So why do you think, other than "But Chelsea bid" that Conte wanted Lukaku? When there is a mountain of (non paper linked) evidence, to suggest otherwise. For me, the fact that Emenalo was meeting up with Lukaku and that Conte stalled on his contract until Lukaku signed for United is pretty much all the proof you need.
And why would I want to paint this picture of Conte not wanting Lukaku anyway? I have no motive to do that. Either way, it doesnt make our club look great. Whether they stalled on Lukaku to try drive down the price as Tobes claims () or were infighting about signing him (as I am almost positive was the case) It looks bad on Chelsea either way. Our owner can be a giant ****wad at times.
He got a pay rise in that contract and it is no longer than his old contract, so your 'logic' is that he stalled on getting a massive pay rise? The fact that your DOF met the player is proof that you were interested in him, which you were, that's indisputable. The rest is just your own added narrative, which conveniently removes the idea that United merely gazumped you, and nicked the lad from under your noses.
So basically what happened was this. Conte said he didn't want the player so Chelsea decided to bid for him anyway when they knew they would be snubbed and that they'd have to give Conte a payrise to keep him happy after they put in a bid for a player they knew he didn't want and which would fail. Is Michael Gove in charge at Chelsea?
Well he did, he was offered the contract at the end of the season, and didnt sign it until lukaku went to United. So whether he wanted Lukaku or not, he stalled on "getting a payrise", that inarguable. He was offered the contract on the 19th June. He stalled for a month. I know you have this thing where your club is **** competitively so you like to make out they are financial dynamos as some sort of compensation for them being **** elsewhere, but thats just fantasy Tobes. Chelsea stalled to bring down the price Then made an identical bid after the United deal was 99% done
Or the payrise was compensation for Chelsea failing to get his number one target, Lukaku. Here's some "evidence". Now where's that mirror? https://www.google.co.uk/amp/metro....ailures-as-future-in-doubt-again-6761063/amp/
He was offered a contract. Maybe he only signed when the terms were improved. That's often what happens with contract negotiations. High five!
I believe one of the main reasons for Conte stalling to sign his contract is he wanted to iron out who exactly targets possible transfers. To that aim he was successful, he got the nod from Roman & a hike in salary. Emanelo's days of picking potential players has passed.
Conte was on holiday until early July you doughnut I've no idea what the attempted sarcasm about Everton is supposed to mean, seems I've hit a nerve though. As you're just creating a narrative that allows you to bury the idea that United ****ed your club up the arse over the player. You matched their bid at the death, as you'd not made a ****ing bid to that point, as you thought he was in the bag, as he'd said yes to the move ffs
So he threatened to quit if Chelsea didnt buy Lukaku and then signed immediately after they failed to sign Lukaku? Low five!
Me. Get it? Looks like it was a week after Lukaku officially rejected Chelsea. A week of Conte sulking before the prospect of £19m over two years cheered him up
Yup, I get it Chelsea were willing to lose Lukaku because they didnt want to pay a few extra million, but were happy to give it to the manager as compensation for losing him Sounds legit.
