Jump to content

The old Man Utd Thread


ThePixelbarks
 Share

Recommended Posts

His people arranged for the leak to the press, I don't know how many more times we're going to have to say that. He set this chain of events into motion.

What I meant was that this seems very similar to the Ronaldo situation in that they (agent and player) were leaking they wanted to leave, but there was no public washing of laundry there was there? (I genuinely can't remember). They just denied it and sorted it out behind closed doors, whereas with this one they seem to have decided to take it public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Riiiiiight.

Vidic corrects Sun story

Story updated 22/10/2010, 09:50

Nemanja Vidic has spoken to ManUtd.com regarding an incorrect story in Friday's edition of The Sun newspaper.

The United captain has been misquoted, making it appear that he was talking about Wayne Rooney. In fact, the word Nemanja used in an interview with reporters following the Bursaspor match was 'Rumour' - not 'Rooney' - and his quote should have read as follows: "Rumour is going around and talking about the bad playing, or something happening around the club with the Glazers, it is not good for the players and not good for the team."

Nemanja told us on Friday morning: "I think it's clear what I said. We are just trying to focus on our game and do the best we can individually.

"There are some quotes from me in newspapers which have nothing to do with me. I am just saying this is between Wayne and the club and like the other players, I am just hoping they sort it out and Wayne is still a Manchester United player.

"What they have written in The Sun is not true."

The incorrect quote originally appeared on the Daily Mail's website, dailymail.co.uk, on Thursday but this was amended in the evening once the error had been pointed out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you watch the clip on SSN's site he clearly says rumour though. I'll find the link if you want, it's in a montage of clips with Fletcher, Evra and Vidic, I saw it yesterday and it's from after the Burasasasasasasapor game.

Highlight is when Evra is asked about will Rooney play again. To paraphrase:

"I don't know, I don't pick the team, I hope so. I'm not Alex Ferguson, I am only Patrice Evra".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I was looking into a field and I saw a cow, and I thought 'it's a better cow than the one I've got in my own field'. It's a fact. Right? However, I guess it didn't really work out that way. I realised it was probably the same cow that I knew was just as good as my own cow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Highlight is when Evra is asked about will Rooney play again. To paraphrase:

"I don't know, I don't pick the team, I hope so. I'm not Alex Ferguson, I am only Patrice Evra".

:wub:

We should sell Rooney and put Paddy up front IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know his employer didn't pay for him. I was pointing out that Rooney's situation is not the same as his for many reasons, the transfer fee being one of them.

I don't know what the effect of abolishing transfer fees would be. I just think it's a massive leap to call footballers slaves because they don't quite have the same mobility between jobs as, say, secretaries. It is obvious to them before they sign these contracts with huge wage packets that there are going to be ripples of discontent if they leave without their employers' consent before seeing out the contract that they signed. Calling them slaves sounds hysterical.

I did say that calling footballers slaves was crass (which yes, I do think it is), though I was just referring to a comment a footballer recently said (I can't recall who). But your comment (bolded) isn't correct, is it? We have had many examples in the past (from Holloway himself) where he said "the club owns them". How is that not slavery? There have been varying degrees of slavery throughout history, of course, and some were treated well.

As I said, I am well aware that the transfer fee changes expectations, but you don't think buying and selling people (for that's what it is for a player in contract) is odd, in whatever context?

And besides, there are plenty of jobs that earn far greater rewards than footballers, but you don't get transfer fees between corporations, do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When he starts scoring the fans won't give a shit, and the people working at the club are professionals and know they have to put up with him, because he's just that good. Really it won't affect anything.... except Rooney's wage packet of course.

It really didn't have to come to this, though. The club knows that Rooney would have plenty of suitors if he wanted out, I don't get how involving the media helped anyone. Apart from SAF, who's now had a very public display of his continuing control of affairs at United. As some of you have said, that might not be how it happened, but that's how the fans will (by and large) see it.

This my cynical take on events today; that this was somehow orchastrated by SAF to demonstrate he's the big daddy of it all. I realise that's unlikely, but at the same time I wonder what would have been said yesterday/today that wouldn't just 2 months ago.

It's odd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Football clubs don't own a player. They do hold their registration though, and in a transfer that is what they are actually selling, the registration.

Ian Holloway says the club owns them - quite animatedly too. Not the registration, the person. I'm just using his terminology, but nobody ever talks about the registration - in the same way when you buy a game, most people think they own the code, not purely the disc it came on. Again, putting it into the context of trading people, it is still odd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. I saw his rant, it was completely from the heart but I didn't agree with a word of it.

Yeah, he's passionate, no doubt, but also wrong in this instance. He talks about loyalty and respect, but just look at some of the posts in this thread since the contract news has come out - along the lines of "he's disrespected the club/fans but I'm glad he hasn't gone".

Fans are just as fickle and disloyal as players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did say that calling footballers slaves was crass (which yes, I do think it is), though I was just referring to a comment a footballer recently said (I can't recall who). But your comment (bolded) isn't correct, is it? We have had many examples in the past (from Holloway himself) where he said "the club owns them". How is that not slavery? There have been varying degrees of slavery throughout history, of course, and some were treated well.

As I said, I am well aware that the transfer fee changes expectations, but you don't think buying and selling people (for that's what it is for a player in contract) is odd, in whatever context?

And besides, there are plenty of jobs that earn far greater rewards than footballers, but you don't get transfer fees between corporations, do you?

Well, that's just Holloway misusing the term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Berbatov and Hernandez seem like a really promising partnership. They're always looking to see where the other is. If Chico starts on the left, with Berba in the middle and Nani out wide, they're all smart enough to interchange positions and this could be devastating. They've got goals in them for sure. Weird that Anderson isn't even on the bench.

*edit*

That goal was just sexy. 60+ mins left though, got to start controlling this game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.