Manchester United Teamtalk/Transfer Rumours/Gossip 2019/20

Rayne Wooney

A dedicated RW player needs to be the next transfer target over everything else, you cannot have a team with a massive gaping hole in it. The ball has gone out our right side to die for the past 5 or 6 years, little good comes from that side.

A left footed player out there would be interesting, but there’s not many good ones around these days.

Get the team functioning properly and then we can think about upgrading what we have.

Cotts72

Rabiot is toxic wouldn't want him anywhere near our club, isn't he on strike or awol over wages now? He'll prob end up at Newcastle of they get taken over.

Pjanic is getting on but seemingly destined for barca this summer

Trigger

I know he hasnt exactly lit it up at Juve but I'd take Bernardeschi and cash for Pogba. Proper Right winger too

Starlord_01

Bentancur and cash for Pogba would be ideal.

Mitch Connor

De Ligt, Bentacur and Dybala are the Juve players I'd be interested to have at United.

S.M.B.

Any player coming the other direction in a Pogba to Juve move would need to meet the new stricter recruitment requirements, otherwise what's the point in having them for players we buy with cash only.

It's why I don't see us doing many cash + player deals in the foreseeable future

Father Hernandez

If United are selling Pogba, it should be cash only and prob looking at £80 million plus minimum.

Any player coming the other direction is coming as part of a deal and not because he ultimately wants to play for United.

As a poster above said, if Juventus can't afford it, tough. Not United's problem.

Mitch Connor

I think swap and player plus cash deals are going to be seen a lot more this summer and into the future - as clubs simply won't have the cash to spend on transfers.

Swaps will reduce transfer outlay and also remove one wage before bringing in another. United are as likely to take part in that, if there are players we want to move.

Not saying United should take any ol' cast offs. but this is going to become a more widespread transfer structure.

And yes, any player United were to bring in, in such circumstances, should be the right player and have the right attitude. Obviously.

If United will only sell Pogba for 80+million, and you add his wages on to the cost to his new club, then arguably on PSG have any chance of signing him at all. And I guess that is bad news for the army of people that want shot of Pogba at all costs.

Hodors Appletart

Father Hernandez wrote: »

As a poster above said, if Juventus can't afford it, tough. Not United's problem.

Fantasyland macho nonsense though.

If Pogba does want out it would be madness to keep him around the dressing room the place would be toxic.

And "stick him in the reserves" is never something that happens either

S.M.B.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I think swap and player plus cash deals are going to be seen a lot more this summer and into the future - as clubs simply won't have the cash to spend on transfers.

Swaps will reduce transfer outlay and also remove one wage before bringing in another. United are as likely to take part in that, if there are players we want to move.

Not saying United should take any ol' cast offs. but this is going to become a more widespread transfer structure.

And yes, any player United were to bring in, in such circumstances, should be the right player and have the right attitude. Obviously.

If United will only sell Pogba for 80+million, and you add his wages on to the cost to his new club, then arguably on PSG have any chance of signing him at all. And I guess that is bad news for the army of people that want shot of Pogba at all costs.

These swaps were notoriously difficult in the past and if we now have a rigid recruitment process in place I can't see them getting any easier.

Now maybe you're right and club finances will usher in a move towards more swap deals but it's also possible that transfer values will just plummet.

Mitch Connor

S.M.B. wrote: »

These swaps were notoriously difficult in the past and if we now have a rigid recruitment process in place I can't see them getting any easier.

Now maybe you're right and club finances will usher in a move towards more swap deals but it's also possible that transfer values will just plummet.

transfer value will plummet, but swaps are an accountancy trick around that.

a player could have a 'book value' of 40million, but a 'real value' of 20million. Swap him for another player with a 'book value' of 40million and you have not made a 20million asset loss.

The_Kew_Tour

I guess most have read the stuff and his comments by now, but really got feel sorry for Luke Chadwick and what he had go through as a young lad just trying make it in the game. Fine footballer but noted for other things that should have been irrelevant.

Comes across very well and seems great guy.

Cantona's Collars

United have confirmed that they are refunding season ticket holders for the remaining games.
They also told fans to stay away from BCD games and not to congregate outside stadiums.

El Gato De Negocios

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

United have confirmed that they are refunding season ticket holders for the remaining games.
They also told fans to stay away from BCD games and not to congregate outside stadiums.

Even as a fan of the club and the obvious bias that brings, they have conducted themselves impeccably throughout the entire crisis. Really, really classy and all concerned should be applauded.

