Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 11/12

Blatter

aperture_nuig wrote: »

Dunno, scottish league isn't looking the most competitive either!

Well it'll more than likely end up similar to that, if not more extreme.

The gap between the resources of PSG and the rest of the French clubs >>>>>> the gap between the resources of Celtic and the rest in Scotland.

Donnielighto

Jame Gumb wrote: »

If a player has no natural affinity to Manchester United, the weather and the city definitely work against us. It just isn't a nice place compared to London, Paris, Barcelona, Milan or Madrid.

Money's obviously an important part of it, but it's not unreasonable for Moura to claim to be impressed by PSG's project. Presumably the Qataris' aim is to be champions of Europe within X years? And they're backing it up with truckloads of cash and a massively respected coach. If United and PSG were offering the same salary, I wouldn't blame someone for choosing PSG. One club clearly on an strong upward trajectory, the other facing a degree of uncertainty (challenge of City, debt, Fergie's inevitable departure, etc).

must be prettt confident ffp has no teeth to go to psg

keane2097

Jame Gumb wrote: »

If United and PSG were offering the same salary, I wouldn't blame someone for choosing PSG.

This, obviously.

I'm not sure I've seen anything as dumb as the labelling of players as money grabbing for picking Paris over Manchester in a while. Dopes.

Fenix

Apologies, I thought the point being made was that the north of England is a ****hole.

Your Airbag

It is understood Arsenal are reluctant to enter formal negotiations until a bid exceeds £20m.

If Fergie wants more communication from Arsenal he needs to make an improved bid on the 15m Arsenal were originally offered. Then he might get a "no way".

keane2097

Blatter wrote: »

Well it'll more than likely end up similar to that, if not more extreme.

The gap between the resources of PSG and the rest of the French clubs >>>>>> the gap between the resources of Celtic and the rest in Scotland.

I reckon Aulas won't be long figuring out a way to keep pace.

Red Crow

keane2097 wrote: »

Why should he not want to move to a city like Paris to play with Lavezzi, Pastore, Menez, Ibrahimovic, Thiago Silva, work with a Brazilian legend like Leonardo ahead of rainy Manchester to play for a team that didn't get out of the group of the ECL last year, won fcuk all, with a less exciting squad and looking to be on a downward curve?

The level of hubris about a sh!thole city that none of ye are even from is very aggravating at times.

I agree with most of that but Paris is a sh1thole too maybe not on the level of Manchester though.

Fenix

keane2097 wrote: »

Jame Gumb wrote: »

If United and PSG were offering the same salary, I wouldn't blame someone for choosing PSG.

This, obviously.

I'm not sure I've seen anything as dumb as the labelling of players as money grabbing for picking Paris over Manchester in a while. Dopes.

Would he been a PSG player now had it not been for the mega rich owners? Dope.

Blatter

Jame Gumb wrote: »

If a player has no natural affinity to Manchester United, the weather and the city definitely work against us. It just isn't a nice place compared to London, Paris, Barcelona, Milan or Madrid.

Money's obviously an important part of it, but it's not unreasonable for Moura to claim to be impressed by PSG's project. Presumably the Qataris' aim is to be champions of Europe within X years? And they're backing it up with truckloads of cash and a massively respected coach. If United and PSG were offering the same salary, I wouldn't blame someone for choosing PSG. One club clearly on an strong upward trajectory, the other facing a degree of uncertainty (challenge of City, debt, Fergie's inevitable departure, etc).

Technically speaking, PSG shouldn't be in Europe for too long. There's surely no way they'll be able to meet FFP regulations when they'll need to be met.

So it's possible that you could be stuck at a club playing in a league that's utterly uncompetitive and barred from participating in Europe at the same time.

I guess some players joining them are banking on FFP not being enforced properly and others just don't give a shít either way and are happy to enjoy the sunshine and spend their mega money, which they're perfectly entitled to do.

Jame Gumb

Fenix wrote: »

homerjay2005 wrote: »

people really underestimate just how much of a s*it hole north west england is. unless you are offered an outrageous sum of money, which united have never done even with or without glazers, players are just not going to be interested in moving there.


its a definate reason united have rarely signed a global superstar.

