Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 11/12

DOC09UNAM

homerjay2005 wrote: »

cambo2008 wrote: »

I agree on Evans,just think Jones has been a step above him.
Vidic has been immense alright but if he gets a 9 I'd give Cleverly an 8.

hmm i dunno. i dont think cleverly was anything special v west brom, was ok in the 2nd half v spurs and did well against arsenal, who were horrific. he came off after 7 minutes against bolton and was ok against everton.

hardly a huge contribution!!!!

If vidic is a nine than nani is a 10.

Will I Amnt

homerjay2005 wrote: »

hmm i dunno. i dont think cleverly was anything special v west brom, was ok in the 2nd half v spurs and did well against arsenal, who were horrific. he came off after 7 minutes against bolton and was ok against everton.

hardly a huge contribution!!!!

You could argue Vidic had nothing to do against Villa and very little against Newcastle.
Not taking anything away from him I think he deserves the 9,just a personal opinion that Cleverly wasn't miles off him.

Blatter

Quandary wrote: »

hey folks, just a quick one someone might be able to answer..

When exactly are the Fifa Fair Play rules coming into effect?

Utd are very well set up to conform to them but how the hell are City/Chelsea/Madrid going to manage?

Giggsy11 wrote: »

FIFA has nothing to do with it. It was imposed by UEFA. Financial Fair Play it is.

I think it will start from 2013-14 season

It has already started, 2013/2014 season is when punishment for not complying can begin.

A club that make a greater ''loss'' than €45 million over the 2011/2012 and 2012/2013 seasons, will be breaking the rules. But apparently fist time offenders won't be strictly punished, so in reality City have plenty of time to sort themselves out and comply.

PHB

The rules are to stop another City, rather than stopping City directly. It's about consolidating power in many ways, but I welcome it because it'll be good for football overall.

City can't spend like they have. They need to work within normal financial rules from this point on. Their new players will have to come to them without incredible wages or huge transfer fees, as Mancini says, they will have to sell to buy. It's why they are being so persistent about Tevez and getting a fee, it's just too much money and they need it in FFP.

Blatter

Just for the record, City's revenue per year at the moment stands at about £200m while ours is at around £330m.

Even taking interest payments into account, that's a rather large advantage.

Giggsy11

Blatter wrote: »

It has already started, 2013/2014 season is when punishment for not complying can begin.

A club that make a greater ''loss'' than €45 million over the 2011/2012 and 2012/2013 seasons, will be breaking the rules. But apparently fist time offenders won't be strictly punished, so in reality City have plenty of time to sort themselves out and comply.

Yeah I meant they will implementing the "Said Ban" from 2013-14. Now monitoring period has already started.

Giggsy11

Blatter wrote: »

Just for the record, City's revenue per year at the moment stands at about £200m while ours is at around £330m.

Even taking interest payments into account, that's a rather large advantage.

IMO they have hard time to comply with "Wages to Turnover ration" should be less than 70%. They have more than 100% now.

rednik

Frank O' Farrell documentary on RTE1 tonight at 10:35pm.

http://www.rte.ie/tv/programmes/frankofarrell.html

Cantona's Collars

rednik wrote: »

Frank O' Farrell documentary on RTE1 tonight at 10:35pm.

http://www.rte.ie/tv/programmes/frankofarrell.html

United is on after it at 11.40pm.

Samich

Blatter wrote: »

Just for the record, City's revenue per year at the moment stands at about £200m while ours is at around £330m.

Even taking interest payments into account, that's a rather large advantage.

This is Cities first year though as a big team gaining fans.

They can make up alot of that gap in the years ahead.

Blatter

Samich wrote: »

This is Cities first year though as a big team gaining fans.

They can make up alot of that gap in the years ahead.

City are miles behind United in terms of fanbase and it'll take a very long time for that to change. They'll make up some of the gap alright, but that won't even touch the edges.

Their stadium was barely half full this season for league cup matches despite dropping ticket prices to something like £10. That'll tell you how far they are behind, and that's only support in England. Their fanbase is non existent globally compared to United's.

It will take years of sustained success for them to get close.

I was looking at an article a couple of months ago and apparently Chelsea's fanbase has grown to 135m fans worldwide with their recent success but United are still way out in front of any other club with 354m fans world wide. Barcelona are second with 270m despite what they've done in the last few years.

