• Hey Guest!
    Enjoy the This Is Anfield Forums but want to remove the adverts? Now you can do so by clicking here.
    Thanks for your support!

Luis Suárez (FW) to Real Madrid

Status
Not open for further replies.

Doggie

Resident Optimist
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
1,616
40 Million and Dzeko would be an absolutely amazing deal! (I would prefer Mario tho!)


If the right deal comes in, well the FSG structure would be taking shape, buy em in, sell em for a profit - it only works tho if you continue to take forward steps!

If we do sell the one player who can win a game on his own for us, we had better bring in atleast 3 players who can win matches as part of our coveted system!
City won't part with Dzeko, as for Balotelli - no fucking way lol

It would be a disaster if we lost Suarez. He's core to everything we are trying to achieve on the pitch.
 


supereddman98

Active Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2008
Messages
987
Fixed it for you. And Torres back for 10 million.
lol I was living in a dream world saying 20 m + Aguero, being serious if that offer was on the table I bet most people on here would jump on it, like for like replacement plus 20 mill to spend. It wasn't that long back when everyone on this forum dreamed of signing Aguero.
 

charleslee89

TIA New Signing
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
2,866
City won't part with Dzeko, as for Balotelli - no fucking way
It would be a disaster if we lost Suarez. He's core to everything we are trying to achieve on the pitch.
hmm, with the right price, i think we can get balotelli...
 

RedSeven

On the one road
Ad-free Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
5,739
Ok maybe "evil" was too harsh a word but the following have all been leveled at FSG:

"penny pinching" "not backing the manager" "accepting mediocrity" "not respecting LFC" "buying players for PR purposes to show big money signings flop" "forcing Fernando Torres to hand in a transfer request when he didn't want to because they wanted the full fee" "meddling too much" "not having enough presence at the club" "promoting an incompetent patsy to a high level to be scape goat for anything that goes wrong" "signing Downing based on a viral video" "wanting to sign Dempsey to sell shirts in America" "not backing the manager by not paying the extra million or two we were charged" "not sacking Roy fast enough" "sacking Kenny too quick" "making us a selling club"

Could probably go on but even if some of those allegations weren't at odds with each other you would be forgiven for thinking FSG were at least a bit dodgy if you just read the negative posts off people on this site.
In a snap shot it would look,as you say,as if they were a bit dodgy.But in numerous different threads over a period of time,most supporters ask similar questions of their owners,no matter what club they are.

I could,would and have asked many of these questions myself,made some of those statements(you used my penny pinching one) but i'm not anti Fsg,but i do think they should have kept kenny(as do you),so they didn't back the manager to turn things around,i do think they had a hand in Torres departure(or at least their man Commolli did),they don't have enough presence at the club,they didn't pay that extra couple of mil for Dempsey,so they didn't back BR on that,and nobody really believed they bought Stewie off the back of a youtube video.

Some of the other things are just venting(think we have a thread for that now,maybe we should us it).I would like us to spend a bit more money and buy a couple of top quality player.I think they can afford it and it wouldn't put us badly in debt.

It was said at the time of buying the club that FSG would need to put at least 100mp into the playing staff,while retaining everyone we had at the time.I'm not saying they should spend that amount but that is the amount that was needed and it was needed almost 2yrs ago.Since then we have lost a number of players,who haven't been adequately replaced and we haven't spent 100mp on the playing staff without loosing others.
 
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
7,373
For the people coming up with Football Manager style cash + swap deals:

1. It is highly unlikely that players like Aguero or even Dzeko would even consider coming here.
2. Even if they did those players are likely to demand higher wages.
3. The extra cash that we may get could quite possibly end up being wasted on a player like Carroll/Downing.
4. There is no guarantee that the new players brought in will be happy or fit into the system.
5. It will make us look even more of a selling club and further reduce our abillity to attract top players.

So overall there is absolutely NO way I would consider selling Suarez unless he has made it clear he wants to leave. And at the current moment in time it does not look like that.
 



liveforthereds

asp67 twitter
Joined
Apr 20, 2008
Messages
5,970
hmm, with the right price, i think we can get balotelli...
Do we really want him, maybe a good player when he wants to be but would come with a lot of problems. I think if we where to go for any players from City there are better options.
 