Sorry Homer, If that's the case and Manchester is such a ****hole, how are City getting the players? Oh yea, they have a very good 'project' going as well.

Money talks. Your global superstars would play in ****in ballina (no offense lads )if they were gettin ridiculous wages.

I don't think that they would actually, unless Ballina Rovers were parachuted into the Premiership "Dublin Dons" style and the owners were looking to spend €1b making the club a force in Europe.

Players want trophies and cash...if they can get both to the same degree in two different places, then they're likely to choose the "nicer" place which is where we can run into difficulty.

I'm sure if some looper offered Moura €500,000 a week to play for Shamrock Rovers, he wouldn't move there...it's not all about money.

People are also too quick to dismiss simple things like the availability of flights. We're mainly talking about foreigners - It's far easier to nip back to Brazil / Argentina / etc from Heathrow or Charles DeGaulle than it is from Manchester.

keane2097

Fenix wrote: »

Would he been a PSG player now had it not been for the mega rich owners? Dope.

wat? You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension.

Kind regards.

Blatter

keane2097 wrote: »

I reckon Aulas won't be long figuring out a way to keep pace.

Actually forget that Monaco have extremely wealthy owners and should steam roll Ligue 2 this season.

I wouldn't be well read on Aulas and Lyon, ambitious and extremely wealthy is he? All I know is that they haven't been up to much the last few years.

I'd love to see the French league rival the other major leagues in Europe.

keane2097

Blatter wrote: »

Actually forget that Monaco have extremely wealthy owners and should steam roll Ligue 2 this season.

I wouldn't be well read on Aulas and Lyon, ambitious and extremely wealthy is he? All I know is that they haven't been up to much the last few years.

I'd love to see the French league rival the other major leagues in Europe.

Well, when he came in first he pulled them out of obscurity and got them to be the force they became in the late 90s in Europe while obv dominating at home. Wouldn't be the most flathúil with his money but is extremely shrewd, just have a feeling he'll find a way to keep pace for the next few years anyway.

IamtheWalrus

It's getting hard to believe Fergie re transfers these days. He said they were looking at adding a few players (after Kawaga and Powell) yet it looks like only RVP will be added. If this is the case, why are they missing out on their targets? Are they aiming too high> Going for players they know'll will never come? Doesn't make sense.

Sgt Pepper 64

Jame Gumb wrote: »

If a player has no natural affinity to Manchester United, the weather and the city definitely work against us. It just isn't a nice place compared to London, Paris, Barcelona, Milan or Madrid.

Money's obviously an important part of it, but it's not unreasonable for Moura to claim to be impressed by PSG's project. Presumably the Qataris' aim is to be champions of Europe within X years? And they're backing it up with truckloads of cash and a massively respected coach. If United and PSG were offering the same salary, I wouldn't blame someone for choosing PSG. One club clearly on an strong upward trajectory, the other facing a degree of uncertainty (challenge of City, debt, Fergie's inevitable departure, etc).

The weather I'll give you. But Ive been to Manchester and Paris a good few times and Paris has its dirty and dodgy areas as well (as does any major City), but apart from that, Manchester is quite a bright and vibrant place for the young professional footballer.
You have good international restaurants like El Rincon, The grill etc and great night life. Modern art etc
Many parts of central manchester have been refurbished with modern buildings, especially the business areas, theres the tram system comparable with any european city.
Lets face it, most footballers just want good restaurants, shopping for the wives\girlfriends and night life and thats all there in Manchester. They arent going to be living in Mossside or anything!
So it always make me chuckle when you hear the tired old crap city remarks

SlickRic

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

If this is the case, why are they missing out on their targets? Are they aiming too high> Going for players they know'll will never come? Doesn't make sense.

i'd guess they're not paying whatever clubs are asking of them.

market value and all that.

with Lucas Moura, you got blown out of the water financially.
Eden Hazard the same.

sometimes you just can't compete, but i do believe your club is trying, while trying not be raped on transfer and agent fees. it's hard with the likes of City, Chelsea and PSG around.