Same article estimated that City have around 18-20m fans world wide. As I said, a long long way to go to get anywhere close.

Jimmy Iovine

homerjay2005 wrote: »

too long to embed, so please have a look at this link if you have 5 or 10 mins spare, its a season review so far. its very detailed and while i disagree with one or 2 player ratings, i think its pretty much bang on and sums up our season.

http://www.fanfeedr.com/soccer/manchester-united?id=cb516a05-c54a-5e8f-af07-cdf91e3af018

There's some crazy ratings in there imo. Nani getting the same rating as Valencia and Jonny Evans? Valencia was rubbish up until the last couple of games, and poor Jonny can be as awful as he can be brilliant. Unfortunately for large parts of the season he's been giving me nightmares with some of his antics on the pitch.

Evra shouldn't have gotten a 6, he should have gotten a 1. It might give him the kick up the arse he needs.

Vidic was great but if Nani only got a 7 then Nemanja doesn't deserve a 9 by any distance.

That 6 for Ashley Young is very generous considering how poor he has been at times.

Also the 6 for Cleverley. He was fantastic at the start of the season and very, very unlucky to have gotten injured. But, how can he get a 6 when he started only 5 games out of 18 in the league. Seems a bit strange to me.

Some of the others are decent enough.

homerjay2005

Samich wrote: »

This is Cities first year though as a big team gaining fans.

They can make up alot of that gap in the years ahead.

City and big in the same sentance, lol......

they will never and i mean never, be anywhere near as big as united. the only thing they have in common with united is geography.

homerjay2005

homerjay2005 wrote: »

City and big in the same sentance, lol......

they will never and i mean never, be anywhere near as big as united. the only thing they have in common with united is geography.

Didn't know you could tell the future.

How do you know what the state of club football will be like in 100 years or even 200 years?

Will I Amnt

rarnes1 wrote: »

Didn't know you could tell the future.

How do you know what the state of club football will be like in 100 years or even 200 years?

Well they won't be in our lifetime,so I guess he can say it without fear of an "I told you so" from anybody.

homerjay2005

rarnes1 wrote: »

Didn't know you could tell the future.

How do you know what the state of club football will be like in 100 years or even 200 years?

its called history. a fan base. global branding and a market. and so on and so on.

city have none. chelsea have taken up all the glory hunters and there aint enough for city to take.

its simple maths, economics, business what ever you want.

Paul Tergat

The city is yours, the city is yourrrrrrssssssss...

homerjay2005

homerjay2005 wrote: »

its called history. a fan base. global branding and a market. and so on and so on.

city have none. chelsea have taken up all the glory hunters and there aint enough for city to take.

Its simple maths, economics, business what ever you want.

My point still stands.

If you know what history will be like 100 years in the future, you're wasted in here !

I think you should work on your maths if you think City could never possibly overtake utd.

Didn't your own club do something similar in the last 20 years

The_Kew_Tour

Rome was not built in a day.

It will take some time before City overtake United.

It may well happen, far stranger things happened, but at this moment in time it's at least a 20 years away and that's with City rolling in the titles and keeping the sugar money coming in too.

Will I Amnt

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Rome was not built in a day.

It will take some time before City overtake United.

It may well happen, far stranger things happened, but at this moment in time it's at least a 20 years away and that's with City rolling in the titles and keeping the sugar money coming in too.

It's new enough territory,if Abramovich was to jack it in at Chelsea and they dropped off the radar,the fan numbers they have built up in the last few years dwindle in time.
Same goes for City.

United have built up a loyal following over a long period,even before the success of the last 20 years they were a vastly bigger club than City are now.

The_Kew_Tour

cambo2008 wrote: »

It's new enough territory,if Abramovich was to jack it in at Chelsea and they dropped off the radar,the fan numbers they have built up in the last few years dwindle in time.
Same goes for City.

United have built up a loyal following over a long period,even before the success of the last 20 years they were a vastly bigger club than City are now.

It's kinda why I get a little annoyed when you hear some people call in particular some of the older generation Glory Hunters, really was annoying getting it from my Liverpool friends in school the irony could not have been more funnier.

Even as kid I remember how many of us were gutted when we blew the league to Leeds in 1992 and have to remember had not won it in 24 years at that stage.