Lucas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
3,171
All the Manchester journos are saying the story isn't true and was started by Liverpool.

One of two outcomes if this is true:

1) We are looking to create a market to sell Suarez.
2) We are making the owners shit themselves so they release funds in January.
 

FreakLFC

Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
319
130 million for Suarez + 120 million for stadium and they can have him. Work smart not hard.
 

RichLFC

Always one of us. RIP.
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
11,674
All the Manchester journos are saying the story isn't true and was started by Liverpool.

One of two outcomes if this is true:

1) We are looking to create a market to sell Suarez.
2) We are making the owners shit themselves so they release funds in January.
No 3 could be that it is a rather ham fisted attempt to detract from the rumored announcement that Jen Chang isn't returning to merseyside...

Not sure but that's the whispers right now, a cover for perhaps fucking up another appointment? Could be wrong but it wouldn't be a big surprise, seen quite a bit of PR maneuvering of this type. Would be clumsy as fuck right enough so I would hope it isn't down to that. Though no 1 would be bad news. I hope it's 2 if anything, pressure being put on to spend some cash from well placed media sources
 

RedSeven

On the one road
Ad-free Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
5,739
Simon Mullock ‏@MullockSMirror
Lot of anger at the Etihad about being linked with Suarez. MCFC think LFC are trying to create a market for their most prized asset

Simon Mullock ‏@MullockSMirror
Just had a call from a very senior source at MCFC. Been told there has been no move for Luis Suarez and there are no plans to bid.


If this is true,you gotta wonder what they are up to.Are they trying to create a market or is there some other reason,if it is true.​
 



MarlboroMan

Vertrauen Sie mir
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
6,065
If we were to sell Suarez then I'd only accept a player swap deal. Face it with 50m AND the fact we just sold off our best player we'd have an even tougher time spending that 50m. So a swap deal of Balotelli and Dzeko or Tevez and Dzeko would be what I'd ask for. City wouldn't do that deal and so no deal! Anyway with Luis having signed a new contract in the summer we don't really have to sell.
 

rab

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2010
Messages
3,273
Think in the case of Agger it had a lot more to do with the player, his agent was hinting strongly at a bit of reluctance on the part of the club until Rodgers put his foot to the floor. They did allow the player to make the call but they would have been ok with it either way really going by their reluctance to pay injury prone players

As for Torres...we really didn't you know. It was not a coincidence that we have not been capable of bringing in genuine quality in to the club since his departure, it was a triple whammy of questionable ambition selling to a rival, no CL football and a inadequate recruitment and senior scouting set up which made us look an increasingly unattractive option to the calibre of player we needed. Like with Masch, Alonso etc, he is still sorely missed by the club and has not been replaced

Which at this point has been worked on but may be some way away from us being able to ride out too many more key departures such as these
I fail to see how getting £50m for Torres was a bad move. The player was struggling and has continued to struggle since he left and we got a ridiculous sum for him, some of which will have helped to pay for Suarez and had the rest been spent on a better option than Carroll who knows where we might be.

You can't say the sale of Torres has prevented us from bringing in quality players since. There are more factors to those struggles than players thinking because we sold Torres we lack ambition. I seriously doubt any player is looking at our scouting set up as part of their decision making process. We sold Torres and certainly aren't missing the kind of performances he's putting in for Chelsea and we got Suarez as a repalcement so we still have that superstar iconic player.

Selling Torres was like selling off your mansion with an suspected subsidance issue just before the housing market tanked. We got maximum value for something that someone else now has to resolve the issues with knowing full well it'll never be worth anything close to what they've paid for it.

Call it lack of ambiton if you like but that was a savy move by the club. What wasn't so savy was spending such a big chunk of that money on someone with only 6 months top flight experience. That's what's hurting us now.
 

braderz

TIA Squad Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
638
Another rumour which snowballed from talk on twitter. What a load of tosh
 

charleslee89

TIA New Signing
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
2,866
Do we really want him, maybe a good player when he wants to be but would come with a lot of problems. I think if we where to go for any players from City there are better options.
he may have lots of emotional baggage but dun we also have one player that has a lot of baggage as well?
 