Your Airbag

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

It's getting hard to believe Fergie re transfers these days. He said they were looking at adding a few players (after Kawaga and Powell) yet it looks like only RVP will be added. If this is the case, why are they missing out on their targets? Are they aiming too high> Going for players they know'll will never come? Doesn't make sense.

Yes but getting RVP is no bad thing. Maybe he will go for someone else after this deal happens/falls through. We were in for Moura too so there must be some transfer cash left over even if we do get our man.

I would like to hear some Sahin news also but it looks like it could be yet another summer with no CM coming in. RVP would help soften the blow. The worst case scenario is that we dont get RVP and thats it for us this summer in the transfer market.

PhlegmyMoses

keane2097 wrote: »

I was lampooning a style of post using the medium of that style of post. Of course there are plenty reasons to choose United, but there are an enormous number of ways in which Paris and PSG would be more attractive to a vast range of people.

The hes-only-going-for-the-money stuff is literally the most insular, small-minded, ignorant garbage that gets a regular airing on this forum.

Ah right. Had a feeling I was missing something but with loads of transfer goons ready to top themselves if United don't sign somebody, anybody, it's hard to tell whether it's satire or legit.

homerjay2005

Fenix wrote: »

Apologies, I thought the point being made was that the north of England is a ****hole.

to be honest, it is. ive been to nearly every ground and thus city in that area and they are all dumps with the area around Stanley Park liverpool being the worst.

v3ttel

Jame Gumb wrote: »

If United and PSG were offering the same salary, I wouldn't blame someone for choosing PSG.

keane2097 wrote: »

This, obviously.

I'm not sure I've seen anything as dumb as the labelling of players as money grabbing for picking Paris over Manchester in a while. Dopes.

1. Quality of the team
2. Quality of the league
3. Qualifications for Champions League
4. Money
5. The place a team is based

If money isn't an issue:

Qualification for Champions League
United are qualified for the Champions League as a first seed and have a recent history of getting to the latter stages (barring a poor showing last season, but with the same group of players who have been doing well). PSG are second seeds, with no recent history of qualifying, and barely struggle out of their group on the occasions where they do get in.

Quality of the team:
Most recent season to 5 seasons back:
United: 2nd, 1st, 2nd, 1st, 1st
PSG: 2nd, 4th, 13th, 6th, 16th

Quality of the league:
Premier league - 2nd/arguably joint 1st with La Liga. Teams in this league generally get to the later stages of the Champions League.
Ligue 1 - generally regarded as 5th, behind Spain, England, Germany and Italy

The place a team is based:
Paris is nicer than Manchester, however arguably top class footballers who currently play for Manchester based teams include: Rooney, Tevez, Aguero, Nani, Kompany, Vidic, Yaya Toure, Ferdinand, Silva, Valencia

---

This is about money, and nothing else. If you believe PSG would convince the lad to go there without mega rich owners, on the basis of what a wonderful city Paris is, you are incredibly naive.

Samba

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

The weather I'll give you. But Ive been to Manchester and Paris a good few times and Paris has its dirty and dodgy areas as well (as does any major City), but apart from that, Manchester is quite a bright and vibrant place for the young professional footballer.
You have good international restaurants like El Rincon, The grill etc and great night life. Modern art etc
Many parts of central manchester have been refurbished with modern buildings, especially the business areas, theres the tram system comparable with any european city.
Lets face it, most footballers just want good restaurants, shopping for the wives\girlfriends and night life and thats all there in Manchester. They arent going to be living in Mossside or anything!
So it always make me chuckle when you hear the tired old crap city remarks

Is there some humour I'm missing in this post?

Manchester - the city of Romance. NO just no.

Take off the red tinted glasses because frankly, there's just no comparison to be made, Paris is on another level to Manchester in every respect.

The_Kew_Tour

Anyone ever been to Spurs and West Ham grounds?

They are in the biggest dumps you will get.

Its unsafe to walk around Upton Park at the best of times.

Fenix

Sorry to get back on this, I want to clarify my point.

I am not saying that a player wouldn't choose Paris over Manchester, far from it! I'm merely saying its not outrageous to think that monetary reasons could be a huge factor in that decision.

