Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 11/12

Giggsy11

Felexicon wrote: »

So who do you think is available to us at the moment.

There are plenty of players who are good enough for us. If we make the right bid or when we need we have to make significant bid to make the other club to consider the deal.

Likes of Vidal (Last season), Moutinho, Witsel, Fellaini, Bender, Banega are all improvement on what we have IMO.

sReq | uTeK

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Yes, because he was MANUTD player in 2008-09.

He wore a united Jersey, He was a madrid player

Hypothetically speaking would you turn down Messi if he decided he wanted to live in the beautiful area of Manchester for a year?

Giggsy11

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

He wore a united Jersey, He was a madrid player

Hypothetically speaking would you turn down Messi if he decided he wanted to live in the beautiful area of Manchester for a year?

Yes, as long as Bebe is fit I would turn down any player on loan. :cool:

Al Capwned

Giggsy11 wrote: »

It's not about being too proud to sign a player on loan just that I don't see it doing any good for us long term, if we have an option to buy then it'l be great.

Henrik Larsson was altogether different deal, there are many big clubs who have signed players on loan, so loan deal is nothing somethign to be ashamed of, just that we won't be fixing the problem.

Fair enough man, it wont do us much good long term, but what about short term?? Why should we not take advantage of a situation that may arise if it will help us, even if it's not for anything longer than a couple of months???

And I dont understand how you can say Larsson was an 'altogether different deal' - It was a short term loan that benefited the club...

titan18

Giggsy11 wrote: »

There are plenty of players who are good enough for us. If we make the right bid or when we need we have to make significant bid to make the other club to consider the deal.

Likes of Vidal (Last season), Moutinho, Witsel, Fellaini, Bender, Banega are all improvement on what we have IMO.

When we had a chance to sign some of those guys for cheap, we should have. Now, I'll take what we've got over spending 30 million on someone like Moutinho or Witsel. I like Fellaini but again, he'd probably cost too much as Everton wouldn't leave him go for cheap. Bayern want Bender and it's looking at about 20 million. He's worth it but I'd doubt he'd go to United over Bayern. Not too sure on Banega's price, but anything over 20 ain't worth it for him imo.

sReq | uTeK

Giggsy11 wrote: »

It's not about being too proud to sign a player on loan just that I don't see it doing any good for us long term, if we have an option to buy then it'l be great.

Henrik Larsson was altogether different deal, there are many big clubs who have signed players on loan, so loan deal is nothing something to be ashamed of, just that we won't be fixing the problem.

It does benefit us long term, you're not looking at the big picture.
Getting in an established player for that year for a loan spell whilst not paying big bucks on a player i.e £30 million or so, would let the younger players develop who may then in a years time coming back from loan be able to fill that gap.

Example at hand could well be Powell/Tuncliffe

Just a thought.

Giggsy11

alproctor wrote: »

Fair enough man, it wont do us much good long term, but what about short term?? Why should we not take advantage of a situation that may arise if it will help us, even if it's not for anything longer than a couple of months???

And I dont understand how you can say Larsson was an 'altogether different deal' - It was a short term loan that benefited the club...

Because if I'm not wrong it was off season for Larsson and we had strikers who were injured so we just needed him till our players were back from injury but in this case we don't have a quality CM, all we do by signing Sahin is postpone the signing of CM if we ever sign one.

Sahin would be quality addition but knowing he will be gone in a year makes me feel we are wasting game time for the likes of Petrucci and other talented midfielders.

Pj!

Moura to decide after Olympics

Manchester United target Lucas Moura has declared his intention to decide his future after the Olympics.


The Sao Paulo attacking midfielder is currently on duty with the Brazil Olympic squad and was an unused substitute in their opening victory over Egypt on Thursday.

In the meantime, negotiations with the Red Devils are in the hands of his agent Wagner Ribeiro who has been instructed to continue discussions despite previously claiming the deal was off.

The 19-year-old is leaving that to his agent while he concentrates on the business of trying to win a gold medal with his country.

"I am focusing on my team, Sao Paulo and in Brazil's national team at the moment. I'll decide my future after the Olympics," Moura told Spanish news agency EFE.

"It's already a victory to be here. Now I have to be ready for any situation if Mano Menezes believes I have to play."

http://www.sportinglife.com/football/news/article/2/7938191/moura-to-decide-after-olympics

Giggsy11

titan18 wrote: »

When we had a chance to sign some of those guys for cheap, we should have. Now, I'll take what we've got over spending 30 million on someone like Moutinho or Witsel. I like Fellaini but again, he'd probably cost too much as Everton wouldn't leave him go for cheap. Bayern want Bender and it's looking at about 20 million. He's worth it but I'd doubt he'd go to United over Bayern. Not too sure on Banega's price, but anything over 20 ain't worth it for him imo.