RichLFC

Always one of us. RIP.
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
11,674
I fail to see how getting £50m for Torres was a bad move. The player was struggling and has continued to struggle since he left and we got a ridiculous sum for him, some of which will have helped to pay for Suarez and had the rest been spent on a better option than Carroll who knows where we might be.

You can't say the sale of Torres has prevented us from bringing in quality players since. There are more factors to those struggles than players thinking because we sold Torres we lack ambition. I seriously doubt any player is looking at our scouting set up as part of their decision making process. We sold Torres and certainly aren't missing the kind of performances he's putting in for Chelsea and we got Suarez as a repalcement so we still have that superstar iconic player.

Selling Torres was like selling off your mansion with an suspected subsidance issue just before the housing market tanked. We got maximum value for something that someone else now has to resolve the issues with knowing full well it'll never be worth anything close to what they've paid for it.

Call it lack of ambiton if you like but that was a savy move by the club. What wasn't so savy was spending such a big chunk of that money on someone with only 6 months top flight experience. That's what's hurting us now.
The reality IMO is that you can't sell club icons to rival clubs. It's something Man U make a point of not doing for one and they have been the side who have won the most gee gaws in the last 20 odd years. Can't really argue with it really

Also, our poor recruiting had been known for a while, it had been a problem since even before G and H showed their arse to us, with very little time at the end of the window, we should have just said no. It's that simple

Spurs aren't in a perfect position but think they did the right thing stopping Modric going to Chelsea. The following year they got 10m more for him from Madrid, who are not a rival club in their own league so no consequent loss of face occurred. May not have struck gold last summer but they are looking in fair shape for another bash at 4th even if they lost their Alonso equivalent

With us we had been selling quality for too long and it immediately got FSG, Commolli and Dalglish off immediately on the wrong foot which even now we have not recovered from. They were not equipped to replace him properly and they should have realized that. People do notice when clubs sell key players to others in the same league, it gives off all the wrong vibes about the direction they are going in and it was one reason why we seemed to spend a lot on buying mediocrity from mid table outfits instead of using that same money on Liverpool quality players, along with poor judgement from the DOF who should never have been appointed and unfortunately Kenny as well, who may have been too wedded to a bygone idealistic outlook

Looking at the players we pursued as well as signed. GS may have done better for Rodgers than AVB but Dempsey, DIame, Marveaux, Whickham, Phil jones etc...shit load of bog standard ness there for all their clubs. Can't really think of any of our target players who really looked great at the clubs they went to except possibly Clichy at City, who was decent, or maybe Ashley young at a push. Coming to a club with Torres and Suarez as our strike duo, maybe the Matas, Cazorlas etc could have been attracted to that. We aimed too low but it was not helped by our continuing sales. Could say we missed a few bullets but we got hit by loads as well

Been the most disappointing thing really since the takeover, and it's caused us to fall further behind. It has to stop

But come the summer, a bad finish this season and can see things stil going in the wrong direction, and we made that a strong possibility due to our ineptitude last summer. The owners have got to realize though that keeping them for an extra season isn't enough, these players need complementing with genuine talent, not mid table players or maybes from within
 



Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,525
I fail to see how getting £50m for Torres was a bad move. The player was struggling and has continued to struggle since he left and we got a ridiculous sum for him, some of which will have helped to pay for Suarez and had the rest been spent on a better option than Carroll who knows where we might be.

You can't say the sale of Torres has prevented us from bringing in quality players since. There are more factors to those struggles than players thinking because we sold Torres we lack ambition. I seriously doubt any player is looking at our scouting set up as part of their decision making process. We sold Torres and certainly aren't missing the kind of performances he's putting in for Chelsea and we got Suarez as a repalcement so we still have that superstar iconic player.

Selling Torres was like selling off your mansion with an suspected subsidance issue just before the housing market tanked. We got maximum value for something that someone else now has to resolve the issues with knowing full well it'll never be worth anything close to what they've paid for it.

Call it lack of ambiton if you like but that was a savy move by the club. What wasn't so savy was spending such a big chunk of that money on someone with only 6 months top flight experience. That's what's hurting us now.
We sold a once proud but now decrepid old mansion for an inflated figure it was a great deal and we mugged off a rival.