Paris is the biggest tourist attraction in the world, bar none, it's obviously a beautiful city, but let's not paint Manchester as a complete kip! It has it's rich areas and it's poor areas just as any city does (especially Paris).

I'll follow PSG this year, especially Lucas, will be interesting to see how long it takes them to gel, will be massive pressure to walk the league and perform in Europe.

homerjay2005

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Its unsafe to walk around Upton Park at the best of times.

keep the head down, the jersey covered and stick to the crowded areas.

the tube is only about 400 metres from the ground, last time i was there we got a police escort and missed the first 20 minutes cos of it.

The_Kew_Tour

homerjay2005 wrote: »

keep the head down, the jersey covered and stick to the crowded areas.

the tube is only about 400 metres from the ground, last time i was there we got a police escort and missed the first 20 minutes cos of it.

Your right. Never wear Jersey if I go to away game. Just not worth it.

v3ttel

Samba wrote: »

Take off the red tinted glasses because frankly.

He is a Chelsea fan, so no red tinted glasses.

Glasses of any description could only improve the situation.

Pro. F

DM-ICE wrote: »

United are not reliant on Clev and Anderson right now though (well in SAF mind. We still have Giggs and Scholes. So buying a midfielder pushes them even further down the rankings so I think its still comparable and an inconsistency.

It also impacts on Powell, Petrucci, Lingard, Tunnicliffe. United already lost Pogba in your opinion because he wasn't played. What will happen with those lads and Cleverley if they don't get game time?

as I said already I actually want a midfielder myself. But I don't see any real substance to the RVP is bad for our squad players but a new midfielder is fine for out midfield squad players idea.

A new midfielder for the Carrick role wouldn't harm Cleverley, Anderson and Powell's game time.

Tunnicliff, Lingard and Petrucci aren't nearly as sure things as Welbeck and Hernandez. The two strikers have shown themselves to already be good enough to start, let alone be back-ups. Those young midfielders have not, so it wouldn't be such a waste if they were pushed down the pecking order.

keane2097 wrote: »

Not really, there is more than one way to skin a cat. Winning trophies is the end goal, assembling a team to do it is the means, if that team has a sh!t midfield and amazing forwards and still does the job it's all the same.

Probably better tbh from an entertainment POV.

The team might still do the job, but they will be far less likely to do the job if the money is spent in an inefficient manner. Buying a super abundance in one position when there are severe problems in others is a very inefficient way of spending the money available.

On the entertainment thing I don't agree at all. Having great forwards and defence and a poor midfield usually leads to a broken team (ie broken into two separate parts with little link up) that plays defensive counter attacking football. Which is exactly what happened in the big games back in the Ronaldo era (edit: in the big games).

keane2097 wrote: »

People should also remember that a forward line of Ronaldo, Rooney and Tevez was able to carry the crap midfield we had in 2008 to a Champions League title. A line-up with Kagawa, Rooney, RVP and the rest is that level.

It's not that level imo, because Ronaldo is a level above all of them.

More importantly, a forward line of Valencia, Rooney, Nani is imo better than the forward line of Rooney, RVP, Kagawa because the first one has actual proper wingers in it and the second one doesn't. I know RVP is fantastic, but he's not much, if any, better than Rooney. And as a winger, Rooney is shìte and Kagawa isn't as good as Nani.

Samba

Fenix wrote: »

Sorry to get back on this, I want to clarify my point.

I am not saying that a player wouldn't choose Paris over Manchester, far from it! I'm merely saying its not outrageous to think that monetary reasons could be a huge factor in that decision.

Paris is the biggest tourist attraction in the world, bar none, it's obviously a beautiful city, but let's not paint Manchester as a complete kip! It has it's rich areas and it's poor areas just as any city does (especially Paris).

I'll follow PSG this year, especially Lucas, will be interesting to see how long it takes them to gel, will be massive pressure to walk the league and perform in Europe.

