When somebody says something that is patently wrong, I'm not going to pat them on the head and humour them - I'm going to tell them that they're wrong, I'm going to tell them why they are wrong, and I'm going to hope they take this on board and don't come back and repeat the exact same nonsense a second, a third, a fourth, and a fifth time And that's the problem with a chunk of Spurs' fanbase: they need to be grabbed by the scruff of the neck and shaken, because they simply don't support the version of Spurs that exists in the real world, they support one with the finances of Chelsea, the prestige of Barcelona and the stewardship of ***in from Oliver Twist, and to be blunt I have well and truly had it with that subset of our supporters this season because literally everything they have whined and complained for, from spending big to sacking Poch to hiring Mourinho, has been given to them and yet what are they doing? Whining and complaining even ****ing louder Let's take you for an example: Bruno Fernandes simply has to wake up in the morning and you're whining and complaining about how he woke up that morning for Man Utd and not us (but, no, we shouldn't be comparing ourselves to other teams all the time as that lacks ambition...) and you simply refuse to listen when it's been explained to you by more than one poster that a.) We bid for Fernandes last summer b.) Sporting tried playing the same game of transfer window chicken that Marseilles did with Batshuayi, only nobody else bid c.) Not only did Man Utd not have the cash to pay Fernandes' £87m release clause, their final bid still comes in below that figure d.) The terms that took Fernandes to Man Utd were actually less favourable to Sporting than those we offered - especially now, as it will take at least a year longer than anticipated to trigger the appearance and goals clauses, and that's without force majeure getting involved Or let's take you bringing up Mbappe a few comments ago, by going back to one of KH's earlier comments shall we? The one where he talks about Liverpool putting glory before profit by investing in their squad - which conveniently omitted the part about how, to sign van Dijk, they had to sell Coutinho to Barca for over £100m (in other words, they put profit before glory in making sure they balanced the books when signing van Dijk...oops!) - because I have to ask the simple question: if you really want us to sign Mbappe, which one of Kane or Son are you happy to see us sell in order to do so? Because that's the reality. It's not "lacking ambition" to understand that paying money that we don't have for a player is not a bold approach that will reap rewards, it's mortgaging the club's future even though that future is uncertain because if The Sheikh Mansour Team can't buy the league every single season why the hell does anyone think that a club without their resources spending like they have them have any chance of not going belly up?
All the Maths is there for us all to see...not just you Mr Levy(HBIC) Ive given Levy praise when he’s earned it and now he gets something different...which is much more balanced than someone who hero worships with tunnel vision no questions asked embarrassing stuff
I think people should challenge views not people and I don't think you should be called a cretin because of your views. The reason that @humanbeingincroydon is taking exception is, however, that your views are not consistent with the real world....indeed most people who are anti ENIC or Levy suffer from the same issue. There us literally no way that you can maximise profits from a football club without also maximising the number of matches won. Because all income comes from fans and fans prefer to see winning teams. It is completely fair to criticise decisions made by the club and discuss the priorities. But to say they are prioritising profits over trophies is accusing them of the impossible and simply shows that you lack understanding.
Alternatively, maybe the Lunatic Fringe don't have a clue what they're whining and complaining about? Seriously, try and find one, just one of them on Twitter or Reddit, who has even suggested that what the team needs is a new DM - which is patently obvious to anyone whose watched our central midfield treated like a free stretch of motorway with the speed cameras switched off by plenty of teams this season - yet instead they're convinced that what the team needs is yet another AM, as if that's the solution to central midfield getting overrun Also, stop picking fights with Worzel Gummidge, since you seem intent on having one straw man argument after another - case in point, you;re now talking about a version of me that doesn;t exists, while by complete coincidence failing to address a single point that I made Embarrassing stuff...
Tell a lie often enough and it will be true. NOT IN THIS CASE HBIC. a.) We bid for Fernandes last summer - you did but unsuccessfully and not what they wanted b.) Sporting tried playing the same game of transfer window chicken that Marseilles did with Batshuayi, only nobody else bid - Fair enough no sale c.) Not only did Man Utd not have the cash to pay Fernandes' £87m release clause, their final bid still comes in below that figure d.) The terms that took Fernandes to Man Utd were actually less favourable to Sporting than those we offered - especially now, as it will take at least a year longer than anticipated to trigger the appearance and goals clauses, and that's without force majeure getting involved c and d together - - Their bid is more than yours when taken into account add ons that were realistic 1. Man U overall offer is 67.6m. Yours was 58m total. Maths tells me 67.6 is higher than 58. 2. Man U initial fee is 47m GBP. Yours was 45m EUROS. Not only is 47 bigger than 45, GBP is stronger than the Euro 3. 18m of your expected bonuses included you to win the league when you haven't done it in half a century isn't realistic (give or take a few years) or the champions league when you have never won it. I'd rather have Man U's appearance and goal clauses than yours thank you very much. It's entirely logical that their added bonuses are better. now not only are you peddling this myth in multiple threads, by my right i shouldn't humour you and i should insult you instead but thankfully i won't do that because i can see you are not in a good place right now.