The fact that we then used a lot of the money on a bad deal ourselves doesn't change the fact the original deal was a good one.
 

DeathOrGlory

Fortune Favours the Gegenpress
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Messages
7,016
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1226797/manchester-city-dismiss-talk-of-bid-for-liverpool-star-luis-suarez?cc=3436

Lock this godforsaken thread.
 

KingLuis7

TIA Youth Team
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
195
Luis Suarez to Manchester City: the numbers don't add up

Roberto Mancini would be told that the purchase of Luis Suarez blows a major hole in the club’s attempts to secure a license to play European football, if he were to consider lobbying Manchester City's board to buy Luis Suarez from Liverpool.

The transfer fee and wages for Suarez would cost City around £20m a year, a sum roughly equivalent to what the club can afford to lose in its entirety in the next financial year, under Uefa’s financial fair play regulations. City are about to announce losses in excess of £100m for the 2011-12 season, the first of Uefa’s two-year monitoring period, during which the club is permitted to lose no more than £18m a year.

If Suarez is purchased for £40m on a four year deal, the club would take a £10m hit each year for four years on its profit and loss account – a figure which would count towards financial fair play calculations. But it is the player’s wages which would deliver the biggest blow to the club’s attempts to draw closer to the £18m figure. If Suarez were to command a salary of £1m a month, less than City’s Carlos Tevez but in line with others among the game’s best paid players, that would take the annual hit to the club up to £22m a year, including wages and transfer fee.

City’s 2011-12 losses will deliver big drop from the £197m pre-tax loss recorded last year – the biggest in English football history. But it leaves City with a mountain to climb to comply with Uefa rules and avoid exclusion from the Champions League.

Very much looks like a case of sell to buy if they're legitimate in the slightest.

http://www.independe...up-8319461.html
 

legalalien

Watcher of the skies
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Messages
8,805
Simon Mullock ‏@MullockSMirror
Lot of anger at the Etihad about being linked with Suarez. MCFC think LFC are trying to create a market for their most prized asset

Simon Mullock ‏@MullockSMirror
Just had a call from a very senior source at MCFC. Been told there has been no move for Luis Suarez and there are no plans to bid.


If this is true,you gotta wonder what they are up to.Are they trying to create a market or is there some other reason,if it is true.​
Curiouser and curiouser. Is this really BR trying to force FSG's hand and compel them to splash the cash or else? Although that doesn't make sense. How could the manager set up a deal to sell a player against the owners' wishes? Especially when said player has only recently signed a contract.

Of course, these days a contract means nothing more than a means of boosting a players selling price.

BTW all this talk of, hypothetically, swapping Luis for Tevez or Balotelli plus whoever is starting to get on my wick. There's no way clubs like LFC or MCFC would consider swapping players. If one of theirs was to move to Anfield as a consequence of Luis moving there then it would be a totally separate deal with a specific price for the City player.
 



Doggie

Resident Optimist
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
1,616
[/size][/font][/color]
Very much looks like a case of sell to buy if they're legitimate in the slightest.

http://www.independe...up-8319461.html
It's widely anticipated that Balotelli is leaving, so there does seem to be some substance to this story.

As for a Balotelli player swap - he is a surly moody diva, who would have gone from City last season if it hadn't have been for Mancini's patience with him. He's a character, but also a nightmare and a liability.
 

RedSeven

On the one road
Ad-free Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
5,739
Curiouser and curiouser. Is this really BR trying to force FSG's hand and compel them to splash the cash or else? Although that doesn't make sense. How could the manager set up a deal to sell a player against the owners' wishes? Especially when said player has only recently signed a contract.

Of course, these days a contract means nothing more than a means of boosting a players selling price.

BTW all this talk of, hypothetically, swapping Luis for Tevez or Balotelli plus whoever is starting to get on my wick. There's no way clubs like LFC or MCFC would consider swapping players. If one of theirs was to move to Anfield as a consequence of Luis moving there then it would be a totally separate deal with a specific price for the City player.
If other clubs think we are gonna sell Luis by the end of the transfer window,they will want a slice of that for themselves,therefore anybody we try to sign will have an inflated price,so we won't buy them.
Come the end of january,we won't have bought anyone due to the inflated prices,so we hold onto Luis.Great news Except,we haven't bought anyone.Kinda like with Danny at the end of August.We didn't get the striker the fans felt we needed But,at least we didn't loose Agger.