They are all good players and key players for their teams, so to make the teams part with them, we have to pay over the odds, especially when we need one.

Julez

Adamcp898 wrote: »

But if we did take him on loan and he did well then Madrid would either be unwilling to sell or want a load of money for him. And then we'd have just acted as a glorified feeder club for them.

I think it would be a good idea, its low risk for us, in that what if we were to spend €30m on a midfielder that didn't settle (eg Veron). In this case if he did play well and they charged us €40m for him it would be worth it, we'd have a midfielder that we know is proven in our midfield. They could always just take him back, yes. But we'd be a year on and we will have been able o asses the Fletch/Ando/Clev situations, see how they've developed and see if we require more in midfield.

DM_7

Larrson was differant. Yes it was a loan but it was a differant scanario. He was coming to the end of his career so we were not helping any other team by taking him on loan.

Take a young player on loan, play him, help him develop to see him go back and help improve a rival team is hardly ideal.

(edit -in my opinion it woud etc) It would make much more sense to buy a player when money is clearly available instead of a loan deal.

LOL at the Messi thing - I was wondering how long it would take for the- 'would you not take messi on loan' idea to appear.

titan18

Giggsy11 wrote: »

They are all good players and key players for their teams, so to make the teams part with them, we have to pay over the odds, especially when we need one.

Aye, they're good players, but if we could get Sahin for a year on loan and allow the likes of Clev, Tunnicliffe, Powell etc improve, then hopefully they can get step into the role the following year. I don't really think the guys posted above are worth 30 million. Best wait until we get a chance at getting the likes of Vidal for cheap like Juventus did, than going and spending it all on Moutinho or Witsel.

Lord TSC

These are the options.

United buy a good CM player.
United loan a good CM player.
United get no CM player.

Obviously I'd want United to buy a long term prospect who will improve the first team now as well. Failing that, I'd rather loan someone than get nothing. Even if he goes next summer, at least the problem is fixed in the short run. Better than doing nothing again.

Giggsy11

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

These are the options.

United buy a good CM player.
United loan a good CM player.
United get no CM player.

Obviously I'd want United to buy a long term prospect who will improve the first team now as well. Failing that, I'd rather loan someone than get nothing. Even if he goes next summer, at least the problem is fixed in the short run. Better than doing nothing again.

Yeah option 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.. option 3.

Sgt Pepper 64

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

These are the options.

United buy a good CM player.
United loan a good CM player.
United get no CM player.

Obviously I'd want United to buy a long term prospect who will improve the first team now as well. Failing that, I'd rather loan someone than get nothing. Even if he goes next summer, at least the problem is fixed in the short run. Better than doing nothing again.

Your forgetting this option

United bring back a retired player

sReq | uTeK

DM-ICE wrote: »

Larrson was differant. Yes it was a loan but it was a differant scanario. He was coming to the end of his career so we were not helping any other team by taking him on loan.

Take a young player on loan, play him, help him develop to see him go back and help improve a rival team is hardly ideal.

It would make much more sense to buy a player when money is clearly available instead of a loan deal.

LOL at the Messi thing - I was wondering how long it would take for the- 'would you not take messi on loan' idea to appear.

Like I said, purely hypothetical but the basic premise still applies.
If a player was to come in and substantially boost us EVEN for 1 year, I'd happily take it.

I think people are blinded by how it benefits the other club and the fact we could lost the player as apposed to all the benefits we at united would get.

As stated, it could go 3 ways.

He plays well wants to stay Real charge us a bit more but at least we've tried before we've bought, know he can do a job and we don't take a risk with £30 Million on an unknown I.E lucas.

He plays well and Real want him back, he's helped us for a year, in effect a stop gap until we sort things out, no harm done.

During his time, we loan a few potential superstars in the form of Powell and Tuncliffe to a premiership outfit and they come back ala Wellbeck, and we don't need Sahin, £30 million saved.

All 3 seem fine to me.

Or we get him and he doesn't perform, which won't happen seeing as he actually has a football brain, Vision, Pace, quick feet, Loves a tack, great link up play, I think i'd actually prefer him to Martinez, but that's just me.

Either one would be ideal.

Al Capwned

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Because if I'm not wrong it was off season for Larsson and we had strikers who were injured so we just needed him till our players were back from injury.......

Fair enough!

