₦airaland Forum

BlueAngel444:
Frankly speaking either Dortmund are silly or there isn't a release clause to begin with or the clause is higher and up to €100m as some pointed out.

ChristineC:
all the analysis depend on the buying clubs. it has been shown recently that many clubs are no longer open to throwing ridiculous fees about. very few clubs will offer up to £250k weekly.
if that release clause is accurate, then the total fee won't exceed £100m.

BlueAngel444:
like I wrote Bayern could afford 130m – 150m for him, like other teams would, the question is still down to Haaland agreeing to join whichever club. You said Riaola fee is fixed, at the time of Chelsea's bid it was 130m to Dortmund with 30m to Riaola and and about 20 to his Dad, of which Chelsea offered to pay just 40m and was agreed, only left with Dortmund who were refusing to sell.

Haaland interest is Real Madrid, if Madrid don't bite then maybe Bayern or an EPL club, maybe PSG but I doubt that

Oasis007:
I enjoy your Analysis, but no way he's gonna cost directly or indirectly more than. £100m, if the release clause is real.

BlueAngel444:
if Bayern are considering Haaland then it may be not as expensive. €80m–€100m R-Clause plus highest €50m for whatever and whoever, Raiola, signing on fee, Papa o.
Total 130m

As long as Dortmund can't stop him moving, the real negotiation would be on his salary and his interests.

AnfieldFan:
Chai ...
See as the comot Liverpool for analysis...

Anyways....I'm only here because I enjoy Ole's tomfoolery...

Oasis007:
Erling Haaland will be free to leave Borussia Dortmund in January, rather than next summer, when a £64million release clause becomes active.

- Marca

We shouldn't miss out.

Roland17:
Another one of our young players that has gone to dust under Arteta. The problem is the useless tactics of using Tierney to spam crosses from the left as your primary source of attack. How is Martinelli supposed to thrive under this system? He is not going to get to the end of those crosses. We are way too predictable..

macjireh:
Liverpool were lucky tuchel came very late and we had lethargic strikers...with lukaku,,,leme see how liverpool repeats wat happened last season...

bring dem on,,I will only edit my post

macjireh:
pep was lucky tuchel came very late and we had lethargic strikers...with lukaku,,,leme see how pep repeats wat happened last season

Amoto94:
The League is a marathon not a 100m dash it's too early to write any team off I still maintain that City and United are the favourites but Chelsea aren't far off either.

Illimitable:
[s]I like how my victims turn philosophical after getting battered.

Go and sin no more.

It’s a wrap! [/s]

Illimitable:
[s]You are missing the point here - I don’t know if it’s deliberate to hide your previous stupidity or it’s a blind spot for you. [/s]

You had said Sancho didn’t go to preseason(promotion) because he had refused to sign. You linked the signing of his contract directly to his promotion.

[s]So I asked, why wasn’t this the same for Foden? Foden should never have been on the plane to preseason when his own contract talk was only up 18 months later. City should have waited for Foden to also sign his contract before putting him on a plane for preseason.


It’s just simple logic and you keep failing. Your only rebuttal to this was that players are treated differently. So in your company, the MD position can be leveraged to get an employee’s signature while another employee of the same age can become the MD without having to worry about signing any contract regarding the role.


If this doesn’t make you look stupid, nothing else would. [/s]

Illimitable:
But but but “All players are not the same”

Only Sancho was offered the contract for the MD position. Foden and Diaz are different players so they were treated differently.

For Sancho, he must sign the contract to become an MD or lose the position. However, for Foden, he can become the MD for18 solid months before signing the MD contract.

This is another reason why women should take enough Folic acid during pregnancy - any inadequacy and the child starts to display this level of incoherent, inconsistent twaddle.

Illimitable:
You made the claim before finding a junk article that partially supports the same claim.

Of all the websites to bring up as evidence, you cited MEN?

You are a charlatan.

Illimitable:
You are a möron!

All players are not the same? Really?

