Mathys Tel | on his way to SPURS. He’s going to Spurs lads. SPURS

Acquire Me said:
If we are unsure about him, like many on here are, we should not spend money on him. Like others are saying, we need someone who are a bit further ahead in their career. And we probably won’t be able to get such a player now.

Best bet is that this season will continue to be a nightmare.
Click to expand...

That still doesn’t explain “dodging a bullet” - that expression carries a negative connotation pertaining the player, no?

And still, the player is seemingly moving to Spurs on a straight loan - no obligation nor option. We’ve actually sanctioned exits and are quite thin upfront - one injury and a bad situation becomes worse - is this good squad planning? Not saying Tel would be the answer to all our problems but I don’t see how allowing for the season to continue to be a nightmare = dodging a bullet
 
IRELANDUNITED said:
So he rejected a move to Tottenham, waited for someone else to come in for him, realised no one else wanted him so then accepted the move to Tottenham, have I got that right?

It’s similar vibes to rashford thinking half of Europe would want him only for him to end up at Aston Villa.
Click to expand...
With one exception/omission: he rejected a permanent move to Spurs, and agreed to a loan. Also, other clubs wanted him, but he either did not want them or, in United's specific case, they were refused by his club.
HTG said:
After reading the last few pages one question remains: why would they agree to loan without an option to Spurs even though United offered an option to buy?
Very weird.
Click to expand...
ohyoudotjpg
 
gaffs said:
I dont understand why United would insist on an obligation. At this point, just get the body in, especially if we dont believe he is a long term option.
Click to expand...
You mean an option. And I have no idea either. But who knows, maybe United even did offer that, but Postecoglu just was more convincing than whoever talked to Tel on behalf of United?
 
dejans said:
And what about this now?!
Click to expand...
It all very much happened exactly as I wrote. We preferred a sale or a loan with an obligation, which is no different from a sale. That didn’t materialise, because Tel was smart enough not to go to Spurs permanently. So we fell back on the second best option, a loan without an option or obligation to buy.
I really don’t get why people on here struggle so much with that concept. It’s very simple, really. A straight sale or a loan with an obligation guarantees us a nice and heavy fee. That’s cool.
A loan without any shenanigans involved makes sense for us, because we still control the players future.
A loan with an option to buy, however, sees us giving up all control and is a no go.
 
Think this stuff about demanding a buy option is BS to be honest. Reckon Bayern felt his stock was more likely to rise at Spurs than here, or we were never in for him to the extent that was reported.

Either way, we are in for a lean goal streak until the end of the season. Enjoy them when you can.
 
What happened to ‘he definitely isn’t going to spurs’?

Also if we can’t get him with an option, surely you’d just take the straight up loan? The chances of signing him permanently are much higher if he’s spent 6 months here to start with
 
mav_9me said:
On a 6 month loan, to replace 2 attackers you've let go?

I mean we do need an extra rotation option no?
Click to expand...
Yeah I wouldn't have minded him as an option from the bench, but people are pretending we missed out on a massive CF. He would've gotten some minutes and maybe even a goal, but it's not a big loss
 
I'm a bit stunned at how many posters don't have the slightest understanding of how options work, yet it doesn't stop them from making up theories.
 
I do understand why United may not have opted for this type of agreement - if he performs well, he could want to return to Bayern in the summer or another club may come in that he prefers to sign for in the summer. Even if he wanted to sign for United permanently, Bayern could use his good form to bump up the price further. While I do get why a buy option would be favourable, I'd have thought that a loan with no obligation or buy option would still be preferable to signing no one (assuming we won't get an attacker in today).
 
Acrobat7 said:
I'm a bit stunned at how many posters don't have the slightest understanding of how options work, yet it doesn't stop them from making up theories.
Click to expand...
We‘re at a point where I’m not surely we’re being trolled.
 
hellhunter said:
But what if the selling club just didn't use their option?!
Click to expand...
Then it’s the same as a straight loan. The selling team still get to dictate how much they want for him in the buy option. Why are we trying to act like there is nothing in it for the loaning club?

Bayern just want their cake and to eat it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.