Actually even writing about that season brings back painful memories

homerjay2005

rarnes1 wrote: »

Didn't your own club do something similar in the last 20 years

what you talking about? i assume its liverpool and us overtaking them 19-18. its not just abotu success. its about fan base, history, global branding, power, everything. united and liverpool have always been the big 2 and arsenal 3rd. that wont change. buying a few league titles wont change that either. are chelsea a bigger club than arsenal or liverpool, even though they have as many titles as both put together in the last 20 years?

no way, liverpool and arsenal are much bigger clubs than chelsea and city. city are not even in the top 10 clubs in england in terms of being "big". trophies is one thing, stature is another.

it hasnt happened in the last 100 years, why would it happen in the next 100.

Nalz

homerjay2005 wrote: »

what you talking about? i assume its liverpool and us overtaking them 19-18. its not just abotu success. its about fan base, history, global branding, power, everything. united and liverpool have always been the big 2 and arsenal 3rd. that wont change. buying a few league titles wont change that either. are chelsea a bigger club than arsenal or liverpool, even though they have as many titles as both put together in the last 20 years?

no way, liverpool and arsenal are much bigger clubs than chelsea and city. city are not even in the top 10 clubs in england in terms of being "big". trophies is one thing, stature is another.

it hasnt happened in the last 100 years, why would it happen in the next 100.

We bought Gary pallister homer don't you remember? Just kidding... the last comment was left out like bait and you bit on it. Props up now and again from the laters

tommyhaas

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Even as kid I remember how many of us were gutted when we blew the league to Leeds in 1992 and have to remember had not won it in 24 years at that stage

26 yrs I'm sure

The_Kew_Tour

tommyhaas wrote: »

26 yrs I'm sure

actually we are both wrong twas 25 years.

they finally won it in 1993 again.

Professey Chin

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

actually we are both wrong twas 25 years.

they finally won it in 1993 again.

Still annoys me that I cant find the documentary about those years.
Can't even remember if it was BBC or CH4 that made it. Aired in 96 I think.
Stupid lost video tape

homerjay2005

The Great Chinholio wrote: »

Still annoys me that I cant find the documentary about those years.
Can't even remember if it was BBC or CH4 that made it. Aired in 96 I think.
Stupid lost video tape

the video steve bruce did in 93 called "captains log" is epic, i have it on vhs somewhere at home.

he took his video camera into the dressing room for the last 6 games, prematch, halftime and after match team talks and all that..

my fav video of united, must have watched it about 200 times from the age of 7-10.

homerjay2005

homerjay2005 wrote: »

what you talking about? i assume its liverpool and us overtaking them 19-18. its not just abotu success. its about fan base, history, global branding, power, everything. .

What I was getting at was this - If someone said 20 years ago that Utd would win the amount of trophies that they have done in the last 20 years they'd have been laughed out of it.

This success obviously brought weith it the stuff you mentioned above.

It's not beyond reality that something like this couldn't happen again, that's all I'm saying.

tommyhaas

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

actually we are both wrong twas 25 years.

they finally won it in 1993 again.

I'd always thought it had been 26 for some reason

Regarding City ever becoming bigger then Utd, in Britain and Ireland only a dramatic drop down through the leagues for a prolonged period of time by United would allow Man City the opportunity to build a bigger fan base then United, but this would be more a case of them overtaking United by virtue of Utd's fan base falling over time, as oppose to on account of City making significant gains

However, if a European Super League was ever to get going, it is possible that City could build a bigger fan base then Utd by virtue of the increasing interest in the Far East. There's obviously huge support for clubs like Liverpool, Utd, Real and Barca over there, a support which would be much more likely to switch allegiances then in the UK. Sustained success by City in such a league could see them dramatically increase their fan base over time. China in particular has a huge population, is a growing economy with higher levels of disposable income then previously. Its exactly the kind of market clubs will target

The_Kew_Tour

tommyhaas wrote: »

I'd always thought it had been 26 for some reason

Regarding City ever becoming bigger then Utd, in Britain and Ireland only a dramatic drop down through the leagues for a prolonged period of time by United would allow Man City the opportunity to build a bigger fan base then United, but this would be more a case of them overtaking United by virtue of Utd's fan base falling over time, as oppose to on account of City making significant gains

