The mancityfans.net football forum

Today's Daily Fail says

Meanwhile, Real Madrid president Florentino Perez has set aside a £55million budget in his bid to sign David Silva from City.
Sources in Spain say Jose Mourinho would offer Argentina striker Gonzalo Higuain in any possible deal.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... z1yP8ngmCG


Not a lot of anything in this story, but at least they are talking the right sort of figures now.
So £55m....Would you sell?
And would you want Higuian?

I know he had a dip in form for a while, but he is a player who is worth turning up to watch on his own. So no to the cash thanks Maureen.
I'd take Higuain in a deal for a different player than Silva, but as it stands he isn't really needed.

There are a few players in this side that aren't replaceable. Silva definitely tops that list.

Everyone is replaceable & if Silva continued his dip in form then he would be drifting that way, however, I don't think that's the case, but what worries me is that this has all the hallmarks of the underhand tactics Real & Barca use to attract players - if his head gets turned we may have no option, but that would involve astronomical figures ala fake Ronaldo

Dunnylad wrote:Everyone is replaceable & if Silva continued his dip in form then he would be drifting that way, however, I don't think that's the case, but what worries me is that this has all the hallmarks of the underhand tactics Real & Barca use to attract players - if his head gets turned we may have no option, but that would involve astronomical figures ala fake Ronaldo

Real do seem to have a record of getting their own way in these matters. However when Christine went there he was making a lot of noise about wanting to go. Big Dave isn't. It's also worth pointing out that it wasn't the end of the world for the shite and had they used the a fair chunk of the cash to replace him, then they would still be in the top echelons. Dunney is correct to say that everybody is replaceable, they have to be, as it's the nature of football that players come and go.

Dunnylad wrote:Everyone is replaceable & if Silva continued his dip in form then he would be drifting that way, however, I don't think that's the case, but what worries me is that this has all the hallmarks of the underhand tactics Real & Barca use to attract players - if his head gets turned we may have no option, but that would involve astronomical figures ala fake Ronaldo

He is one of the best players to pull on a city shirt. Not for sale at any price!

There are 3 players who could replace him. Messi, Iniesta or Fabregas.

Slim wrote:There are a few players in this side that aren't replaceable. Silva definitely tops that list.

Yaya tops the list. There is no one in the world that can do what he does.

Silva is replaceable (messi or iniesta would do) but I wouldn't want to replace him.

Edmonds says.



NO DEAL

We dont need the money, we need a player of his ability.

If we sold Silva it would send completely the wrong message and also make Real think they can just poach from us. Higuain would not offer us anything that would improve our squad in an area where we need it - we have 4 good strikers already.

A quick counter offer suggesting a swap deal for Ronaldo should put the matter to bed. Problem with Real is they will feed shite to their puppet media for weeks to try to manufacture the idea that a deal is being negotiated, or Silva "really wants to go." City need to put out a short sharp statement to nip it in the bud, along the lines of "Silva isnt for sale, not for any price and wont (real Khaldoun's lips) be going anywhere this summer."

I take it you all realise you're commenting on an article by 'sportsmail reporter' here ?

Ted Hughes wrote:I take it you all realise you're commenting on an article by 'sportsmail reporter' here ?

We all know it is bullshit.

But there is nothing else city related going on except bullshit for the foreseeable so might aswell join in.

Ted Hughes wrote:I take it you all realise you're commenting on an article by 'sportsmail reporter' here ?

It was a bollox based dilemma that's all.

A budget of £55m might well include agents fees and wages, not necessarily the fee we would be offered. Even at £55m surely it would still be NO!

Socrates wrote:A budget of £55m might well include agents fees and wages, not necessarily the fee we would be offered. Even at £55m surely it would still be NO!

The £55 mil has been made up by some geezer who may or may not work for the Daily Fail, but doesn't have the balls to put his name to the story.

Ted Hughes wrote:

Socrates wrote:A budget of £55m might well include agents fees and wages, not necessarily the fee we would be offered. Even at £55m surely it would still be NO!

The £55 mil has been made up by some geezer who may or may not work for the Daily Fail, but doesn't have the balls to put his name to the story.

It'll be a junior reporter mate, some rumour he/she has picked up surfing the web or calling dodging contacts in Spain. Just pointing out that a £55m budget wouldn't mean a £55m transfer fee.

Socrates wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:

Socrates wrote:A budget of £55m might well include agents fees and wages, not necessarily the fee we would be offered. Even at £55m surely it would still be NO!

The £55 mil has been made up by some geezer who may or may not work for the Daily Fail, but doesn't have the balls to put his name to the story.

It'll be a junior reporter mate, some rumour he/she has picked up surfing the web or calling dodging contacts in Spain. Just pointing out that a £55m budget wouldn't mean a £55m transfer fee.

I should imagine £55mil is the imaginary fee, they probably haven't got into imagining the wages yet.

just read somewhere onthe net madrid closing in on modric.

Ted Hughes wrote:

Socrates wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:

Socrates wrote:A budget of £55m might well include agents fees and wages, not necessarily the fee we would be offered. Even at £55m surely it would still be NO!

The £55 mil has been made up by some geezer who may or may not work for the Daily Fail, but doesn't have the balls to put his name to the story.

It'll be a junior reporter mate, some rumour he/she has picked up surfing the web or calling dodging contacts in Spain. Just pointing out that a £55m budget wouldn't mean a £55m transfer fee.

I should imagine £55mil is the imaginary fee, they probably haven't got into imagining the wages yet.

They'd say it was the fee if it was te (imagined) fee. "A budget of" implies the cost in total.

Socrates wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:

Socrates wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:

Socrates wrote:A budget of £55m might well include agents fees and wages, not necessarily the fee we would be offered. Even at £55m surely it would still be NO!

The £55 mil has been made up by some geezer who may or may not work for the Daily Fail, but doesn't have the balls to put his name to the story.

It'll be a junior reporter mate, some rumour he/she has picked up surfing the web or calling dodging contacts in Spain. Just pointing out that a £55m budget wouldn't mean a £55m transfer fee.

I should imagine £55mil is the imaginary fee, they probably haven't got into imagining the wages yet.

They'd say it was the fee if it was te (imagined) fee. "A budget of" implies the cost in total.

I wish these real estate muppets Im dealing with would actually get that through to their thick fucking heads.

On topic , Silva has already stated he doesnt want to go anywhere and seeing as City are financially better off than anyone else along with being premiership champions (I love saying that) then Real will be wasting their time.

Maybe we send out a rumour we have set aside 60mil for fake ronaldo!!!
And see what the spanish twats say to that the fuckers.