We had probably agreed a deal before then though.
Nasri To City - Done Deal!
- Thread starter evra
- Start date
- Status
We had probably agreed a deal before then though.
Selling to shitty is probably worse than us as they are a "new rival", one that could ultimately see them dropping out of the top 4 all together.
On the other hand, making us stronger doesn't really effect Arsenal's standing one bit.
City are kind of rivals to them right now. They finished above Arsenal last time. Btw I didn't see any kind of backlash when Cole was sold to Chelsea who are arguably Arsenal's bigger rivals than us.
I think Nasri will come to us if those quotes are true.
I've given up. He's going to City. I hope we don't buy anyone else, if we can't get Nasri/Sneijder/Modric and give Cleverley a proper chance.
Realistically Arsenal are going to be a lot closer to City when they sell Nasri and Fabregas than to us, and might find themselves battling it out for top 4 against Liverpool, City and Tottenham sooner or later.
True. But when I say rival, I mean more historically rather than the current threat level. As a fan, I would have sold Heinze to Chelsea rather than Liverpool, despite Liverpool being of no real threat to us. Keep in mind we're probably the team Arsenal fans hate most after Spurs.
The Cole transfer was different as, at the time, it looked like Arsenal got a really good deal with Gallas and cash.
Thats a fair point alright!
Arsenal are not gonna be any stronger than City will be next year, unless they make a good few improvements particluarly in defence & up front. If they sell & sell to City they'll be shifting the balance, they'll be worse off than last year.
City will bolster their squad no doubt, but maybe not as much as folk expect them to, due to this Financial Fair Play thing-a-my-bob..
Yeah but Cleverley's going to City. I can't see us getting Sneijder or Modrić either as they're both going to City.
Why? It's only the Daily Mail that are reporting it.
I don't know, I guess it would be just too good if he came to us. He's a true muppet's dream.
And also, Mancini saying "Not yet," Arsenal willing to sell their players to City, Wenger's pride and newspapers reports. Although that Nasri's quotes about wanting to win trophies are encouraging. But you can just imagine him saying "City are on a up" when he signs for them
I'd be very surprised if he signs for us, since almost everything shows that he's going to City.
I don't know, I guess it would be just too good if he came to us. He's a true muppet's dream.
And also, Mancini saying "Not yet," Arsenal willing to sell their players to City, Wenger's pride and newspapers reports. Although that Nasri's quotes about wanting to win trophies are encouraging. But you can just imagine him saying "City are on a up" when he signs for them
I'd be very surprised if he signs for us, since almost everything shows that he's going to City.
Mancini also says Sanchez wants to join City.
Selling to any of the other top three teams would not make any sense anyway, if their intention is not to strengthen their rivals. Not sure why United will be singled out. In fact, it's City and Chelsea who can afford to strengthen even further, even after spending 20+mil on Nasri.
It's amazing how people see things differently based on the same, unsupported, rumours.
I have seen nothing of note to suggest we know where he will be next season. His recent interview does suggest he wants to move on from Arsenal to win trophies but he could just as easily be doing a Rooney and wanting to see investment.
Also, with his quote about money not being an issue - this could quite easily be him dismissing City, whereas it could also be him just getting his excuses in early as to the real reason he chooses them.
Patience, children.
I have seen nothing of note to suggest we know where he will be next season. His recent interview does suggest he wants to move on from Arsenal to win trophies but he could just as easily be doing a Rooney and wanting to see investment.
Also, with his quote about money not being an issue - this could quite easily be him dismissing City, whereas it could also be him just getting his excuses in early as to the real reason he chooses them.
Patience, children.
That's why we should focus on what we know, not unsubstantiated rumours.
What we know is that 1) City can offer bigger wages than United, 2) Arsenal were, in the not too distant past, willing to sell players to City 3) Wenger insisted they would never sell to United.
Therefore it would be a big surprise - imho - if Nasri ended up at Old Trafford. City is an infinitely more likely destination or he might just stay at Arsenal after all this. Joining United, I think, is the least likely option of the three.
Arsenal have only sold players to City that they wanted too.
Adebayor, Toure and now Clichy, none of them moved away from Arsenal when Arsenal didn't wanted to keep them. The Gunners are not bothered about Clichy leaving because he has been well below his best for the last two years.
Adebayor, Toure and now Clichy, none of them moved away from Arsenal when Arsenal didn't wanted to keep them. The Gunners are not bothered about Clichy leaving because he has been well below his best for the last two years.
That was before City finished ahead of Arsenal in the league.
There's absolutely no reason for Wenger to favour selling to City over United this summer. The fact he specifically stated he wouldn't want to sell Nasri to United was in response to a direct question. His response if asked about selling to City would, no doubt, be exactly the same.
fixed.
Apart from pride and his long-standing rivalry with Fergie.