I think it's a combination of both tbh, you could also argue that club prospects also played a part, it's all irrelevant now anyway, we didn't get our target.

keane2097

Rooney10 wrote: »

1. Quality of the team
2. Quality of the league
3. Qualifications for Champions League
4. Money
5. The place a team is based

If money isn't an issue:

Qualification for Champions League
United are qualified for the Champions League as a first seed and have a recent history of getting to the latter stages (barring a poor showing last season, but with the same group of players who have been doing well). PSG are second seeds, with no recent history of qualifying, and barely struggle out of their group on the occasions where they do get in.

Quality of the team:
Most recent season to 5 seasons back:
United: 2nd, 1st, 2nd, 1st, 1st
PSG: 2nd, 4th, 13th, 6th, 16th

Quality of the league:
Premier league - 2nd/arguably joint 1st with La Liga. Teams in this league generally get to the later stages of the Champions League.
Ligue 1 - generally regarded as 5th, behind Spain, England, Germany and Italy

The place a team is based:
Paris is nicer than Manchester, however arguably top class footballers who currently play for Manchester based teams include: Rooney, Tevez, Aguero, Nani, Kompany, Vidic, Yaya Toure, Ferdinand, Silva, Valencia

---

This is about money, and nothing else. If you believe PSG would convince the lad to go there without mega rich owners, on the basis of what a wonderful city Paris is, you are incredibly naive.

You are either foolishly or disingenuously using past performance as an indication of future performance in the first two points when any moron could tell you PSG's situation has obviously changed to invalidate past results as a future predictor. This is obvious, if you deny it you are either blinded by bias, a dope or telling lies on the internet. I'm not sure which I'd prefer to be, probably a dope.

The third is probably pretty irrelevant, not really sure I'd care that much if I was happy enough I was joining a club that was going to crush domestically and challenge in Europe.

You've gotten the fourth one correct which is laudable.

It should go without saying that the idea that you speak for everyone in putting how nice the place where you live is at the bottom of a list of criteria in a "where do I want my job to be" decision is misguided.

The fact that you as an individual would choose to put how nice the place where you live is at the bottom of a list of criteria in a "where do I want my job to be" suggests to me that you may be a bit odd and probably lack the empathy to understand the decisions of many players in this regard.

Fenix

RVP would come in handy when Rooney goes on one of his seasonly form dips. He's a fantastic player but I can understand some fans worries, seen it put best by some random on twitter, "dont need a 2 week holiday in Dubai, but I'll ****ing take it."

Copper_pipe

If i don't move to Manchester United it is not my fault, Manchester United are not willing to pay my agent £6mil on top of the move but PSG are willing to pay the £6mil top. If I could choose I would choose Manchester United but my agent has directed me a move to PSG, Please do not blame me." - Lucas

Money talks

statto25

Copper_pipe wrote: »

If i don't move to Manchester United it is not my fault, Manchester United are not willing to pay my agent £6mil on top of the move but PSG are willing to pay the £6mil top. If I could choose I would choose Manchester United but my agent has directed me a move to PSG, Please do not blame me." - Lucas

Money talks

Where is that quote from?

Fenix

keane2097 wrote: »

Rooney10 wrote: »

1. Quality of the team
2. Quality of the league
3. Qualifications for Champions League
4. Money
5. The place a team is based

If money isn't an issue:

Qualification for Champions League
United are qualified for the Champions League as a first seed and have a recent history of getting to the latter stages (barring a poor showing last season, but with the same group of players who have been doing well). PSG are second seeds, with no recent history of qualifying, and barely struggle out of their group on the occasions where they do get in.

Quality of the team:
Most recent season to 5 seasons back:
United: 2nd, 1st, 2nd, 1st, 1st
PSG: 2nd, 4th, 13th, 6th, 16th

Quality of the league:
Premier league - 2nd/arguably joint 1st with La Liga. Teams in this league generally get to the later stages of the Champions League.
Ligue 1 - generally regarded as 5th, behind Spain, England, Germany and Italy

The place a team is based:
Paris is nicer than Manchester, however arguably top class footballers who currently play for Manchester based teams include: Rooney, Tevez, Aguero, Nani, Kompany, Vidic, Yaya Toure, Ferdinand, Silva, Valencia

---

This is about money, and nothing else. If you believe PSG would convince the lad to go there without mega rich owners, on the basis of what a wonderful city Paris is, you are incredibly naive.