Giggsy11 wrote: »

.........all we do by signing Sahin is postpone the signing of CM if we ever sign one.
Sahin would be quality addition but knowing he will be gone in a year makes me feel we are wasting game time for the likes of Petrucci and other talented midfielders.

A quality addition >>>>> game time for progressing youngsters. As potentially good as he is, Petrucci is not gonna be starting the amount of games as the likes of Sahin would, nor would he be as influential.

If we can get him on loan, I reckon it's a no-brainer - We have to take him.

MisterAnarchy

Hopefully Utd sign Sahin on loan ,he is exactly the type of player so badly needed .He is quality .
It shouldnt be too difficult to get him as Real owe Utd a favour or two after pilfering so many players over the last few years.

I've no doubt Utd will miss out on him though and waste more money on a winger or defender instead of addressing the key weakness in the team ,its becoming a joke at this stage.

Lord TSC

I also don't get the whole calling Real Madrid a "rival" team tbh. At most, we play them in two competitive matches a year, and that's if the stars align. United are hardly going to regret giving a player match time when he goes back to Madrid, given how rarely we play them in competitive matches and how little Madrid's results and form impact United....

Samich

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Kuu9uLAxMY

I know I know, youtube clip.
But if you compare that clip to the clips of the likes of Lucas and some others we've been linked with and then you watch his you can see he is just absolute LIGHT years ahead.

My god does he like a tackle

titan18

I know it's said that he's got attitude problems etc, but M'Vila seems to be available for cheap enough. He's a pretty good player, and at his rumoured price would be a better signing than some of the guys with 30+ valuations.

Also, I wouldn't be against stealing Joe Allen off Liverpool. Not sure if he'd be good enough, but might be worth a try.

Sahin on loan would be my preference if those were the 3 options though

Could also sign Lucas and swap him with Liverpools Lucas.

Jimmy Iovine

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Hopefully Utd sign Sahin on loan ,he is exactly the type of player so badly needed .He is quality .
It shouldnt be too difficult to get him as Real owe Utd a favour or two after pilfering so many players over the last few years.

I've no doubt Utd will miss out on him though and waste more money on a winger or defender instead of addressing the key weakness in the team ,its becoming a joke at this stage.

He shouldn't cost that much with everything included so he could be gotten as well as a winger or defender. We'd probably go halves with Madrid on his wages or something like that.

Pro. F

Felexicon wrote: »

So who do you think is available to us at the moment.

Javi Martinez, Lass Diarra, Fellaini are three who would be perfect for us. And that's only the players that I personally have been able to watch enough of and know are realistically available. I guarantee there are plenty of good CMs available out there if the scouts would just go find them before somebody else does.

Samich

Pro. F wrote: »

Javi Martinez, Lass Diarra, Fellaini are three who would be perfect for us. And that's only the players that I personally have been able to watch enough of and know are realistically available. I guarantee there are plenty of good CMs available out there if the scouts would just go find them before somebody else does.

Arsenal, Chelsea and Pompey reject, no thanks. Fellaini hasn't been tested against any "top european teams" as ye keep saying.

MagicMarker

Well that didn't last long.

MisterAnarchy

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

He shouldn't cost that much with everything included so he could be gotten as well as a winger or defender. We'd probably go halves with Madrid on his wages or something like that.

I know he wont cost much but I can see Ferguson being stubborn and passing on the deal.He still seems to be convinced that his central midfield is strong enough to compete at the highest level when in fact it is anything but.
Its like having the engine of a fiesta in a rolls royce.

Samich

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

I know he wont cost much but I can see Ferguson being stubborn and passing on the deal.He still seems to be convinced that his central midfield is strong enough to compete at the highest level when in fact it is anything but.
Its like having the engine of a fiesta in a rolls royce.

Fiesta engine is one of the most reliable in cars, so there.

Giggsy11

Samich wrote: »

Arsenal, Chelsea and Pompey reject, no thanks. Fellaini hasn't been tested against any "top european teams" as ye keep saying.

"Why do you want to sign Zidane when we have Tim Sherwood?" and Cantona was which club's reject?

Pro. F

titan18 wrote: »

I know it's said that he's got attitude problems etc, but M'Vila seems to be available for cheap enough. He's a pretty good player, and at his rumoured price would be a better signing than some of the guys with 30+ valuations.

Also, I wouldn't be against stealing Joe Allen off Liverpool. Not sure if he'd be good enough, but might be worth a try.

Sahin on loan would be my preference if those were the 3 options though

Hasn't M'Vila had some off field issues though? I think he would be a very good buy, but I'd be weary if that is the case.