After lying to us for hours that had Sancho signed his contract, it would have been the gateway to the preseason tour(promotion) and his refusal to sign was the reason Pep didn’t take him to preseason, you have the audacity to say all players aren’t the same?

You are a brainless charlatan.

Illimitable:
[s]Your stupidity knows no bounds. You have reduced this whole argument to your poor use of English.

Look at the sentence again and stop disgracing your school. An agreement was thought to be imminent - This simply means City thought there was an agreement but Sancho backed away from whatever psychotic idea City thought they had.

In short, there was never an agreement(at least, none on Sancho’s side of the table). City only felt so. If there was an agreement, it would be on paper(Sancho’s signature with wet ink).

Meanwhile, why were the steps taken for Sancho’s promotion not existent with Foden and Diaz?

Can you answer this question and nail your own coffin so I can debate more important people on this thread?

You died when you linked Sancho’s contract to his promotion. Foden/Diaz proved contracts and promotion are two different entities.

I bet you wish you could take that back.

Bloody charlatan. [/s]

Illimitable:
No no no, don’t be stupid.

He didn’t wish to be a City player “any longer”.

Illimitable:
“An agreement was thought to be imminent……”

City thought they had an agreement. I am not insulting the article. I am insulting your cognitive and deductive reasoning.

Illimitable:
Your use of English is terrible.

Sancho “backed away” cos he wished to no longer be an employee of Man City. QED.

Illimitable:
Your use of English is terrible.

Sancho “backed away” cos he wished to no longer be an employee of Man City. QED.

120 hours later, you still haven’t told us why the steps taken for Sancho’s promotion didn’t apply to Diaz and Foden.

That was where you died - everything else you have typed is just saving face.

I’m your intellectual god.

Illimitable:
The “backed away” phrase was used because he was expected to sign.

What kind of deductive reasoning is this you are displaying? Sancho was a City player through and through. If he rejected any contract, it means he was not going to be a City player going forward thus the phrase back away.

You went to a restaurant, asked for the menu, picked rice and stew, food was served and you changed your mind that you don’t want the food again, you have backed away. You don’t have to start eating the food before one could say you backed away.

Illimitable:
You are a pathological liar, bros.

There’s no parallel here. The Athletic simply said Sancho and Foden are ambitious brats but Foden was more grounded because of his Manchester background and because his family are all city fans while Sancho was impatient.

By the time the contract was tabled, Sancho had made up his mind that he wasn’t going to wait to get a cameo in a dead rubber game against Bournemouth.



I couldn’t answer that because there’s no evidence that actually happened . I scoured over 30 articles on The Athletic about Sancho’s contracts and none of the articles wrote anything like that because it’s unreasonable.

You scooped that from MEN - a junk sports media designed for society degenerates like yourself so they don’t feel left out about the happenings in world football. There’s no way a 17 year old would insist the number of appearances should be claused in his contract in a club as massive as Man City.

The MEN article was probably written by a lunatic like you to make Sancho look bad. A ploy club’s PRs had always used to settle the fans that might be agitated that Sancho was lost. “It’s not our fault, guys. We tried everything but that boy was unreasonable.”

I remember Ronaldinho also wanting a Helipad before coming to Man Utd. You have to be the biggest idiöt on the planet to believe such crap. Sancho never asked for that, he wasn’t going to sign for City because Pep took too long to play him in the senior team.




The mind of a lunatic.

The first thing a very good psychologist would have noticed about you is that you suffer from acute psychosis. You are reading/seeing things that didn’t happen.

I have asked you to tell me why Foden got promoted to the senior team before his contract was up - you cannot answer. I hope you haven’t forgotten how you drew a parallel by comparing Sancho’s contract to the role of a managing director.

You lied to the whole world Sancho’s contract guaranteed his promotion and if that’s the case, why didn’t Man City wait until Foden’s contract was signed before taking him to a preseason tour.

You are a blithering idiöt!

Illimitable:
You are a blithering idiöt..

You said Sancho’s contract was the offer that he was guaranteed to be promoted that summer and he would have been promoted had he accepted the offer in March 2017. So how come Foden was “promoted”(taken to preseason) before he was given an offer?