You are either foolishly or disingenuously using past performance as an indication of future performance in the first two points when any moron could tell you PSG's situation has obviously changed to invalidate past results as a future predictor. This is obvious, if you deny it you are either blinded by bias, a dope or telling lies on the internet. I'm not sure which I'd prefer to be, probably a dope.

The third is probably pretty irrelevant, not really sure I'd care that much if I was happy enough I was joining a club that was going to crush domestically and challenge in Europe.

You've gotten the fourth one correct which is laudable.

It should go without saying that the idea that you speak for everyone in putting how nice the place where you live is at the bottom of a list of criteria in a "where do I want my job to be" decision is misguided.

The fact that you as an individual would choose to put how nice the place where you live is at the bottom of a list of criteria in a "where do I want my job to be" suggests to me that you may be a bit odd and may lack the empathy to understand the decisions of many players in this regard.

Are you unable to respond to a post without insulting it's author if you don't agree with what's being said?

Christ your making valid points but I find it hard to reply to you directly without geting into a slinging match which you seem to intent on creating.

keane2097

Fenix wrote: »

Are you unable to respond to a post without insulting it's author if you don't agree with what's being said?

Christ your making valid points but I find it hard to reply to you directly without geting into a slinging match which you seem to intent on creating.

The post I was responding to was idiotic enough to warrant my contempt.

My first post today wasn't directed at anyone in particular rather it was again directed at a prevalent attitude which again I find blinkered and worthy of my contempt.

The post where I said you couldn't read was in response to you seemingly not understanding what I had said and calling me a dope. That probably wasn't very nice and I apologise.

Jame Gumb

Rooney10 wrote: »

Jame Gumb wrote: »

If United and PSG were offering the same salary, I wouldn't blame someone for choosing PSG.

keane2097 wrote: »

This, obviously.

I'm not sure I've seen anything as dumb as the labelling of players as money grabbing for picking Paris over Manchester in a while. Dopes.

1. Quality of the team
2. Quality of the league
3. Qualifications for Champions League
4. Money
5. The place a team is based

If money isn't an issue:

Qualification for Champions League
United are qualified for the Champions League as a first seed and have a recent history of getting to the latter stages (barring a poor showing last season, but with the same group of players who have been doing well). PSG are second seeds, with no recent history of qualifying, and barely struggle out of their group on the occasions where they do get in.

Quality of the team:
Most recent season to 5 seasons back:
United: 2nd, 1st, 2nd, 1st, 1st
PSG: 2nd, 4th, 13th, 6th, 16th

Quality of the league:
Premier league - 2nd/arguably joint 1st with La Liga. Teams in this league generally get to the later stages of the Champions League.
Ligue 1 - generally regarded as 5th, behind Spain, England, Germany and Italy

The place a team is based:
Paris is nicer than Manchester, however arguably top class footballers who currently play for Manchester based teams include: Rooney, Tevez, Aguero, Nani, Kompany, Vidic, Yaya Toure, Ferdinand, Silva, Valencia

---

This is about money, and nothing else. If you believe PSG would convince the lad to go there without mega rich owners, on the basis of what a wonderful city Paris is, you are incredibly naive.

Nobody has said that PSG convinced him
to go there because it's a wonderful city.

The point is that salary is not the be all or end all. Yes it's important but it's not the be all or end all.

Is it unreasonable for Lucas Moura to claim that he's impressed by the "project"? Of course not.

What is the "project"? Take a club in one of the major cities of Europe, throw bucketloads of cash at it, appoint a world class manager, sign world class players, pay them a fortune and compete for the Champions League...and all of this while living in one of the nicest cities in the world with regular direct flights to Brazil for internationals/family occasions.

The stats you're quoting aren't relevant either - PSG's next 5 years is obviously going to be up there with anyone's. You may as well say "sure City have never won the European Cup - Why would anyone choose them over United?".

Money is an important part of "the project" but guys aren't moving there just for money...it is for "the project".