Just googleing it there and I can't actually find anything. Did I imagine that he had been getting into some sort of trouble?

DM_7

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

Like I said, purely hypothetical but the basic premise still applies.
If a player was to come in and substantially boost us EVEN for 1 year, I'd happily take it.

I think people are blinded by how it benefits the other club and the fact we could lost the player as apposed to all the benefits we at united would get.

As stated, it could go 3 ways.

He plays well wants to stay Real charge us a bit more but at least we've tried before we've bought, know he can do a job and we don't take a risk with £30 Million on an unknown I.E lucas.

He plays well and Real want him back, he's helped us for a year, in effect a stop gap until we sort things out, no harm done.

During his time, we loan a few potential superstars in the form of Powell and Tuncliffe to a premiership outfit and they come back ala Wellbeck, and we don't need Sahin, £30 million saved.

All 3 seem fine to me.

Or we get him and he doesn't perform, which won't happen seeing as he actually has a football brain, Vision, Pace, quick feet, Loves a tack, great link up play, I think i'd actually prefer him to Martinez, but that's just me.

Either one would be ideal.

The question - how was Larrson differant? was asked, I answered it with the fact we were not helping another side. Its a factor worth considering.

Anyway, as I said in the beginning, (in imaginary land) I don't have a problem with a player being signed on loan.

It my have its own advantages - but its still not the best option, I want United spending time and money on the best options. Best option is to buy/loan w/buy option imo.

Al Capwned

Pro. F wrote: »

Hasn't M'Vila had some off field issues though? I think he would be a very good buy, but I'd be weary if that is the case.

Just googleing it there and I can't actually find anything. Did I imagine that he had been getting into some sort of trouble?

Not off-field, but wasnt he subbed at the Euros and threw his jersey down, or something like that, or had a go at Blanc over it???


EDIT - titan18 has the link below - not shaking Blanc's hand!

Samich

Giggsy11 wrote: »

"Why do you want to sign Zidane when we have Tim Sherwood?" and Cantona was which club's reject?

He can't even get near the France side.

dahat

Psssst..........we are not signing a CM this window,no hint of it whatsoever!
Wingers and defenders are all we sign!!

Samich

MagicMarker wrote: »

Well that didn't last long.

...and keep it on topic thanks.

titan18

Pro. F wrote: »

Hasn't M'Vila had some off field issues though? I think he would be a very good buy, but I'd be weary if that is the case.

Just googleing it there and I can't actually find anything. Did I imagine that he had been getting into some sort of trouble?

I think there was issues alright. Just looking and there's assault

http://www.caughtoffside.com/2012/05/02/arsenal-target-yann-mvila-arrested-following-assault-on-teenager/

and not shaking Blanc's hand

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18688834

Tbf, a move to someone like United could make him. Talented players around him like Scholes, a great manager. If he can't be sorted out at United, than he's probably screwed in life anyway. He has the talent, and seems to be available at a decent price.

Pudsy33

Samich wrote: »

Giggsy11 wrote: »

"Why do you want to sign Zidane when we have Tim Sherwood?" and Cantona was which club's reject?

He can't even get near the France side.

They have two good centre midfielders. Plus, that's irrelevant. I think he'd be a handy addition

sReq | uTeK

Samich wrote: »

The two clips couldn't be any further apart if you tried.

that's a compilation of Carrick breaking up play (Well I may add) then passing it 5 yards left or right. There is NO bite in his tackles there is no going around a player linking up 1/2's spraying 60 yard cross field / killers balls in behind defense. There is a serious lack of speed.

I like Carrick, he does a job, he does a job very well, against lesser competition. It's the better teams we need someone like Sahin against
I don't get why when ANYONE makes a comment about a likely signing you try and hijack the thread with Carrick talk, are you him in disguise.

Or are you in fact BATEMAN ?

It's boring tbh, you post nonsensical dribble on an hourly basis.
Please just go away.

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

Arsenal, Chelsea and Pompey reject, no thanks. Fellaini hasn't been tested against any "top european teams" as ye keep saying.

Leaving Pompey because he was bought by Real for big money doesn't make him a Pompey reject ffs. Leaving Chelsea was hardly a bad thing either because they had a tendency to overstock on players and he wanted more game time. So the only question I would have over him is that he pushed for a move away from Arsenal when he still had a decent chance of establishing himself there. There was an Arsenal fan in here before saying that Las is a bit too pushy when it comes to not accepting squad rotation, but I think it would be something that could be lived with. I think he would get enough games for United if he was first choice, which he would be based on his quality.