I take your point that it may not be the rational choice but since when has Wenger been acting reasonably when it comes to transfers?
Btw anyone who says that Man City can offer obscene amount of money should probably read this article
Fair-play rules mean we can't break the bank, admits Mancini - Premier League, Football - The Independent
Fair-play rules mean we can't break the bank, admits Mancini - Premier League, Football - The Independent
Just a thought, but would it not make more sense to sell to us then City from a competitive point of view, surely Arsenal will be in direct competition with City to finish top four and not with us to win the league.
Although for Arsenal to admit to that would'nt impress fans.
Although for Arsenal to admit to that would'nt impress fans.
Fergie is a mate though, you'd always rather sell to a mate.
Easy for Sir Alex to get on with Wenger when Arsenal hav'nt been a force in so many years.
I was responding to a post of yours in which you told people to ignore unsubstantiated rumours. If you want people to be rational here, you should take the same approach yourself. Have you got any rational reason why Wenger might be willing to sell to City but not United?
From an Arsenal perspective, selling Nasri to either Manchester club is something they want to avoid. All that remains to be seen is whether the player has a preference.
They sold them Adebayor and Touré, they are selling Clichy - it seems they are not overly concerned with strengthening (if the signing of Clichy can be called that) City.
Selling Nasri to United - the same summer Fabregas leaves them for Barca - would be a clear and obvious indication that they cannot even pretend to compete with the biggest clubs any more. If they sell him to City Wenger can still say that it's the crazy money they could not compete with. Losing him to United sends a dreadful message.
It's true that Arsenal will want to avoid selling him to either of the Manchester clubs. However, if only United and City put a proper bid in then in my opinion City would be clear favourites to get him. Unless he's desperate to join United but I can't see why he would be.
City are a bigger threat to Arsenal than us and Chelsea are anymore though. They're too far behind to finish first or second anymore so keeping in the CL will be next years task for the most part.
It's already been point out that Adebayor and Toure were sold to City before they were the kind of threat they are to Arsenal right now.
Clichy is not comparable with Nasri, as he is obviously not rated as highly. I don't think that's any more relevant than the fact United and Arsenal have recently done business with the transfer of Mikael Silvestre.
As for your last sentence, you can't see the appeal of joining Manchester United over joining Manchester City? Oh dear.
Lescott is the only weak player in it. Kompany is brilliant, Richards had a very good year and Clichy is a good LB that was just out of form. Hardly "wank"
Its a better defence then Arsenal.
I don't see why Nasri would be determined to do so. He has no allegiance to Manchester United at all, he knows City will be in the Champions League and there's the question of wages. He might prefer United but I can't see him fighting tooth and nail to join us over City if his main aim is to leave Arsenal for a more ambitious club.
City are a threat to Arsenal but you assume that Wenger has given up on even attempting to compete with United. He may well think that they will be able to beat City next season even if they sell them Nasri but they certainly won't have a chance to catch United if he ends up at Old Trafford.
If neither club has put in a firm bid then I suspect they are playing a game of seeing who blinks first.
United know City can outbid them and pay Nasri more. It really boils down to what Nasri is happy with in terms of wage.
What you think we would offer? He has rejected £90k from Arsenal.
United know City can outbid them and pay Nasri more. It really boils down to what Nasri is happy with in terms of wage.
What you think we would offer? He has rejected £90k from Arsenal.
No, I'm serious. I believe that if he wants to leave, it's only because he fears Arsenal have become a sinking ship. I don't think his heart is set on a move to United, that he's so desperate to join us that he would reject every other club.
He said money has nothing to do with it, for what thats worth, we can match City for Nasri, they're not going to splurge millions upon millions on him with transfer fees and wages.
Because United are one of the World's biggest clubs, the most successful team ever in England, have arguably the best manager in history, play good football (and not 3 defensive midfielders), have 75000 ish fans to every single home game, millions worldwide.
Yeah I just can't see why
Right that's a better argument at least, although it's totally based on no evidence whatsoever, just your "feeling".
Of course but everyone's opinion is based on speculation only. Apart from the Twitter ITKs of course, they know everything.
indeed.My only gripe was that you couldn't see why United might be infinitely more appealing to a footballer.
Footballers want to perform on the highest stage and Nasri himself has said that his primary motivation is winning medals.
On this basis, would his preference be to join the team that won 4 out of the last 5 PL titles and made 3 out of the last 4 CL finals?
Or would he prefer to play for the team that just won it's first trophy in 38 years, has never won the Premier League and never even played in the CL before?
Hmmm...
On this basis, would his preference be to join the team that won 4 out of the last 5 PL titles and made 3 out of the last 4 CL finals?
Or would he prefer to play for the team that just won it's first trophy in 38 years, has never won the Premier League and never even played in the CL before?
Hmmm...
- Status