Will I Amnt

statto25 wrote: »

Copper_pipe wrote: »

If i don't move to Manchester United it is not my fault, Manchester United are not willing to pay my agent £6mil on top of the move but PSG are willing to pay the £6mil top. If I could choose I would choose Manchester United but my agent has directed me a move to PSG, Please do not blame me." - Lucas

Money talks

Where is that quote from?

I'm willing to bet my house that it didn't come from Moura.
What an endearing quote to his new teams fans........

MagicMarker

Copper_pipe wrote: »

If i don't move to Manchester United it is not my fault, Manchester United are not willing to pay my agent £6mil on top of the move but PSG are willing to pay the £6mil top. If I could choose I would choose Manchester United but my agent has directed me a move to PSG, Please do not blame me." - Lucas

Money talks

For the love of god, post a fúcking source!!

Fenix

keane2097 wrote: »

The post I was responding to was idiotic enough to warrant my contempt.

My first post today wasn't directed at anyone in particular rather it was again directed at a prevalent attitude which again I find blinkered and worthy of my contempt.

The post where I said you couldn't read was in response to you seemingly not understanding what I had said and calling me a dope. That probably wasn't very nice and I apologise.

Yea, good luck to you fella. With an attitude like that, you're going to need it.

Will I Amnt

Just on the whole Paris is more attractive than Manchester thing.
It really is down to the individual.Paris is the worst city I've had the misfortune to visit.
I hated every stinking,boring minute of it.
Majority of people are horrible,ridiculously expensive(not that it would be a problem for a player).
Unless you're into pretty buildings and crap like that then there's not much in it.

keane2097

MagicMarker wrote: »

For the love of god, post a fúcking source!!

First google result for "my agent has directed me a move to PSG" links to this thread.

keane2097

Fenix wrote: »

Yea, good luck to you fella. With an attitude like that, you're going to need it.

tyty

jaykay74

Copper_pipe wrote: »

If i don't move to Manchester United it is not my fault, Manchester United are not willing to pay my agent £6mil on top of the move but PSG are willing to pay the £6mil top. If I could choose I would choose Manchester United but my agent has directed me a move to PSG, Please do not blame me." - Lucas

Money talks

Did you just make this up or... ?

Jame Gumb

cambo2008 wrote: »

Just on the whole Paris is more attractive than Manchester thing.
It really is down to the individual.Paris is the worst city I've had the misfortune to visit.
I hated every stinking,boring minute of it.
Majority of people are horrible,ridiculously expensive(not that it would be a problem for a player).
Unless you're into pretty buildings and crap like that then there's not much in it.

This is becoming a tad ridiculous. Fair enough, you happen to dislike Paris but you're certainly in a minority.

How anyone can try and compare the two cities is beyond me. Would any of you honestly bother going to Manchester if it wasn't for football? I know I wouldn't.

I especially liked the "Manchester has some good restaurants and museums too" stuff earlier. It also has a JJB Sports and an M&S. Sure who needs Paris?! FFS.

What's next up - The shock horror of someone choosing to live in Manhattan rather than Glasgow?

DM_7

Pro. F wrote: »

A new midfielder for the Carrick role wouldn't harm Cleverley, Anderson and Powell's game time.

Tunnicliff, Lingard and Petrucci aren't nearly as sure things as Welbeck and Hernandez. The two strikers have shown themselves to already be good enough to start, let alone be back-ups. Those young midfielders have not, so it wouldn't be such a waste if they were pushed down the pecking order.

Carrick is not going to be replaced. Regardless of that being right or wrong it appears to be the case. If a new midfield player is bought it would impact on the three lads as SAF has basically said Carrick is first choice and the new player wouldn't be ahead of him anyway.

re the young players I don't take issue with your point at all. But I mentioned it to a poster who previously took issue with Pogba's 'treatment' by him being left behind experienced players. I thought it was worth a mention considering those lads are in the position Pogba was last season. I wasn't comparing them to Welbz and Chica.

as I said earlier I want another midfield option, a quality one. I want a striker as well. But treating midfield and the strikers differantly is inconsistant imo considering the similarities of a need for more quality and how that impacts on other players in each position.

another inconsistency is the perception Cleverley is always injured. Welbeck has had loads of injuries but its not really mentioned.

anyway, sorry, I have no idea why I am making an issue of all this!