1.) My first two bullet points covered this: we bid, Sporting took the piss. For some reason it's a surprise to some people that we didn't go back 2.) The fee is considerably less than the release clause. 47 is less than 87, after all.. 3.) And £47m of the fee was...oh, right, money paid upfront for a player who didn't have a release clause, offered by a club who have twice challenged for the title in the past five years who had also recently appeared in a Champions League final Easy enough for you to understand?
i see, a boris special, you mean to say that man united offered more than you but offered less in percentage of fernandes release clause. So what you are saying is that Man U did offer MORE than spurs and got fernandes. Case closed as to why they got the player.
Ah, good, I get to insult you for the Fernandes stuff Did Man Utd bid for Fernandes last summer? No Did Fernandes have a release clause last summer? No, it was in the contract he signed last September (and, as it needs explaining to you, September comes after August) Do you know the details of Fernandes' sale? Apparently not, as they break down like this: £47m upfront (which isn't the release clause), £4.2m if Man Utd qualify for next season's Champions League, £4.2m in appearance bonuses, £4.6m into his agent's pocket, £12.6m if he wins the Ballon d'Or, and a 10% sell-on clause - all of which is still less than £87m - and there's a reason why I underlined two of those clauses Is there a history of clubs returning to clubs who previously took the piss over transfers? No, which Saido Berahino can tell you all about as he's not doing much else these days So what I'm saying is that a.) It's highly unlikely that Sporting will ever see £12.6m of those add-ons b.) As things stand it's possible that another £4.2m of those add ons could become null and void c.) The fact that Sporting insisted on a 10% sell-on clause looks remarkably like Sporting were making sure they'd get a cut if Fernandes moved to Barca/Los Ladrones before at least £12.6m and potentially £21m of those add-ons are paid - all because they mugged themselves last summer hoping that PSG or whoever would come in at the last minute
Woah - that is a fellow Spurs fan. That language is unacceptable. We all disagree, but only because we want the same thing, but have different ideas of how we get there. I'm sure your post, Kings and my response will all be deleted when the mods see them, but please keep it civil. I have no doubt @KingHotspur wants the best for our team
Fact of the matter is, in Total value, Man United offered more than Spurs did which is probably why they have Fernandes and Spurs did not. Theres no two ways about it, you pay more in total you will probably get the player. No way that you spin it will make Uniteds total offered for Fernandes any less than what Levy offered.
Just lots and lots of Stop insulting people and stop quoting people insulting people. ****'s sake. This childish **** is unacceptable and you know it is. Feel free to PM the mods if somebody's crossed the line.
Fact of the matter is, they didn't: which is why Sporting insisted on the 10% sell-on clause being added, because they wanted a degree of security Also, it's worth pointing out, paying more doesn't necessarily mean you get a player, the problem is fans in a post-Abramovic world are conditioned to thinking that even though it's not the case. Case in point, Arsenal bid £15m for Wanyama while we bid £11m, and in a world where £££ is everything that obviously means he would have been lining up at the Emirates - but in reality he only lined up at the Emirates, for us, during the NLD The reason Man Utd had a free run at Fernandes in January is down to two things: Sporting pissing off suitors last summer when waiting for PSG or whoever to gazump our bid, and Sporting painted themselves into a corner meaning they had to accept the bid even though it was clearly slanted in Man Utd's favour while also being far below the release clause - in other words, last summer they were West Brom when we bid for Berahino, in January they were Taurine FC Salzburg having to bite their lip and accept the equivalent of £2.50 for Erling Braut Haaland
eh? No one needs to PM you it’s on the main Page HBIC acting like a mumbling idiot because others don’t agree with him do not apportion the blame...**** all to do with anyone else he just got like minded responses
Well by my mathematics, 47M (United) is more than 40M (Spurs). Likewise 67M (United) is also greater than 58M (Spurs) For that specific example, Southampton would have preferred 15m but let Wayama go for 11m to you guys BECAUSE wanyama wanted to play for you guys. The deal didn't happen with Sporting because they refused your valuation in the summer. It is sadder than you guys didn't even try to match United in January when Sporting were accepting of a similar offer because arguably you are the better prospects. As for release clauses, they don't mean a thing on paper, plenty of players move below their release clauses if the offer is acceptable. I don't know why you keep referring to the release clause
The posts should have been left up even though it descended into a petty argument and name calling. The cycle will continue and the bullying will probably get worse
I dont think it was name calling...I stand by what I said as it’s what I believe I made valid points HBIC got called out...PNP gone and deleted it all
First of all, we offered £45m Secondly, as I spelled out, it's quite possible that the fee Sporting receive won't reach £67m given the add-ons include £4.2m for reaching next season's Champions League (which may not even take place) and £12.6m for winning the Ballon d'Or, while the £4.2m for appearances has been set back by a year due to the current suspension of football, so as I said it's not outside the realms of possibility that Sporting will only make the initial transfer fee that was, and let's not beat around the bush here, merely £2m more than we offered - and £40m less than the release clause that only came into existence last September - plus 10% of whatever somebody else pays for him In short, Sporting mugged themselves twice - but that's far less embarrassing than reading "Wah wah wah, why are you calling me stupid for posting stupid things?" that some people insist on posting in this thread...