Cantona's Collars

Statutory Ape wrote: »

Even as a fan of the club and the obvious bias that brings, they have conducted themselves impeccably throughout the entire crisis. Really, really classy and all concerned should be applauded.

This.

They donated money to 250 different supporters clubs last week to give to charities of their choice.

https://twitter.com/SimonPeach/status/1262775260589576196?s=19

jayo26

[Deleted User] wrote: »

https://twitter.com/SimonPeach/status/1262775260589576196?s=19

Seemingly uniteds tests were the cleanest in the league. They were so negative that the testkit couldn't go minus enough, the testers said they never seen a more negative bunch of tests. We win.

Liam O

The tests were biased, Howard Webb is probably head of testing.

Kerrydude1981

jayo26 wrote: »

Seemingly uniteds tests were the cleanest in the league. They were so negative that the testkit couldn't go minus enough, the testers said they never seen a more negative bunch of tests. We win.

Has to be worth 50 points in the league
Teams need to be rewarded for being so negative

Lord TSC

James Cooper:

Rashford and Pogba are fit.

Ighalo's contract ends next Friday. We'd like him to stay. His club wants him back. We are "relaxed" about the issue because Rashford is fit and there is less need for Ighalo.

Lord TSC

Lord TSC wrote: »

James Cooper:

Rashford and Pogba are fit.

Ighalo's contract ends next Friday. We'd like him to stay. His club wants him back. We are "relaxed" about the issue because Rashford is fit and there is less need for Ighalo.

I would not agree with that statement

We do need him

He offers something different

We need options

Mitch Connor

Deleted User wrote: »

I would not agree with that statement

We do need him

He offers something different

We need options

Would you see Ighalo as the primary target United should have to be that player? Cause if not, then I don't see how you can really argue.

I think the club would like to keep him through to the end of the season, but his club are (apparently) only willing to talk sale at this point, not loan.

In that case, I can understand why United might not want to make that jump, which would have a knock-on effect on any summer business they might want to do.

If it was a normal season, we'd have happily waved good-bye to Ighalo on Friday week, and looked at doing the primary summer business, coming back to Ighalo as a backup option.

Liam O

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I would not agree with that statement

We do need him

He offers something different

We need options

Should be allowed to sign a replacement really if he goes. But then the can of worms that opens with the likes of Ziyech and contracts next month would it be worth it?

The news about Rashford is good though. Probably for the best he wasn't rushed back again.

Mitch Connor

Liam O wrote: »

Should be allowed to sign a replacement really if he goes. But then the can of worms that opens with the likes of Ziyech and contracts next month would it be worth it?

Don't see why there should be any argument for allowing United to sign a replacement.

We have the option (by FA/PL) to extend the loan. It is not their fault that United are not able to.

Lord TSC

Deleted User wrote: »

I would not agree with that statement

We do need him

He offers something different

We need options

I really liked him, and agree overall.

But would you pay 20m for a 30 year old back up striker?

He was signed as a short term option. I have a feeling though that we won't want to invest that much for a player of his age profile, when we could possibly go looking for a younger version of him in the summer...

Mitch Connor

Lord TSC wrote: »

I really liked him, and agree overall.

But would you pay 20m for a 30 year old back up striker?

He was signed as a short term option. I have a feeling though that we won't want to invest that much for a player of his age profile, when we could possibly go looking for a younger version of him in the summer...

I think there was a good chance of him being signed, in a normal summer, but it would have been later in the summer depending on other players being signed, and remaining budget.

StringerBell

I'd pay it for him yeah, could probably get him cheaper anyway.

For him specifically I'd pay it, he has taken to the squad like a duck to water basically. You have him in already and know his capabilities and don't have to wonder about whether the player will fit in or not.

The younger probably more expensive version of him is more of an unknown. A back up striker for 20 who is happy with his role (as it's been a dream to play for the club) to be around for 2/3/4/ seasons is pretty ideal to me.

Starlord_01

StringerBell wrote: »

I'd pay it for him yeah, could probably get him cheaper anyway.

For him specifically I'd pay it, he has taken to the squad like a duck to water basically. You have him in already and know his capabilities and don't have to wonder about whether the player will fit in or not.

The younger probably more expensive version of him is more of an unknown. A back up striker for 20 who is happy with his role (as it's been a dream to play for the club) to be around for 2/3/4/ seasons is pretty ideal to me.

Used in rotation with Martial and Greenwood.

Mitch Connor

StringerBell wrote: »

I'd pay it for him yeah, could probably get him cheaper anyway.

For him specifically I'd pay it, he has taken to the squad like a duck to water basically. You have him in already and know his capabilities and don't have to wonder about whether the player will fit in or not.