Fenix

Loved this little piece of skill from Nani last night

Will I Amnt

Jame Gumb wrote: »

This is becoming a tad ridiculous. Fair enough, you happen to dislike Paris but you're certainly in a minority.

How anyone can try and compare the two cities is beyond me. Would any of you honestly bother going to Manchester if it wasn't for football? I know I wouldn't.

I especially liked the "Manchester has some good restaurants and museums too" stuff earlier. It also has a JJB Sports and an M&S. Sure who needs Paris?! FFS.

What's next up - The shock horror of someone choosing to live in Manhattan rather than Glasgow?

I said its down to the individual.
Football players are into the same stuff regular people are too.
Paris doesn't have much to interest me,who's to say the same cant be said for football players.

Felexicon

Jame Gumb wrote: »

This is becoming a tad ridiculous. Fair enough, you happen to dislike Paris but you're certainly in a minority.

How anyone can try and compare the two cities is beyond me. Would any of you honestly bother going to Manchester if it wasn't for football? I know I wouldn't.

I especially liked the "Manchester has some good restaurants and museums too" stuff earlier. It also has a JJB Sports and an M&S. Sure who needs Paris?! FFS.

What's next up - The shock horror of someone choosing to live in Manhattan rather than Glasgow?

I don't know about you, but I'd rather be surrounded by trackie wearing Mancs all day than have to listen to the constant drivil spouted by those cheese eating surrender monkeys.
Vive Le Manchester

Jame Gumb

cambo2008 wrote: »

Jame Gumb wrote: »

This is becoming a tad ridiculous. Fair enough, you happen to dislike Paris but you're certainly in a minority.

How anyone can try and compare the two cities is beyond me. Would any of you honestly bother going to Manchester if it wasn't for football? I know I wouldn't.

I especially liked the "Manchester has some good restaurants and museums too" stuff earlier. It also has a JJB Sports and an M&S. Sure who needs Paris?! FFS.

What's next up - The shock horror of someone choosing to live in Manhattan rather than Glasgow?

I said its down to the individual.
Football players are into the same stuff regular people are too.
Paris doesn't have much to interest me,who's to say the same cant be said for football players.

The point isn't whether Paris is of interest to you or not...it's whether most people would choose to live in Paris rather than Manchester (all other things being equal).

I also not sure what kind of "stuff" anyone could be into that Manchester has and Paris doesn't. Rugby League? Cricket? Meat pies?

With Moura in mind, my understanding is that it's generally easier for a Portuguese speaker to learn French rather than English..all part of the package.

Pro. F

DM-ICE wrote: »

Carrick is not going to be replaced. Regardless of that being right or wrong it appears to be the case. If a new midfield player is bought it would impact on the three lads as SAF has basically said Carrick is first choice and the new player wouldn't be ahead of him anyway.

But there is no need to plan around what Fergie is going to do if the discussion is about some disagreement with what Fergie is going to do. I think Fergie should get a better player than Carrick for that slot in the first team and I think he shouldn't buy any more strikers so that Welbeck and Hernandez will get enough games to develop.

I know Fergie is probably happy with Carrick, but that wasn't really the point of your question. At least I think it wasn't. I was showing you that there isn't any inconsistency in the position of thinking we should buy a midfielder because we need one and thinking we shouldn't buy another striker because we don't need another one and it will harm Welbeck and Chicharito's game time.

DM-ICE wrote: »

re the young players I don't take issue with your point at all. But I mentioned it to a poster who previously took issue with Pogba's 'treatment' by him being left behind experienced players. I thought it was worth a mention considering those lads are in the position Pogba was last season. I wasn't comparing them to Welbz and Chica.

Fair enough. I probably should have just quoted your original post. This always happens when people come in half way through the conversation.

DM-ICE wrote: »

another inconsistency is the perception Cleverley is always injured. Welbeck has had loads of injuries but its not really mentioned.

Are you sure? I thought Cleverley's injury record was a bit worrying and Welbeck's was more normal.

Pj!

Fenix wrote: »

Loved this little piece of skill from Nani last night

He wouldn't get away with that in a serious match to be fair.