I never said anything about players having to be tested in top European games before we should consider them. Fellaini has played in the PL for a few years and his quality is obvious.

v3ttel

Schism wrote: »

Maybe you misread my post, I agree! Spurs weren't too proud to take on Adebayor and it worked out beautifully.

Yep, I was just trying to back up your point.

Apologies if it looked otherwise

Samich

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

The two clips couldn't be any further apart if you tried.

that's a compilation of Carrick breaking up play (Well I may add) then passing it 5 yards left or right. There is NO bite in his tackles there is no going around a player linking up 1/2's spraying 60 yard cross field / killers balls in behind defense. There is a serious lack of speed.

I like Carrick, he does a job, he does a job very well, against lesser competition. It's the better teams we need someone like Sahin against
I don't get why when ANYONE makes a comment about a likely signing you try and hijack the thread with Carrick talk, are you him in disguise.

Or are you in fact BATEMAN ?

It's boring tbh, you post nonsensical dribble on an hourly basis.
Please just go away.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrU_bmuiC4U

And you say "likely signing"?

Samich

Pro. F wrote: »

I never said anything about players having to be tested in top European games before we should consider them. Fellaini has played in the PL for a few years and his quality is obvious.

Your whole Carrick hate is because he can't do it against top european teams.

sReq | uTeK

Pro. F wrote: »

Leaving Pompey because he was bought by Real for big money doesn't make him a Pompey reject ffs. Leaving Chelsea was hardly a bad thing either because they had a tendency to overstock on players and he wanted more game time. So the only question I would have over him is that he pushed for a move away from Arsenal when he still had a decent chance of establishing himself there. There was an Arsenal fan in here before saying that Las is a bit too pushy when it comes to not accepting squad rotation, but I think it would be something that could be lived with. I think he would get enough games for United if he was first choice, which he would be based on his quality.

I never said anything about players having to be tested in top European games before we should consider them. Fellaini has played in the PL for a few years and his quality is obvious.

it's okay, while Samich sits there trying to show Carrick as the messiah, he wants any player named as a potential signing to have scored a hat trick in a champions league final 3 years on the trot.

Samich, it's EVIDENT upon watching certain players even without top class European displays that they could in fact cut it at the highest level.

Wayne Rooney - Case in Point.

sReq | uTeK

Samich wrote: »

Your whole Carrick hate is because he can't do it against top european teams.

You're just trolling now or just really really REALLY thick.
He's never said Fellani couldn't hack it in Europe.
He's saying he's played in the Premier League for years now and is good enough for europe.

DM_7

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

I also don't get the whole calling Real Madrid a "rival" team tbh. At most, we play them in two competitive matches a year, and that's if the stars align. United are hardly going to regret giving a player match time when he goes back to Madrid, given how rarely we play them in competitive matches and how little Madrid's results and form impact United....

Both clubs will compete in the champions league. Both teams compete off the field in differant situations, for players, for fans, commercially etc. You don't have to compete head to head in a match to be considered a rival team. Rivalry exists in differant forms. I would consider the teams to be rivals, I wouldn't call it an intense rivalry.

Fenix

Oh Christ we're still on the Carrick bull****!?

sReq | uTeK

Samich wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrU_bmuiC4U

And you say "likely signing"?

So you didn't answer ANY point I brought up in my last post about the differences in Sahin v Carrick and why you posting that clip of Carrick had ZERO relevance

Instead you come back and post a clip of Anderson while we're talking about 2 players who play entirely different roles within a team.

I'm sorry, do you often confuse yourself or is it your job to try and confuse others?

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

Your whole Carrick hate is because he can't do it against top european teams.

So?

Samich

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

You're just trolling now or just really really REALLY thick.
He's never said Fellani couldn't hack it in Europe.
He's saying he's played in the Premier League for years now and is good enough for europe.

Thanks for the thick comment. You know what I've done.

You mention Rooney as case in point. Never done it for England or on the really big european matches for Utd.

sReq | uTeK

DM-ICE wrote: »

Both clubs will compete in the champions league. Both teams compete off the field in differant situations, for players, for fans, commercially etc. You don't have to compete head to head in a match to be considered a rival team. Rivalry exists in differant forms. I would consider the teams to be rivals, I wouldn't call it an intense rivalry.

I'd consider Wigan to be a rival club, I wouldn't consider them intense rivals.

Al Capwned

Some people rate Carrick.
Some people don't.

Some people agree with others opinions.
Some people don't.

Can we all agree to disagree and move on.

Please!!!!