The younger probably more expensive version of him is more of an unknown. A back up striker for 20 who is happy with his role (as it's been a dream to play for the club) to be around for 2/3/4/ seasons is pretty ideal to me.

Would agree with this, assuming Ole is comfortable with Martial leading the line as first choice, as that is what it comes down to. Ighalo prohibits signing a (potential) first choice striker, imo.

There is potential we could sign Dembele (linked) and he could become first choice. I don't know that Ighalo would do that.

Lord TSC

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Ighalo prohibits signing a (potential) first choice striker, imo.

Some links to Ben Yedder today. Feels he'd be the first choice type of signing.

The_Kew_Tour

Dembele seems be name called out on most reports like it's close to done.

It will be interesting period. Squad still needs good bit of work in and out

Mitch Connor

Lord TSC wrote: »

Some links to Ben Yedder today. Feels he'd be the first choice type of signing.

Yedder would be 30 by the time next season starts, a year younger than Ighalo.

I don't think Yedder would be a massively different prospect from a squad point of view. Maybe a bit more pressure, but no more longer term than Ighalo would be. Yedder would be rotational, imo.

Liam O

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Don't see why there should be any argument for allowing United to sign a replacement.

We have the option (by FA/PL) to extend the loan. It is not their fault that United are not able to.

You are signing a player in good faith that it's until the end of the season. Suddenly that doesn't happen and the player is no longer available purely because the season is delayed. Just off the top of my head and don't know if I fully believe the reasoning I myself have given but definitely an argument.

PARlance

Assuming Martial is being backed as our no.9 for the next few season then I think Ighalo would be a perfect signing.

It gives Greenwood time to develop further while protecting him... to ultimately take over from Martial in 2/3 years.

I think that's what the plan will be. It's a cheap plan and it helps promote our own, I would be happy enough with it.
Not saying that a top striker wouldn't be better in the short to medium term but I would spend the money elsewhere.

Mitch Connor

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Would you see Ighalo as the primary target United should have to be that player? Cause if not, then I don't see how you can really argue.

I think the club would like to keep him through to the end of the season, but his club are (apparently) only willing to talk sale at this point, not loan.

In that case, I can understand why United might not want to make that jump, which would have a knock-on effect on any summer business they might want to do.

If it was a normal season, we'd have happily waved good-bye to Ighalo on Friday week, and looked at doing the primary summer business, coming back to Ighalo as a backup option.

I can argue it

He gelled incredible well in a short space of time

He knows his role and his age is ideal for the role he has been given

He is not the lead striker according to Oles setup

Who else would be happy to be benched and used when called upon that has his ability

Mitch Connor

Liam O wrote: »

You are signing a player in good faith that it's until the end of the season. Suddenly that doesn't happen and the player is no longer available purely because the season is delayed. Just off the top of my head and don't know if I fully believe the reasoning I myself have given but definitely an argument.

The good faith piece is why the FA and PL have agreed that deals (loans, contracts) can be extended to the end of the season.

United have the option to sign Ighalo through to the new end of the season. They, currently, aren't able to agree the deal with his club to extend his loan (who are to due to start their season in June).

Its unfortunate, but I don't just don't see why United should be given dispensation to sign someone else.

Father Hernandez

Liam O wrote: »

Should be allowed to sign a replacement really if he goes. But then the can of worms that opens with the likes of Ziyech and contracts next month would it be worth it?.

Liam O wrote: »

You are signing a player in good faith that it's until the end of the season. Suddenly that doesn't happen and the player is no longer available purely because the season is delayed. Just off the top of my head and don't know if I fully believe the reasoning I myself have given but definitely an argument.

Same argument with Dean Henderson too wouldn't it?

His loan is due up in June IIRC and Sheffield United competing with United for a CL place.

Immorally wrong but they're a direct competitor.

Btw nice to have some football related to tall about outside of corona for a change

Mitch Connor

Deleted User wrote: »

I can argue it

He gelled incredible well in a short space of time

He knows his role and his age is ideal for the role he has been given

He is not the lead striker according to Oles setup

Who else would be happy to be benched and used when called upon that has his ability

United might want to target a longer term, first choice striker (we've been linked to Dembele a lot), as opposed to a back up.

We tried to sign Haaland, which would indicate United aren't just looking for a backup striker.

Mitch Connor

Mitch Connor wrote: »

United might want to target a longer term, first choice striker (we've been linked to Dembele a lot), as opposed to a back up.

We tried to sign Haaland, which would indicate United aren't just looking for a backup striker.