However, if a European Super League was ever to get going, it is possible that City could build a bigger fan base then Utd by virtue of the increasing interest in the Far East. There's obviously huge support for clubs like Liverpool, Utd, Real and Barca over there, a support which would be much more likely to switch allegiances then in the UK. Sustained success by City in such a league could see them dramatically increase their fan base over time. China in particular has a huge population, is a growing economy with higher levels of disposable income then previously. Its exactly the kind of market clubs will target

Properly got our wires crossed

Well it was 26 years before they won it in 1993. But when I referred to Leeds beating us it had been 25 years and not 24 like I said and you pointed out.

tommyhaas

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Properly got our wires crossed

Well it was 26 years before they won it in 1993. But when I referred to Leeds beating us it had been 25 years and not 24 like I said and you pointed out.

Apologies, I was referring to years you went without winning it

parker kent

homerjay2005 wrote: »

what you talking about? i assume its liverpool and us overtaking them 19-18. its not just abotu success. its about fan base, history, global branding, power, everything. united and liverpool have always been the big 2 and arsenal 3rd. that wont change. buying a few league titles wont change that either. are chelsea a bigger club than arsenal or liverpool, even though they have as many titles as both put together in the last 20 years?

no way, liverpool and arsenal are much bigger clubs than chelsea and city. city are not even in the top 10 clubs in england in terms of being "big". trophies is one thing, stature is another.

it hasnt happened in the last 100 years, why would it happen in the next 100.

I'm not sure what exactly you are using when you say "in terms of being big". If City won several leagues and began to catch up, then they would become "big". Anyway, United didn't just overtake Liverpool from being say, 18-14 on the overall league honours table. They were on 7 and Liverpool had 18. That is a massive gap. Nobody at all would seriously have believed in 1990 that Liverpool would not win a league in the next 22 years and that United would win at least 12 (possibly 13 depending on this season). You genuinely cannot tell what will happen.

Obviously it is not likely that City will catch United any time soon, but you never know. You talk about the last 100 years, but the only reason United and Liverpool are so far clear is because they went through a period of dominance. If City had one as well, they would join the leading pack. It is not crazy to suggest that a team with their money may win a number of leagues. After all Liverpool did it in the 70s and 80s, United have done it in the 90s, 00s and this decade so who is to say that City could not win a massive amount of trophies. If they put 5, 6 leagues together in a 10 year period, they would be a genuinely massive club and not just in their imagination any more.

If you read up on your football history, you will see that teams often emerge and become big hitters very suddenly. Real Madrid were the original Man City or Chelsea when they started buying all round them in the 50s under Santiago Bernabeu. Now that name is immortalised in one of the most famous stadiums in the world and Real Madrid are genuine football royalty. Money changes things and changes them dramatically. Look at AC Milan before and after Silvio Berlusconi took over. Obviously they were already a big name team, but they were nothing like the giant that they became in the late 80s with his money. They stockpiled trophies over the next 20 years.

If City were to do the same (a massive if of course), then without doubt they would become a big team on the level of United or Liverpool. They already have a pretty decent history too, much more than Chelsea.

Why would it happen in the next 100 years? Because they have more money than anybody else. Money brings success. Anyway, 100 years is a ridiculous figure to use. It is far, far too long of a period to use. For a large amount of the 20th century, United were very much the B team in Manchester. Then along came Busby to change things. All it takes is a big event to change things.

Blatter

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/dec/29/sion-criminal-complaint-fifa

The threat of Basel being prevented from playing in the CL seems to be growing.

Tbh, I couldn't really give a toss if people say it'd be embarrassing for us to re enter the CL on those grounds. I'd love it personally, if only to listen to the pure moral outrage from rival fans.

I still reckon it's still very unlikely but there seems to be some sort of a chance at this stage.

parker kent

If United got back in and won it, I would probably never stop laughing. 20th anniversary of Denmark winning the European Championships without qualifying for it, so it would be apt :pac:

kmart6

rarnes1 wrote: »

If someone said 20 years ago that Utd would win the amount of trophies that they have done in the last 20 years they'd have been laughed out of it.

Well Fergie really showed all those people who laughed at him didn't he!?

The_Kew_Tour

From a personal point of view I don't want us to be back in CL.

