Summer 2015 Transfer Window General Discussion

rob316

kfallon wrote: »

Surprised nobody took a chance on him, think he's a decent CF!

Yes very good CF.

Hasn't he failed a couple of medicals before though? £15m is a big risk for a midtable club to risk.

LiamoSail

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Who wants to play guess the password?

Didntwanthimanyway ?

Mickeroo

Lescott has singed for Villa it seems.

Harry Palmr

Leicester wants Jon Walters.

That_Guy

@ChampionsLeague

Confirmation that @D_DeGea will 100% remain a @ManUtd player #UCL #DeadlineDay

Though that tweet has subsequently been deleted.

corcaigh07

Berbatov is a free agent, United?

razorblunt

What kind of wages is Austin on? I'd have at least expected a loan similar to Remy at Newcastle when QPR last dropped down.

Bounty Hunter

corcaigh07 wrote: »

Berbatov is a free agent, United?

more likely Villa.

jpboard1

That_Guy wrote: »

@ChampionsLeague



Though that tweet has subsequently been deleted.

Looks like the deal is definitely dust. Real teaching Utd a lesson?

Beefy78

razorblunt wrote: »

What kind of wages is Austin on? I'd have at least expected a loan similar to Remy at Newcastle when QPR last dropped down.

Remy wanted out though. Austin doesn't seem the kind of guy to rock the boat - QPR spent a lot of money on him when other clubs were scared off by his medical results and it seems QPR were very open and upfront with him that they'd let him go if someone met the £15m price.

With Euro 2016 coming up he may regret not being an arse about it.

Harry Palmr

4 hours and 58 minutes left

As things stand Liverpool, Arsenal, City and Man Utd are not signing anyone else and Chelsea are after a centre back, Spurs are considered a final push for Berahino and that's about it among the bigger clubs.

Giggsy11

jpboard1 wrote: »

Looks like the deal is definitely dust. Real teaching Utd a lesson?

Teaching lesson lol.

jpboard1

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Teaching lesson lol.

Would think so. United need this deal more than Madrid. They will still take him in the January or next summer. The fact that they are not even going to appeal says alot.

TheDoctor

United do not need this deal. Where is that notion coming from.

raze_them_all_

jpboard1 wrote: »

Would think so. United need this deal more than Madrid. They will still take him in the January or next summer. The fact that they are not even going to appeal says alot.

yeah, united need the money, who cares about they massive sponsorship deals they have, the fact we have 3 other keepers, but they showed us by not wantiung to spend money on a player and then when they do make a bid we still keep a world class keeper, poor united

HalloweenJack

I really don't get all the negativity around Austin.

I know he failed a medical previously but the guy's played close to forty games in each of the last six seasons as a professional footballer. He's hardly Andy Carroll.

Plus he's a proven goalscorer in the Prem, even more impressive considering how crap QPR were last year.

Money seems to be the only obstacle but I think he'd be worth a punt. I'd be happy to have him at Chelsea.

Beefy78

TheDoctor wrote: »

United do not need this deal. Where is that notion coming from.

The fact that they'll now lose him on a free I guess. This was the best deal United were going to get.

Beefy78

HalloweenJack wrote: »

I really don't get all the negativity around Austin.

I know he failed a medical previously but the guy's played close to forty games in each of the last six seasons as a professional footballer. He's hardly Andy Carroll.

Plus he's a proven goalscorer in the Prem, even more impressive considering how crap QPR were last year.

Money seems to be the only obstacle but I think he'd be worth a punt. I'd be happy to have him at Chelsea.

It is mainly about insurance. That is what medicals are for. Some clubs just won't be able to get cover for a player if they fail a medical.

jpboard1

TheDoctor wrote: »

United do not need this deal. Where is that notion coming from.

They are now stuck with a keeper that does not want to be there. And will lose out on alot of money when he finally moves.

Corholio

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

yeah, united need the money, who cares about they massive sponsorship deals they have, the fact we have 3 other keepers, but they showed us by not wantiung to spend money on a player and then when they do make a bid we still keep a world class keeper, poor united

You keep him, but will he play and then lose him for nothing next year.

I think both clubs have lost out in the deal but it's certainly created a problem for United now.

jpboard1

Beefy78 wrote: »

The fact that they'll now lose him on a free I guess. This was the best deal United were going to get.