I'm not sure. Rashford from what I recall we have been told is the lead striker.

I dont remember seeing anything about bringing up a lead striker unless Rashfords role is changing again

Being honest I'm trying remember where Utd left off just before Rashford got injured

Ighalo was loaned in January due to his injury

Mitch Connor

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not sure. Rashford from what I recall we have been told is the lead striker.

I dont remember seeing anything about bringing up a lead striker unless Rashfords role is changing again

Being honest I'm trying remember where Utd left off just before Rashford got injured

Ighalo was loaned in January due to his injury

Rashford played out left with Martial up top as a first choice plan for an age now. Rashford centre forward was abandoned fairly quick into the season.

Again, we went for Haaland in January.

Liam O

Mitch Connor wrote: »

The good faith piece is why the FA and PL have agreed that deals (loans, contracts) can be extended to the end of the season.

United have the option to sign Ighalo through to the new end of the season. They, currently, aren't able to agree the deal with his club to extend his loan (who are to due to start their season in June).

Its unfortunate, but I don't just don't see why United should be given dispensation to sign someone else.

Saying that you can just extend contracts is reductive in the extreme. What if the finances aren't right? If I'm Ryan Fraser for example, why do I risk my career high pay day that's coming in the summer to help Bournemouth attempt to avoid relegation? They're down a player but let's say Mark Noble is in a similar spot (no idea, just the name that came to my head), West Ham don't lose a player as he's happy to play on no matter what.

DM_7

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm not sure. Rashford from what I recall we have been told is the lead striker.

I dont remember seeing anything about bringing up a lead striker unless Rashfords role is changing again

Being honest I'm trying remember where Utd left off just before Rashford got injured

Ighalo was loaned in January due to his injury

Rashford is left/forward, Martial is main striker.

For tactics that changes from time to time or if a player is out.

Edit: sorry i see Mitch already posted.

Mitch Connor

Liam O wrote: »

Saying that you can just extend contracts is reductive in the extreme. What if the finances aren't right? If I'm Ryan Fraser for example, why do I risk my career high pay day that's coming in the summer to help Bournemouth attempt to avoid relegation? They're down a player but let's say Mark Noble is in a similar spot (no idea, just the name that came to my head), West Ham don't lose a player as he's happy to play on no matter what.

an none of that has anything to do with the scenario.

If Fraser doesn't extend his contract to the end of the season, then he doesn't play beyond his current contract and Bournemouth are without him. That simple. Same for Willian. Their clubs don't get to sign a replacement player.

The FA/PL can agree to allow short term contract/loan extensions, and they have. Its up to clubs and players to agree them. If they don't: Tough luck.

The_Kew_Tour

Can’t see anyone paying for Pogba both in fees , wages and lump sum for Agent. If Pogba could get his mind in right place we could have best Midfield in over a decade.

CB is crucial too in and when next deadline comes around

Ordinary man

I saw it mentioned somewhere that if pogba and bruno are both fit, bruno could be the one playing deeper. Bruno's workrate would be much better and it could allow for pogba's tendancy to wander

The_Kew_Tour

Ordinary man wrote: »

I saw it mentioned somewhere that if pogba and bruno are both fit, bruno could be the one playing deeper. Bruno's workrate would be much better and it could allow for pogba's tendancy to wander

Personally I would much rather that. I think Pogba be in favour too:pac:

DM_7

Ighalo was only a possibility due to Covid19 stopping football in China.

Annoying for United to lose him before the season is over but it seems reasonable that he would return.

I don't think a new signing would be allowed as it would be unfair on other clubs.

In terms of what is left of the season United can't be too concerned when the time off has allowed Rashford and Pogba to play a bigger part in what is left of the English season. Europe won't be there in June either allowing a focus on the next domestic fixture.

I think without a crowd it could favour guys like Bruno, Pogba, Rashford and Martial - I may be way off but the more training style atmosphere games seem to me to be the type of format that will players with quality on the ball - but only if intensity levels are right. United have had problems there in recent times.

I think that will be a key thing for teams when things come back, who finds the intensity and drive without a crowd, atmosphere to feed off will be a major factor.

kowloonkev

If Pogba is given another chance without some kind of apology for his agent then I think I will give up on Ole as much as I love him.

Drumpot

kowloonkev wrote: »

If Pogba is given another chance without some kind of apology for his agent then I think I will give up on Ole as much as I love him.

If he goes he goes , I really don’t care if he’s given away at this stage, but if he stays I don’t want or need a public apology from Pogba. If we got a season where he and his agent STFU And did all his talking on the field that would be enough of “an apology” for me.