I understand why people would, but I only think it would hinder our chances of winning the league, as we are not good enough to win CL and League in one season as the team is and with injuries then that could be real hindrance.

enviro

rarnes1 wrote: »

What I was getting at was this - If someone said 20 years ago that Utd would win the amount of trophies that they have done in the last 20 years they'd have been laughed out of it.

This success obviously brought weith it the stuff you mentioned above.

It's not beyond reality that something like this couldn't happen again, that's all I'm saying.

IMO the difference is that Utd won't drop off the way Liverpool did. Liverpool went from a period of success to a prolonged baron spell. Like that's some contrast. City may become regular contenders for the Premier league but I believe Utd will be there at the top also for many many years to come.

When Utd started winning the league on a regular basis, early 90's on... no team really stuck with them with consistency year in year out, maybe that's unfair on Arsenal... but they have dropped off so much in recent years I think it's a fair point. Chelsea came into it from around 2003 on... BTW I'm taking the whole premier league period into account here.

Just to back up the point
Since the 92-93 season Utd have failed to win the premier league 7 times, being runners up 4 times. Of the years they failed to win or didn't finish 2nd...
Chelsea won 3, runners up 4 (2003 to present)
Arsenal won 3, runners up 5 (1997 to 2004)


The bottom line is I think a top two scenario could be on the cards in the coming years. Similar to Spain. Unless of course some other clubs receive huge investment as City have or develop some serious talent (holding onto them is another matter though)

Also Utd had the History in place before the success of the last 20years.

Blatter

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

From a personal point of view I don't want us to be back in CL.

I understand why people would, but I only think it would hinder our chances of winning the league, as we are not good enough to win CL and League in one season as the team is and with injuries then that could be real hindrance.

Thursday night football could end up being just as damaging tbh. Even though lots of fringe players will be playing, it screws up training times and affects league preparation.

It's a nightmare. I'd swap it for the CL right now, no matter what the circumstances, without even thinking about it.

parker kent

enviro wrote: »

IMO the difference is that Utd won't drop off the way Liverpool did.

How can you be sure though? Under Ferguson, they will almost definitely be a top 3 team, but afterwards who knows? There may be a ticking time-bomb in the Glazer ownership too. Now I don't actually think they will fall away like that, but you don't actually know. Like I said earlier, who would have imagined in 1990 that Liverpool would fall away in the manner they did?

Also to go further back, when Santiago Bernabeu took over as President of Real Madrid, they were not even the biggest team in the city, let alone Spain. Things happen, change happens. When Brian Clough took over Forest, I doubt people expected 2 European Cups to follow. Obviously football is different now than it was then but 10 years ago who would have foreseen Man City being Premiership favourites? Funny things can and do happen. It may not be likely but you can never be categorical in your beliefs.

Also a top 2 similar to Spain? What about Chelsea? They have unlimited funds. Arsenal will be thereabouts for the foreseeable future too I imagine. Liverpool always have the potential to come back as well.

The_Kew_Tour

Blatter wrote: »

Thursday night football could end up being just as damaging tbh. Even though lots of fringe players will be playing, it screws up training times and affects league preparation.

It's a nightmare. I'd swap it for the CL right now, no matter what the circumstances, without even thinking about it.

Hmm. ya I see what ya mean.

Personally though I don't think United will be taking the EL as serious and I think we will see the likes of Berba and other second choice players playing the likes of Ajax unless we come down to semi final stage where they go for it more serious.

Personally United going back in will be taken more serious and I cant really see United getting anywhere near the level they need to win it and get over Barca or Real anyway.

Hopefully next summer will go long ways to sorting that problem:o

Mikeyt086

Aaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnndddddd its time for the next trio of Phil Jones sigs. Some bastard had the gall to tempt me into making an Indiana Jones sig.. If you didnt learn from this monstrosity:


If you post something ridiculous regarding photoshop I WILL make it.

So here: Markc1184 is the lucky (or unlucky maybe) recipient.

http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h230/mikeyt086/markc1184.jpg

s_carnage:

http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h230/mikeyt086/s_carnage.jpg

Cian A:

http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h230/mikeyt086/Cian-A.jpg

Up next: mars bar, DB21, Baz2009..

#PhilJonesTakeover

kmart6

kmart6 wrote: »

Well Fergie really showed all those people who laughed at him didn't he!?

