1st season at the club will be hampered by injury and need to settle into new league is my prediction (hope)
Nordic Ghost Yeti (Scandi Carroll) | Haaland at City
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Jesus can be played on the right though, plus they will need him when Haaland is out injured for months.
All people can hope for is that his injuries keep niggling away otherwise this is a ridiculous move. The only striker around in the PL that has the athleticism of him is Ronaldo who is in his late 30s and supposedly finished but still one of the top scorers in the league. If he has an injury free season he will blitz the league and break records.
What would be wrong with a few good seasons, a profit out of a player and then selling abroad?
Doubt Dortmund regret it!!
He would clash with Guardiola, the same way Ibra clashed with him; with any luck, Pep will get jaded and leave.
Butterfly effect
£55m for Haaland. Jesus Christ thats a bargain.
Yeah, this place would be absolutely fine with losing the club's main (and 21 year old) striker for £50m
Who cares what this place thinks? Also it's the entire wrong attitude to have.
If we signed him and actually became a good team winning trophies it would be easy to convince him to stay.
So we can say goodbye to winning the league for next 3 years
Does that not sicken you?
As fecking if you'd be on here spouting this shite if City had just signed our first choice striker for £50m, when any half decent replacement would be almost twice that.
Not like we would be in with a chance before this signing anyway. We are a million miles away.
Injury free I can see him breaking all sorts of records.
Wouldn't have happened. He'd have played under Ole and we'd have sucked like we do now.
Not really? Still not sure of your point tbh
We also didn't want to deal with his very much alive agent back then.
Oh. Alright then.
So who is pocketing all this extra money from the deal? Because it isn’t Riola
And a club has to have some sort of principle/ ethic. United is too big a club to have release clauses that aren't absurd. Haaland was not worth having a low release and he isn't now.
As fecking if you'd be on here spouting this shite if City had just signed our first choice striker for £50m, when any half decent replacement would be almost twice that.
On the contrary, I'm sure he would have made a huge difference for Man Utd.
He started his career under Ole. If there's one thing he can do, that is get the best out of him.
Absolutely. I'm sure no agent(s) of any player we were ever interested in from that point onwards would have demanded a ridiculously low release clause had we handed one to Haaland.
Yeah right. I don't believe that for a second. Most likely City are paying way more beyond the buyout clause in separate payments into offshore accounts. City's creative accounting / PR department and friendly reporting press all at work here.
This isn't the sure thing everybody thinks it is. He may well blow us all away, he looks a rare mix of physical and talent, but it's a very different league, will be playing for a more neurotic manager who hasnt had my strikers like him to my memory. Tougher league too and more regular injuries this year.
He'll prob end up banging in goals for Abu Dhabi but i wouldnt be as confident as many are
He'll prob end up banging in goals for Abu Dhabi but i wouldnt be as confident as many are
Didn’t think you had a point. Glad we got there in the end.
While we continue to be shit. No thanks
Presumably because Borussia Dortmund was always a stepping stone and that clause was the only way he would have ever signed for them.
Mino Raiola may be gone but his work lives on a while longer.
How have they got him that cheap? They've had Dortmund's pants down there big time.
City not playing much blitz football though.
Thats true, but we've seen high profile signings fail in the past. Shevchenko, Di Maria, Veron etc... I remember Shevchenko being hyped up to the max and thinking he was going to cause Chelsea to dominate for years, but he was pretty useless in my opinion
Ah reminds me of the days when we would sign the exciting striker du jour as we went from strength to strength winning title after title.
Good times.
Good times.
As fecking if you'd be on here spouting this shite if City had just signed our first choice striker for £50m, when any half decent replacement would be almost twice that.
What part of sell abroad do you not understand?
Btw, isn’t it a bit strange that Real Madrid didn’t go all out for him with one of their usual months long campaigns where they tap up players they really want? I know Benzema has been unreal this season but he’ll be turning 35 halfway through next season. Real Madrid treating Haaland as the successor should’ve been a no brainer and they love these sorts of massive name signings.
I figured for sure they’d want both Mbappe and Haaland this summer. New Galactico era and all that.
I figured for sure they’d want both Mbappe and Haaland this summer. New Galactico era and all that.
So what? That's hindsight.
Raiola did a madness with that. He was the hottest striker in Europe and available for 20m, he could probably have got Dortmund to agree to anything. A low release clause with a massive wedge for himself isn’t ideal for Dortmund but those were his terms and they were happy to meet them for 2 years of productivity. I can see why United pulled out.
Sancho costed twice
RVP was 29 too. I do think Kane would improve us. But I doubt ETH would want him anyway.
Of course BVB don't regret it because this is what they do and what their business model revolves round, not one serious big club agrees to this. No matter how bad we've been a club of our size should never resort to such immoral decisions to try and get back to the top. Liverpool and City never needed to.
If you think a mere profit of £30-35m on a £100-150m player(that you have to replace) is actually acceptable you and Ed Woodward will make good pals as terrible business men and Woodward himself saw it as horrible business.
It's not worth having a player even like Haaland for 2/3 years in such a vulnerable and risky deal for the club and BTW every chance he'd have gone to City/Chelsea as they'd never agree to a restricted clause.
Haalands dad probably
I wonder why other teams weren't involved at that cheap... likes of Real Madrid, Barca, Juve etc... if they were in for him as well you have to wonder the wage package offered by city must be enormous.
Big clubs don't hand out silly release clauses for that you don't need hindsight.
You said he'd have stayed if we won stuff. Which hindsight tells us we wouldn't have. So it would have been a small time thing for a big club to do and wouldn't have worked anyway as he'd leave us for City anyway