Here is the place to talk about all things city and football!
by Mase » Fri Jul 11, 2025 7:32 pm
city72 wrote:john@staustell wrote:I read we weren't going for him because Forest are so difficult to deal with, as Spuds have found out.
Can't see our opinion changing
If he has a £60m release clause you wouldn’t be dealing with forest pay the clause and deal with the player on terms
Forest are suing Spurs it looks like.
-
Mase
- Anna Connell's Vision
-
- Posts: 44374
- Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:08 pm
- Location: The North Pole.
- Supporter of: Warnock's Ref Rants
- My favourite player is: Danny Tiatto
by john@staustell » Sat Jul 12, 2025 4:42 am
Mase wrote:city72 wrote:john@staustell wrote:I read we weren't going for him because Forest are so difficult to deal with, as Spuds have found out.
Can't see our opinion changing
If he has a £60m release clause you wouldn’t be dealing with forest pay the clause and deal with the player on terms
Forest are suing Spurs it looks like.
Exactly!
“I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly.”
-

john@staustell
- Roberto Mancini's Scarf
-
- Posts: 20299
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: St Austell
- Supporter of: City
by salford city » Sat Jul 12, 2025 5:17 am
john@staustell wrote:Mase wrote:city72 wrote:john@staustell wrote:I read we weren't going for him because Forest are so difficult to deal with, as Spuds have found out.
Can't see our opinion changing
If he has a £60m release clause you wouldn’t be dealing with forest pay the clause and deal with the player on terms
Forest are suing Spurs it looks like.
Exactly!
Let spurs take the heat for the approach and try to start a bidding war though if he does have a documented 60M clause, why go above it.
Your job is cleaning boots
-
salford city
- David Silva's Silky Skills
-
- Posts: 6042
- Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 4:21 pm
Return to The Maine Football forum
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Mase, Nigels Tackle, nottsblue, salford city, Scatman and 177 guests