Exactly. Hard to know if his head is going to be right now. He won't be happy that united dragged things out. As people are saying, they don't need the money. It was just a power play that went sour.

raze_them_all_

Corholio wrote: »

You keep him, but will he play and then lose him for nothing next year.

I think both clubs have lost out in the deal but it's certainly created a problem for United now.

he will play and united said knew he'd go for free, gives us 10 months to look for a replacement

TheDoctor

Beefy78 wrote: »

The fact that they'll now lose him on a free I guess. This was the best deal United were going to get.

Do you think United give a toss about 29 million.

Addidas and Chevrolet are giving them 125 million this season alone.
Plus Champions League money
Plus Premier League money.
Plus all their other sponsors, including AON who themselves are at least another 10 million a season.
Plus gate receipts.

United now get to keep De Gea for another season, who is better than any keeper they would have received from the deal.

jpboard1

TheDoctor wrote: »

Do you think United give a toss about 29 million.

Addidas and Chevrolet are giving them 125 million this season alone.
Plus Champions League money
Plus Premier League money.
Plus all their other sponsors, including AON which is at least another 10 million a season.
Plus gate receipts.

United now get to keep De Gea for another season, who is better than any keeper they would have received from the deal.

Yep, money isn't the biggest issue here. As people keep saying, united have loads of it. But the fact is both clubs have messed him around so now it will be interested to see how motivated he is.

Beefy78

TheDoctor wrote: »

Do you think United give a toss about 29 million.

Addidas and Chevrolet are giving them 125 million this season alone.
Plus Champions League money
Plus Premier League money.
Plus all their other sponsors, including AON who themselves are at least another 10 million a season.
Plus gate receipts.

United now get to keep De Gea for another season, who is better than any keeper they would have received from the deal.

"Give a toss"? Crikey, that's some level of arrogance.

I imagine Manchester United will "give a toss" about losing their best player on a free transfer. If they didn't "give a toss" then they wouldn't have wanted to sell him to Madrid in the first place.

Corholio

TheDoctor wrote: »

Do you think United give a toss about 29 million.

Addidas and Chevrolet are giving them 125 million this season alone.
Plus Champions League money
Plus Premier League money.
Plus all their other sponsors, including AON which is at least another 10 million a season.
Plus gate receipts.

United now get to keep De Gea for another season, who is better than any keeper they would have received from the deal.

There obviously some care about money if they were willing to sell him. Of course United aren't gonna care about it hugely but that's not the point, it's still losing out on £30 million and gaining a keeper who was already packing his bags who hasn't 'been able' to play a game this season.

raze_them_all_

jpboard1 wrote: »

Yep, money isn't the biggest issue here. As people keep saying, united have loads of it. But the fact is both clubs have messed him around so now it will be interested to see how motivated he is.

How have united messed him around, kept him out of team to avoid injury for transfer, was told he could leave if real made a real bid not a here the change behind the couch bid, united finished the transfer on their end, All of this is madrid

TheDoctor

Beefy78 wrote: »

"Give a toss"? Crikey, that's some level of arrogance.

I imagine Manchester United will "give a toss" about losing their best player on a free transfer. If they didn't "give a toss" then they wouldn't have wanted to sell him to Madrid in the first place.

At no point did United want to sell. Accepting an offer and wanting to sell are completely different things.

Beefy78

The Glazers "give a toss" about £29m, I can guarantee it.

Beefy78

TheDoctor wrote: »

At no point did United want to sell.

They accepted the bid. If they would have preferred to have kept him and lose him on a free they would have told Real Madrid where to stick their £29m

Corholio

TheDoctor wrote: »

At no point did United want to sell.

So they didn't enter the paperwork that people keep banging on about? Of course they wanted to sell him after a certain point over the past few weeks.

raze_them_all_

Beefy78 wrote: »

They accepted the bid. If they would have preferred to have kept him and lose him on a free they would have told Real Madrid where to stick their £29m

I don't want to sell something, If someone offers me a **** ton of money and a replacement for what they want to buy then yeah I'll take it, doesn't mean I want to sell but be silly not to

TheDoctor

If United wanted to sell, this would not have taken to the last minute of the last day of the transfer window to get it done.

Beefy78

Have Manchester United ever lose their best player on a free transfer?

raze_them_all_

Beefy78 wrote: »

Have Manchester United ever lose their best player on a free transfer?

Has any teams best player ever been ****ed around by the club who were "determined" to sign him?

TheDoctor

Madrid let Casillas go on the assumption they would have De Gea this season.

And now they dont.

