Well he wanted to leave so yes, against his will. How else do you want me to word it? Let me know and i will.
**** decision by Levy, he’ll get £25m next season as that’s what his contract dictates. In the interim he keeps a player who’s been denied the move he wanted and as you say, is on comparatively poor money compared to his team mates. He should have done a sensible deal with United, but he obviously worked on the premise that you’d eventually crack and pay his £60m fee.
Do you think Spurs will offer Alderweireld a new contract now? He gets a big pay rise and Spurs get to protect their asset and flog him next year?
No transfer request, no strike and no tantrums...all the things players do to force a move so how do you know he wanted a move? you could word it that united tried to get him for less than we wanted and failed. You could say united were too tight fisted to pay the going rate. you could say that united did not think he was worth the money. you could say that united have ****ed up. you could say that spurs thought it was better sell him next summer for £25m as Sanchez will learn from him next season and it was not worth weakening our squad this season. or you could bleat on about us keeping him "against his will" like he's a hostage instead of a footballer being expected to stick to the contract he chose to sign which has made him a millionaire several times over. Only a drama tart would chose the last option... obviously just imo
I’m sure he’ll be offered a new contract, he already has been. Whether he’ll accept or not is another matter.
we did...was apparently offered £130,000 per week last winter or spring but he apparently wants £180,000 per week.
a) he was offered a new contract last winter/spring worth £130,000 per week and is said to be currently on £65,000 per week plus bonuses which take him closer to £80,000. b) by not selling we "lose" £25m (if it was true united were offering £50m) next year but in the mean time we keep a good player and do not strengthen united. c) If we sell we are slaughtered for being a selling club (happened last year with Walker) and when we don't we are accused of keeping players against their will or being greedy...so tbh **** what others think. d) why should we do a "sensible" deal with united or Jose? United have negatively affected us several times by tapping up players... most notably with Carrick and Berbatov. They didn't give a **** about spurs (why should they?) just about doing whatever they need to get their player. When Jose was Chelsea manager he did similar. We do not need to be sensible with United. We need to do what's best for us. I genuinely find it fascinating that people think we should have sold to united...it's almost as though us not doing so has proved them wrong after they were convinced he'd be going
Keeping a player who wants away rarely proves to be a prudent decision, especially when their contracts are running down. My view is that by asking an unrealistic fee you’ve not done what’s best for you, so we’ll agree to differ.
All Utd had to do was meet our asking price and he'd have gone. We didn't block a transfer, we set a fee and no one matched it. Utd probably could've offered a swap for Martial as well, he don't wanna be at Utd, Jose don't want him either, Poch supposedly really likes Martial... It would've been a deal both managers would've liked. The only people Toby should be pissed with is Utd, not Spurs.
What was this asking price by the way, out of interest? If it was ludicrously high, given we know he can leave for very little soon, I'd suggest the only person he be pissed off with is the person setting the fee, not United for not thinking he is worth it. Could be a blessing in disguise all round this, you lot are clearly chuffed he's stayed, despite the repeated assertion he's not first choice anyway and is a crock and past it, and we have enough centre halves in our squad to work with anyway so best just get on with it. Everyone wins.