How's that for a conspiracy theory.Have i been beaten to it?
 

Drian

TIA Youth Team
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
303
Rodgers plays down Suarez Transfer Talk

http://www.juicefm.c...ransfer-talk/?/

Liverpool manager Brendan Rodgers has brushed aside newspaper reports linking Luis Suarez with a big money move away from Anfield.

Speaking at his weekly press conference, the Reds boss said "Suarez is certainly not someone we want to sell or move on. We want to add players, not lose them. He's very happy here. There will be no bidding war. He's staying here."

His comments come amid intense press speculation that Manchester City are preparing a bid for the Uruguayan hitman.

Reports suggest Robert Mancini is an admirer - and is lining up a bid of up to £50 million to snatch him from Rodgers in the January transfer window.



End of story.
 

Doggie

Resident Optimist
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
1,616
Rodgers plays down Suarez Transfer Talk

http://www.juicefm.c...ransfer-talk/?/

Liverpool manager Brendan Rodgers has brushed aside newspaper reports linking Luis Suarez with a big money move away from Anfield.

Speaking at his weekly press conference, the Reds boss said "Suarez is certainly not someone we want to sell or move on. We want to add players, not lose them. He's very happy here. There will be no bidding war. He's staying here."

His comments come amid intense press speculation that Manchester City are preparing a bid for the Uruguayan hitman.

Reports suggest Robert Mancini is an admirer - and is lining up a bid of up to £50 million to snatch him from Rodgers in the January transfer window.



End of story.
Glad to hear Rodgers saying that.

Doesn't mean City won't make a bid however.
 

SirBillShankly

Joe and Holly's Dad
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
10,044
I started a thread a long time ago about how much Suarez would be valued at in today's market, so it intrigues me to ask this question:

What is he actually worth?

God forbid if he was sold, just curious what people think his value would be worth. £40m? Maybe £50m?
 



RedSeven

On the one road
Ad-free Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
5,739
Rodgers plays down Suarez Transfer Talk

http://www.juicefm.c...ransfer-talk/?/

Liverpool manager Brendan Rodgers has brushed aside newspaper reports linking Luis Suarez with a big money move away from Anfield.

Speaking at his weekly press conference, the Reds boss said "Suarez is certainly not someone we want to sell or move on. We want to add players, not lose them. He's very happy here. There will be no bidding war. He's staying here."

His comments come amid intense press speculation that Manchester City are preparing a bid for the Uruguayan hitman.

Reports suggest Robert Mancini is an admirer - and is lining up a bid of up to £50 million to snatch him from Rodgers in the January transfer window.



End of story.
From August:

But Rodgers yesterday insisted that there was no chance Carroll would be leaving Liverpool, telling reporters: "To even consider wanting to take him on loan is a liberty.
"I need a minimum of three strikers. Once the window shuts, that is it until January. I have got Luis Suarez, Fabio Borini and Andy Carroll.
 

legalalien

Watcher of the skies
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Messages
8,805
If other clubs think we are gonna sell Luis by the end of the transfer window,they will want a slice of that for themselves,therefore anybody we try to sign will have an inflated price,so we won't buy them.
Come the end of january,we won't have bought anyone due to the inflated prices,so we hold onto Luis.Great news Except,we haven't bought anyone.Kinda like with Danny at the end of August.We didn't get the striker the fans felt we needed But,at least we didn't loose Agger.

How's that for a conspiracy theory.Have i been beaten to it?
I suppose that's like putting a house up for sale because you have to not because you want to, and therefore you ask for a ridiculously inflated price and assume that no-one would be stupid enough to pay it, so at least you could say to your creditors "hey, I tried to sell it, but in this economy ...". But then along comes some Sheik who's yearning for a 3-bed semi detached in Wavertree and he makes you an offer you could not in your right mind refuse. What're ya gonna do?

Probably take the money and reminisce about the good old days in the house on Suarez Avenue.
 