I am asking you this question to destroy your earlier point that Sancho’s contract is tied to his promotion, that’s a lie you managed to put together cos you are a very stupid person during an argument. You even went as far as comparing it to the role of Managing Director - characteristic of a room temperature IQ in display.

If indeed contracts are tied to promotion, City would have waited until Foden’s contract was up in 2018 before giving him promotion(taken to a preseason tour) - just like you stupidly lied about Sancho. That wasn’t the case.

As for Foden not asking for anything or playing the long game, that’s understandable. He was born in a family of City fans and he’s a local boy. He knew sooner than later that his chance would come.

Sancho signed for Watford at age 8, left his family house at age 11 in Kennington to board at Harefield academy in Uxbridge. He has always been in a hurry to get things done. He was only 13 years of age when he was playing against boys of 16 years of age at Watford academy.

He was never the type to stay stagnant. He was too ambitious for that and by the time he turned 15, he told Watford he was going to join Man City. So what part of his previous behavioral traits gave City the audacity to keep him waiting in the fringes before sending him to the deep waters?

City should have known he was not going to wait for long - and they should have pushed him to at least appear in a dead rubber game in 16/17, they didn’t and they lost him.



You must be very stupïd to be holding a MEN article as the gospel as per what happened with Sancho. There’s a reason such articles are easily accessible to moröns like you: they are not properly researched.

According to the Athletic, Sancho was already impatient before the contract offer was presented to him. This is why you will never win an argument with me - because you research from junk articles and you use it as a crutch to debate your intellectual superiors.

Get the fück outta my face, you despicable cünt!

Amoto94:
Chelsea’s net spend over the last five years (£230m) has been £392m less than Manchester United (£622m), and £388m less than Manchester City (£618m).

We also have a lower figure in that time than Arsenal (£331m), who’s net spend has been over £100m more.
Copied

patrickmuf:
Pep has outspent his rivals and that's a fact...Net spend...

Illimitable:
Look at this idïot.

You have been lying to us that Sancho’s contract was tied to his promotion. Even after you were told Foden signed his contract in Dec 2018 AFTER he was promoted in the summer of 2017, the penny still didn’t drop for you?

Every young player has an academy scholarship. It’s totally different to what we are discussing. Don’t muddy the waters with your stupïdity. Sancho was offered £30,000 per week contract in March 2017 - you told us that contract was tied to him being promoted - which he turned down.

If the contract was the promotion, how come Foden was promoted before signing his own contract in December 2018? Can you not see the foolishness in your logic?

So let me get this straight - You claim Sancho’s contract in March 2017 was the promotion offer. So Sancho was given an offer before promotion but Foden was given a contract after promotion in 2018?

You are a disgrace to your lineage.

Illimitable:
Football contract isn’t for an MD position. It’s to tie him down for a certain number of years and retain him as an employee.

Sancho was offered a contract - the contract didn’t signify he was being promoted. They were just keeping him in ice for the foreseeable future.

If you have any IQ, you would notice that Diaz & Foden weren’t given any contracts that year but they ended up going for City’s preseason.

In actuality, Foden didn’t sign his contract until December 2018(£30,000 per week). Sancho was offered his contract around March 2017.

A contract is a contract, it’s got nothing to do with being promoted. I brilliantly led you to this cul-de-sac so you can “unalive” yourself in the presence of everyone.

Joe Hugill, Charlie McNeill, Woolstoon all have contracts at Man Utd, they are nowhere near being promoted. Instead of you to sit and learn when your superiors are dropping gems, you are puffing chest like an orangutan.

Illimitable:
Says the plonker that is equating giving contracts to a player to his promotion.

If you are dafter than this, you would be a pawpaw fruit.

Illimitable:
This fool won’t stop exposing himself as an idïot. What sarcasm are you talking about? Sancho had made up his mind before anything was offered.

City offered him a contract and they thought an agreement was in order. Sancho didn’t take the offer because he had made up his mind to move on before then.

You are a disgrace to your lineage.