker position. You wouldnt sign someone like Haaland to use for a season or 2 while you look for a replacement, you'd build a team around him for years of success
Click to expand...
But if they cost the club the same who's the better stop gap out of the two?
 
Last edited:
Teja said:
Responded above but apparently the release clause thing isn't really true.

But the logic there was Haaland wasn't really an established player when we made a bid - was playing in the Austrian league + had a few CL goals. Viewed as a bit of a project than someone who can come in and instantly deliver. If we built him up and put up with his inconsistencies and sell him just as he was about to hit his peak, then that'd be a bit of a bummer.
Click to expand...

Haaland has been scoring for bvb since day 1 and scored 8 goals in 6 games for Salzburg in CL. I am not sure where this "built up" comes from. His salary is lower than both Ighalo and Cavani, and also profit in transfer fee if he decides to leave as well.
 
His choice of clubs so far oozes development development development. Dortmund looked a more secure choice in this sense. Especially when it comes to playing first team football.

It wasn't clear cut that the would take the step from Salzburg to a higher level in this way. He didn't need any time to adjust, just smashed through with a 20 min hat-trick and never looked back.

Who would think that possible? Not even Ole, I suspect.
 
Jim Beam said:
We don't and shouldn't do that unless the boy looks like a generational talent which he does. Then you get him in the club at all costs and try to find a way to extend a deal. For example, I would go for young Il Fenomeno under those conditions once he moved from PSV (am not comparing them like for like as Ronaldo was undoubtedly far more certain to reach greatness than Haaland, am just explaining that for every rule there are exceptions and they pretty much moved at similar age). Yes, the release clause looks low, but they also bought him for 18 million. That is crazy low too.

Of course, we can go with a more routine way of how we go about things and now throw 130-150 million at him. Mind you, we can still lose him in 3 years time even then. Players commitment tends to go to shit if your team isn't playing great anyway. And you won't get much more than 150 back for sure.

As I say, am more in line with @Dve explanation anyway - meaning player choosing Dortmund in this particular case.
Click to expand...
We have no choice about extending a deal just liked Dortmund. After 2 seasons he will be getting tapped up by clubs. He only signed a year ago January and already the talk is of his next destination. I see it being no different for us unfortunately. If he rated us he would commit more than 2.5 years and not insert a low buy out. He was basically a kid when he joined so why does he need to be on his toes so much and planning the next move when he is so young? why not commit properly like a normal person?

The Ronaldo one would be a tough one I cant lie. I would be shit scared to lose such a great talent so cheap and after such a short time. I would probably rather not have them because you cannot lament what was never yours. I would forever have a problem if we had a world talent for so short a time and sold them cheap. Many of us were pissed over the Pogba transfer and only his return stopped people criticising SAF
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
Haaland has been scoring for bvb since day 1 and scored 8 goals in 6 games for Salzburg in CL. I am not sure where this "built up" comes from. His salary is lower than both Ighalo and Cavani, and also profit in transfer fee if he decides to leave as well.
Click to expand...

There’s every reason to expect some initial bumps as he transitions to a club in a tougher league, and with far higher pressure and expectations. United is a different beast.
 
Dve said:
The source is his own and his father words. It was Haaland´s own decision to go to Dortmund, and he was never rejected by United. He saw Dortmund as the natural next step, matching his development (Molde->Salzburg->Dortmund->?) (just like Bellingham). In hindsight, it might sound strange that Haaland was worried not to get game time at United, but he was playing in Austria, remember, and Martial was on fire. Still, If Haaland had trusted that Ole would remain at United, that could have helped, but Ole´s job looked everything but safe January 2020 (there was even a story circulating that Haaland requested a guarantee from Woodward that Ole would stay in his job, but that of course, could be just bollocks). So according to Haaland himself, he went with this gut-feeling in the end, which could be a mix of many things. Would he be starting, did the club really want him (e.g. the fans, the board), what would happen if Ole got the sack, how would the next manager treat him. There is one thing many new appointed managers seem to be cautious about, and that´s players with too much affection to the former one - just look what happened to the Norwegian players Ole signed at Cardiff. These things counts.
Click to expand...

This is one of the better posts. It's really good. But even if one believes Haaland Sr., all of that still traces back to Woodward in the end. Also, the release clause issue isn't covered in this post.

tenpoless said:
Worth 3 billion now. Fecking Ed Woodward im telling you.
Click to expand...

Yep. There are still people reaaaalllly not getting it. This one is also on Woodward. This thread and the other one should be overflowing with people fuming at the ways he f*cked this up.

The rest of this post isn't directed at you.

If a potential world beater comes on the market for 18m, you get it done; there are no excuses. 75m release clause in two years? Whatever. You get it done and if you run the club poorly enough that he doesn't stay, that's on you. (Keeping in mind the only reason Raiola can even propose that clause with a straight face is because you're running the club poorly)

Someone who's not a fearful narcissist like Woodward sees that release clause proposed and reacts with mirth and a friendly spirit of 'I accept that challenge'. "Of course, we're not at our best and you're not without your rights to ask for that clause. If that's your main concern, then for me I'm in. Let's get everything signed right now. Now I'm glad I listened to Ole and came along on this meeting!"

They'll joke with Haaland. "You do realize that you're going to be the person who brings us to the point where you want to stay, right? ;)"

Not Edward "I AM MANCHESTER UNITED" Woodward though. He reacts with: 'Pfft. I AM (I mean, this is) MANCHESTER UNITED. We don't do release clauses. It's beneath me.'

This guy* tries to project strength to cover weakness. Constantly. I'll say it again - I'm laughing at how much I've been saying this without any expectation that the greater caf will pick up on this via osmosis - Woodward's every action comes from fear. He tries to project strength to cover weakness. All. The. Time. The overpaying of players comes from this place. The contracts to 'preserve value' comes from this. The bizarre behaviors like firing Rio in the dressing room comes from this place. Even Rooney text-gate comes from this.

*One can, and probably should, be much much much much much more insulting.
 
73424364.jpg
 
The most nailed on future Ballon d'or winner I've ever seen. If an opportunity comes to get him we should move heaven and earth to do it.
 
Oh he's borrowing the flair of Zlatan as well now? Sorry Sancho my lad, we'll find a way without you.
 
Ridiculous coordination and speed of execution. He really is an absolute physical freak of nature
 
giorno said:
Ridiculous coordination and speed of execution. He really is an absolute physical freak of nature
Click to expand...


Our Problem is Raiola again... I think we have no chance of signing him and if he would like to come Mino would feck up every two Months like he does with Pogba:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Just give them 200 million for sancho and haaland.

Bing bang bosh next seasons titles is ours.
 
Do everything to sign him. City are winning the league for the next decade if they get him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.