Beefy78

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

Has any teams best player ever been ****ed around by the club who were "determined" to sign him?

Don't know. You seem very, very defensive about this. I assume you and that Doctor chap are United fans?

Dispassionately, if you look at this as a neutral, then this seems like bad news for Man United but from reading the two of you it is like it is Christmas morning.

Maybe you're right - de Gea might play every minute the rest of the season, win you the title and pay back every penny of that £29m. Seems unlikely though and the sensible thing to do was obviously to take the cash, which is why they did it.

LuckyLloyd

Yeah, I find it hard to see the positives in this from a Utd perspective.

2ndcoming

Madrid have issued a strongly worded 10 point statement blaming United for the collapse of the deal. Whether it's true or not, it will be interesting to see the effect on his attitude if he believes United scuppered his dream move on purpose.

LuckyLloyd

2ndcoming wrote: »

Madrid have issued a strongly worded 10 point statement blaming United for the collapse of the deal. Whether it's true or not, it will be interesting to see the effect on his attitude if he believes United scuppered his dream move on purpose.

Link?

Rayne Wooney

Navas is a good goalkeeper to be fair, not as good as De Gea, Neuer or Curtois but possibly in the next bracket down

TheDoctor

Correct Beefy, was great news this morning waking up hearing the deal was dead.

raze_them_all_

Beefy78 wrote: »

Don't know. You seem very, very defensive about this. I assume you and that Doctor chap are United fans?

Dispassionately, if you look at this as a neutral, then this seems like bad news for Man United but from reading the two of you it is like it is Christmas morning.

Maybe you're right - de Gea might play every minute the rest of the season, win you the title and pay back every penny of that £29m. Seems unlikely though and the sensible thing to do was obviously to take the cash, which is why they did it.

No defensible, Find it amusing how people are assuming that united are made to be the joke in this. They let it be known months ago they would sell for the right price, madrid tried to get it done for cheap but it didn't happen, they let madrid go as De gea was going to be signed, now they don't have the guy they publicly courted and they let a madrid legend go

Beefy78

TheDoctor wrote: »

Correct Beefy, was great news this morning waking up hearing the deal was dead.

Fair enough.

LuckyLloyd

TheDoctor wrote: »

Correct Beefy, was great news this morning waking up hearing the deal was dead.

But why? I take it you assume he'll come back in to the same level of performance as last year and sign a new deal, yeah?

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

No defensible, Find it amusing how people are assuming that united are made to be the joke in this. They let it be known months ago they would sell for the right price, madrid tried to get it done for cheap but it didn't happen, they let madrid go as De gea was going to be signed, now they don't have the guy they publicly courted and they let a madrid legend go

And they can get him on a free contract at the end of the year instead so?

raze_them_all_

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

But why? I take it you assume he'll come back in to the same level of performance as last year and sign a new deal, yeah?



And they can get him on a free contract at the end of the year instead so?

So united keep the player they didn't want to sell and have 10 months to get a replacement

Beefy78

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

No defensible, Find it amusing how people are assuming that united are made to be the joke in this. They let it be known months ago they would sell for the right price, madrid tried to get it done for cheap but it didn't happen, they let madrid go as De gea was going to be signed, now they don't have the guy they publicly courted and they let a madrid legend go

I don't think anyone on here has made United a joke in all this. Maybe on twitter or something you might mean. On here, no. There's a number of people pointing out that this was the best deal you'd get in the circumstances and that now your best player will leave on a free transfer which is difficult to spin into a positive.

Casillas wouldn't have been in goal for Real Madrid regardless. He hasn't been good enough for years and only got back into the side last season because of a lack of alternatives. Either way it shouldn't impact you and your club. This is clearly bad news for all parties.

TheDoctor

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

But why? I take it you assume he'll come back in to the same level of performance as last year and sign a new deal, yeah?



And they can get him on a free contract at the end of the year instead so?

No I assume that in January he'll probably sign a pre-contract with Madrid.

Madrid had all summer to get him, the bids United had received were not considered sufficient and so the saga dragged on.

Madrid let their no.1 go on the assumption United would just hand him over this summer.

At the last minute Madrid finally put in a bid that United could accept but the deal couldnt be completed in time.

Beefy78

Southend once missed out on the deadline day signing of Kevin McLeod from Swansea because the fax machine in the club office ran out of paper just before midnight.

LuckyLloyd

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

So united keep the player they didn't want to sell and have 10 months to get a replacement

Fair enough.