I don't know that he's on 250k but I reckon he's on a very good screw. That's what he was playing for. Most United fans I know hate him for it.
You didnt read it did you? Cahill didnt cost much more than £6million did he? Was it £7million. Therefore you can get layers for that sort of sum. Both United and City pulled out due to the £6million demanded by the agent, now has Fergie rang Mancini and said, back me up on this one Bob? I dont think so. It may well be the case though.
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/s...ngered-by-failure-to-land-lucas-moura?cc=5739 3rd paragraph. Thats Fergie.
They seriously the best you have? I said VIDEO evidence UIR. If I don't believe the Guardian/Telegraph I'm sure as **** not going to believe 'tribalfootball' It was ESPN who said 6m, not Fergie in my eyes, even them quoting him would've made it a little more believable but they just said 'Ferguson has already alleged that the agent fees for the Hazard deal were worth £6 million, which clearly prohibited securing the Belgian winger." Key word alleged
You dont know many then. Rooney is on £180k according to our accounts, £70k less than the media reported. He was offered a £180k contract before he kicked off about our lack of ambition and he signed the same contract. Its very much possible it was all a stunt to get transfer funds. Something discussed at large by United fans as it all happened far to quickly and seemed staged. Of course thats just a rumour though. Would you put it past Fergie though?
Soccernet is a very very good source, far far better than the 2 you quoted considering its one of the number on football news outlets in the world Will give you the tribal football link but they do get it from other sources, in this case the Daily Fail. You asked and I supplied, I see no issue here
Soccernet may well be reliable, but not in this instance for me. Read what I editted, they didn't quote fergie, simply wrote their own line. You did not supply what I asked though mate (video evidence). Honestly, I will happily admit defeat if you can provide evidence that we paid Hazard's agent 6m or near it.
Not everything is video'd pal, managers have written press conferences aswell as video ones. Also the report was just covering its arse I think, saying alleged rather than a definite 'he said'. You know what the press are like.
I think we all know its true but lets wait til November just to confirm it. Clearly the desperate denials mean its of some concern to you so I hope its nowhere near £6million but if I am honest I wouldnt bet the money of my most hated foe on it!
When have I ever said that I am denying it? I said that I don't know and neither do you. As I will say yet AGAIN. You don't know that we paid 6m. What part of that don't you understand?
Who gives a ****, why does everything have to turn into a pissing contest, so what of Chelsea have paid massive fees to agents good on em they did what needed to be done to get their man. We sound bitter that they did taking some sort of moral high ground, I'd wager the only reason we don't is because we can't afford too. We are reliant of a player wanting to play for us.. Chelsea are run and owned by a **** but he's their **** why should they care that he is pissing his money up the wall on **** players and their agents good on him, he is doing what he deems necessary to improve his team. We are managed by a Scottish **** an I can see why fans of other clubs don't like him, I wouldn't like him if he wasn't our Scottish **** ..
Call me old fashioned my mate but don't you see that the money agents steal takes money out of the game of football? No? Ah well. We take a moral high ground against it and I for one am delighted. We weren't being held to ransom by agents long before we became skint. Shame the clubs can't show solidarity on this.
Agents are there in every sport round the world whether it's right or wrong in my opinion is irrelevant .. It's a free Market under free Market conditions.. Money talks if they agent gets his player more money he is doing his job. He can't drive up the amount a club is willing to accept.. That's the club who say what they want .. If the individual player has a contract with an agent that he gets x amount of a fee then who's fault is that the onager or the agent spotting a talent representing him probably playing the Market as in the clubs interested to earn him more money.. Is it the agent that wants 45m for modric? The players are the ****s and the clubs with the cash are willing to piss it up the wall..