RedSeven

On the one road
Ad-free Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
5,739
I suppose that's like putting a house up for sale because you have to not because you want to, and therefore you ask for a ridiculously inflated price and assume that no-one would be stupid enough to pay it, so at least you could say to your creditors "hey, I tried to sell it, but in this economy ...". But then along comes some Sheik who's yearning for a 3-bed semi detached in Wavertree and he makes you an offer you could not in your right mind refuse. What're ya gonna do?

Probably take the money and reminisce about the good old days in the house on Suarez Avenue.
So you could end up selling and you don't buy anywhere else cos prices are now inflated due to everyone knowing you have the money.Either way,you don't spend anything at that time.

This is probably not the case but if we leaked this story then there is the possibility that this is 1 such scenario.
 

Macedonian_Red

Banned Users
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
2,961
Torres had been playing shit for 2 seasons and was always getting injured playing for Spain.Selling him was good.
Selling Luis when he is playing good is bad news.
Sorry mate, but that is nonsense ... In his last "poor" 18 months with LFC, Torres has scored 27 goals in 45 league appearances, or 0.600 goals per game ... So far, Suarez has scored 23 goals in 55 league appearances for LFC, or 0.418 goals per game ... So much for Torres "playing shit for 2 seasons" ... I know that some people would like to justify FSG's decision to sell Torres, but the fact remains that it was a fuck up of monumental proportions ...
 

rab

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2010
Messages
3,273
The reality IMO is that you can't sell club icons to rival clubs. It's something Man U make a point of not doing for one and they have been the side who have won the most gee gaws in the last 20 odd years. Can't really argue with it really

Also, our poor recruiting had been known for a while, it had been a problem since even before G and H showed their arse to us, with very little time at the end of the window, we should have just said no. It's that simple

Spurs aren't in a perfect position but think they did the right thing stopping Modric going to Chelsea. The following year they got 10m more for him from Madrid, who are not a rival club in their own league so no consequent loss of face occurred. May not have struck gold last summer but they are looking in fair shape for another bash at 4th even if they lost their Alonso equivalent

With us we had been selling quality for too long and it immediately got FSG, Commolli and Dalglish off immediately on the wrong foot which even now we have not recovered from. They were not equipped to replace him properly and they should have realized that. People do notice when clubs sell key players to others in the same league, it gives off all the wrong vibes about the direction they are going in and it was one reason why we seemed to spend a lot on buying mediocrity from mid table outfits instead of using that same money on Liverpool quality players, along with poor judgement from the DOF who should never have been appointed and unfortunately Kenny as well, who may have been too wedded to a bygone idealistic outlook

Looking at the players we pursued as well as signed. GS may have done better for Rodgers than AVB but Dempsey, DIame, Marveaux, Whickham, Phil jones etc...shit load of bog standard ness there for all their clubs. Can't really think of any of our target players who really looked great at the clubs they went to except possibly Clichy at City, who was decent, or maybe Ashley young at a push. Coming to a club with Torres and Suarez as our strike duo, maybe the Matas, Cazorlas etc could have been attracted to that. We aimed too low but it was not helped by our continuing sales. Could say we missed a few bullets but we got hit by loads as well

Been the most disappointing thing really since the takeover, and it's caused us to fall further behind. It has to stop

But come the summer, a bad finish this season and can see things stil going in the wrong direction, and we made that a strong possibility due to our ineptitude last summer
If anything we've hampered a rival by taking £50m off them for what is a shell of the player they thought they were getting and was hardly the club icon he once was.

Had we used the money from Torres and bought Cavani or Falcao it would be seen as a masterstroke, we didn't and that has hurt us but we stilled showed the ambition you claim we lack by breaking the British transfer record. Just because Carroll hasn't worked out doesn't make the Torres deal a poor one.

United sold Beckham, Van Nistlerooy and Ronaldo to Real Madrid but it doesn't make them a club without ambition and stop them being attractive to prospective new players. Arsenal sell players every year pretty much but were an attractive enough option to tempt Cazorla in the summer, someone you say wouldn't be interested in coming here because we sold Torres and that was after Van Persie announced his intention to leave.

Every club sells players, it's not a sign of lack of ambition particualrly if you do it on your terms as we did with Torres and ultimately we've seen that we've got the better end of that deal.
 



Status
Not open for further replies.