He's got the trophies to prove it doesn't he.

enviro wrote: »

IMO the difference is that Utd won't drop off the way Liverpool did. Liverpool went from a period of success to a prolonged baron spell. Like that's some contrast. City may become regular contenders for the Premier league but I believe Utd will be there at the top also for many many years to come.

When Utd started winning the league on a regular basis, early 90's on... no team really stuck with them with consistency year in year out, maybe that's unfair on Arsenal... but they have dropped off so much in recent years I think it's a fair point. Chelsea came into it from around 2003 on... BTW I'm taking the whole premier league period into account here.

Just to back up the point
Since the 92-93 season Utd have failed to win the premier league 7 times, being runners up 4 times. Of the years they failed to win or didn't finish 2nd...
Chelsea won 3, runners up 4 (2003 to present)
Arsenal won 3, runners up 5 (1997 to 2004)


The bottom line is I think a top two scenario could be on the cards in the coming years. Similar to Spain. Unless of course some other clubs receive huge investment as City have or develop some serious talent (holding onto them is another matter though)

Also Utd had the History in place before the success of the last 20years.

A top 2 like Spain?

I don't think Chelsea will go away despite their poor form this season. They will still attract some of the best players with all their cash.

City and Chelsea have the cash and utd have the best manager so until that changes it's realistically a 3 horse race the next few years.

Blatter

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2080025/Chris-Smalling-months-glandular-fever.html?ITO=1490&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

If true, Ugh......

enviro

It's a fair point about Chelsea but Abramovich is the best thing about that Club and imo can at times be the worst also. Since Mourinho left/was forced out, they ain't the same. IMO they are in decline and no manager is getting the time they need to make their mark and start to build a legacy.

Remains to be seen how long Villa Boas will get to turn things around there. He should get a couple of seasons at least, he has the talent but you all know what Abramovich is like if success doesn't arrive rapid. Also who is buying the players there, the manager or the owner? Big hairy lemon right there.

It's true that the future is unknown in terms of Utd post Fergie, but imo, Utd have the infrastructure in place to continue at the top should the right man be brought in to take over. I believe the hot seat at Utd will be just that, the hottest property in world football when Fergie goes... the worlds best will want that job, especially if it comes with the control that fergie commanded.

I think another thing that will ensure that Utd continue at the top is the revenue that comes in and the loyal fanbase, that will help secure lucrative commercial deals. Once the youth development policy and player develop strategy remains, things will work out ok for Utd. It is a proven roadmap to be fair.
Of course the debt is an issue of major importance but the club has and imo will continue to manage it with the resources they have or can access.

Edit: Just to add that, with respect to Liverpool they have been making a come back for the last 20 years in the league (finished 2nd twice). IMO the challenge Arsenal will face is holding on the world class players they need to compete... the recent transfers out of the club are worrying. Will that trend continue?

Mikeyt086

Blatter wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2080025/Chris-Smalling-months-glandular-fever.html?ITO=1490&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

If true, Ugh......

F.UCK OFF

Jesus bloody Christ what the fuc'k is going on? I think we are just short of someone getting AIDS. Ridiculous amount of injuries and illnesses.

Mitch Connor

hopefully it is wildly inaccurate - the guy has been immense for us and with Vidic already out and Rio's injury problems we really can not deal with another defensive injuy at the moment.

if it is confirmed, I would certainly be hoping that United look to make even a short term signing in the next week to cover. Rafael, Fabio, Evra, Evans, Ferdinand, Jones is NOT enough to get us through until March, especially when you look at the injury records of Rio, Rafael and Fabio.

MagicMarker

Fergie will probably just stick Carrick in there.

Mitch Connor

MagicMarker wrote: »

Fergie will probably just stick Carrick in there.

That is a very strong possibility unfortunately, but we need Carrick in central midfield. Moving Carrick would require a midfield signing imo (a signing we need anyway imo)

Blatter

When is Fergie's press conference, tomorrow morning is it? Hopefully he'll confirm it either way then.

Is there any decent CB in the MLS that we could loan for a few months?

LostBoy101

Blatter wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2080025/Chris-Smalling-months-glandular-fever.html?ITO=1490&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

If true, Ugh......

Lets just hope and pray that is dailymail bull****.