manchester united

[Ben]

Rashford can get to fuck, he's fallen out love with football and is just looking for a final payday, imagine been caught up in your own hype that much that you will only leave if you can go to Barcelona.

 

He's like some spoiled Hollywood housewife.

[Froggy]

He's third choice for Barca too after Williams and Diaz.

 

He's also been twerking saying he could see himself as a #9 for Barca, even though he said at us that he doesn't like playing as a #9.

 

He has no shame. His PR team should be along to boost his image soon though.

[Ben]

Man U the gift that keeps on giving 

[Ronson333]

 

[wyn davies]

1 minute ago, Ronson333 said:

 

🤣🤣🤣🤣

[SAK]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c04d25r24vyo
 

Ex player sues them.

 

 

 

Edited July 14, 2025 by SAK

[Froggy]

1 hour ago, Ben said:

Man U the gift that keeps on giving 

 

I mean, Real just paid €50m for him after letting him go to us for free.

 

We made £12m+ from him and he never made an appearance for us. 

[BennyBlanco]

Just now, Froggy said:

 

I mean, Real just paid €50m for him after letting him go to us for free.

 

We made £12m+ from him and he never made an appearance for us. 

 

£12m - that will buy you half a leg of the fullback you need. . . . 

[KaKa]

6 minutes ago, BennyBlanco said:

 

£12m - that will buy you half a leg of the fullback you need. . . . 

 

They just can't stop giving good players away! 

 

This guy spent a year at Benfica and is now at real Madrid for 4 times what they sold him for.

 

And they actually need players in his position! 

 

Just unbelievable.

[Ben]

34 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

I mean, Real just paid €50m for him after letting him go to us for free.

 

We made £12m+ from him and he never made an appearance for us. 

 

Your right, competent coaching would have spotted his talent 

[Froggy]

2 hours ago, BennyBlanco said:

£12m - that will buy you half a leg of the fullback you need. . . . 

 

We have plenty of left backs to be fair. Some young and exciting ones too. 

 

But yes focus on us making £12m in profit for a player who never played for us and not Madrid buying a player for €50m that they let go for free. It's Man United after all, you have to make sure they look the worst. 

[Geordie Ahmed]

5 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

We have plenty of left backs to be fair. Some young and exciting ones too. 

 

But yes focus on us making £12m in profit for a player who never played for us and not Madrid buying a player for €50m that they let go for free. It's Man United after all, you have to make sure they look the worst. 

 

Did they let him go or did he leave after his youth contract expired?

[Froggy]

15 minutes ago, Geordie Ahmed said:

Did they let him go or did he leave after his youth contract expired?

 

What's the difference? 

 

On a side note, anyone want Malacia for £50?

[Geordie Ahmed]

1 hour ago, Froggy said:

 

What's the difference? 

 

On a side note, anyone want Malacia for £50?

 

Big difference, one is the club not rating him whilst the other is the player choosing to run down his contract and leave

 

For example, did Liverpool let Trent go for free or did he run down his contract

[Froggy]

6 hours ago, Geordie Ahmed said:

Big difference, one is the club not rating him whilst the other is the player choosing to run down his contract and leave

 

For example, did Liverpool let Trent go for free or did he run down his contract

 

You think a Spanish youngster let his contract run down so he could leave Real Madrid?

 

Whether or not their contract was run down or they weren't rated, it's still a blunder to let them go for free. Letting Trent go for free was also a blunder.

[Fak]

6 minutes ago, Froggy said:

Letting Trent go for free was also a blunder.

 

They got £10m for him

[SweMag]

11 hours ago, Froggy said:

 

I mean, Real just paid €50m for him after letting him go to us for free.

 

We made £12m+ from him and he never made an appearance for us. 

Could have made a £45m+ profit on him. Really poor transfer business from the people involved. Maybe it was the same people who let Pogba leave on a free and then four years later sign him for £93m.

[Froggy]

2 minutes ago, Fak said:

They got £10m for him

 

€6.2m if you believe the Spanish sources, but wasn't that a loan fee to get him in early so he could play in the CWC for Real? Essentially a loan fee.

[Fak]

3 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

€6.2m if you believe the Spanish sources, but wasn't that a loan fee to get him in early so he could play in the CWC for Real? Essentially a loan fee.

 

Not a freebie then wor kid.

[Froggy]

1 minute ago, SweMag said:

Could have made a £45m+ profit on him. Really poor transfer business from the people involved. Maybe it was the same people who let Pogba leave on a free and then four years later sign him for £93m.

 

This isn't how it works though. We signed a youngster for free who at the time wasn't close to the first team. We couldn't give him the game time he needed so we sold him with a sell-on clause. That's not bad business, that's good business. You can't keep every single player on your books expecting to sell them for their absolute max potential value.

 

It's like saying it's really poor business from Birmingham as they could have made £100m instead of £25m on Bellingham. Or Sporting could have made £80m from Ronaldo instead of £12m. Or Inter could have made £130m instead of £8m from Coutinho.

 

Just simply not how it works. 

 

4 minutes ago, Fak said:

Not a freebie then wor kid.

 

Whatever suits your agenda.

[Froggy]

Also, fair enough on Pogba.  We wanted to keep him the first time and he wanted to leave, but the huge fee and letting him go for free again a second time. Madness.

[Fak]

What agenda? You said they let him go for nowt and then your next post you admit they got €6m for him.

[Froggy]

9 minutes ago, Fak said:

What agenda? You said they let him go for nowt and then your next post you admit they got €6m for him.

 

If you want to be pernickety that's fine. 

 

Trent didn't run down his contract then. Liverpool sold their £75m rated right back for €6m. Awful business. 

[Lotus]

These things happen. Players leave or are let go because there’s a bit too much competition. Their progress isn’t linear. They might have looked a little ordinary compared to some other players but they move on, get some game time and flourish. 
I’d rather see players do that than be caught in the Chelsea on-loan-forever model. That really seems to destroy a lot of decent/good players careers. 

[Froggy]

1 minute ago, Lotus said:

These things happen. Players leave or are let go because there’s a bit too much competition. Their progress isn’t linear. They might have looked a little ordinary compared to some other players but they move on, get some game time and flourish. 
I’d rather see players do that than be caught in the Chelsea on-loan-forever model. That really seems to destroy a lot of decent/good players careers. 

 

Agreed.

 

It would obviously be nice if you had some sort of psychic vision and were able to see who's going to be great and who isn't, but I don't hate letting these guys go as long as there's a sell-on clause.

 

People are trying to spin this as a negative against Man United when we've let a guy who's never played for us go and fulfil his potential, and made £12.6m in the process. Everyone is a winner in this scenario IMO.