Jump to content

Now That's What I Call Transfer Rumours! 7


Rich

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Entirely untrue.

 

That's how it seemed. Only noticed them being referred to as united in the last couple of years, well after Man City getting dubbed as "citeh" by other club's fans.

 

Never made any sense calling them "United" anyway, as they're not united. There's two teams in Manchester so not united at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, RobsonsWonderland said:

People need to give Gordon a pre season.

If we are sitting here in a years time fair enough but Eddie does have history of settling players in before they peak.

 

People need to give him time, full stop. Drawing any conclusions now is stupid. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Optimistic Nut said:

Really not keen on Phillips one bit. 

He was first choice on my wish list last  time of asking and still think he would be a phenomenal signing. He looked really gutted (in context of his side just winning the league!) at how little he’d featured/been backed by Pep. Eddie would boost him massively. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Coffee_Johnny said:

He was first choice on my wish list last  time of asking and still think he would be a phenomenal signing. He looked really gutted (in context of his side just winning the league!) at how little he’d featured/been backed by Pep. Eddie would boost him massively. 

 

Phillips would be perfect for you. Tenacious, energetic and technically sound. Having Phillips and Bruno Guimarães as your DM options would be some serious depth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shayve79 said:

 

 

Because they rarely play him as a box to box midfielder.

 

He's usually hiding behind an opposition player, scared shitless over the idea of receiving a pass. He's not a DM. Solskjaer persisted with it for years.

 

He scored 4 goals for Scotland during the last international break. They used him differently.

 

He scored 8 goals (1 might have been taken off him) for United during 20/21. He's not a very good overall player, but he does possess good ball striking technique. His height and physical presence are useful in the opposition box. He's similar to Fellaini.

 

The Fellaini comparison is a pretty good one tbh. He wasn't that good technically either, but he was big and physical, and he got some goals.

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Coffee_Johnny said:

He was first choice on my wish list last  time of asking and still think he would be a phenomenal signing. He looked really gutted (in context of his side just winning the league!) at how little he’d featured/been backed by Pep. Eddie would boost him massively. 

 

Agree, don't understand why people wouldn't want him. I'm guessing wages would be a problem for anyone coming from City and it seems unlikely in general, but I think he'd be great.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, timeEd32 said:

 

Agree, don't understand why people wouldn't want him. I'm guessing wages would be a problem for anyone coming from City and it seems unlikely in general, but I think he'd be great.

 

Questions over fitness as well maybe? Don't know how his availability has been for City since I don't watch them regularly, but he missed a lot of games for Leeds in the Premier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

we already have a better version of McTominay in Longstaff. We should be looking at an upgrade for Longstaff so that he can be a squad player. I can’t think of a single reason to sign McTominay at all, but then I couldn’t for Gordon either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shayve79 said:

 

Until Newcastle become one of the biggest clubs in the world, they're not going to be associated with the word United over Manchester United.

 

Leeds United are known as Leeds. Sheffield are known as Sheffield. West Ham United are West Ham. It is what it is.

 

You've made some good posts, but they are going to land better if you just accept people grimace at referring to them as "United" here. When in Rome and all that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Shayve79 said:

 

Until Newcastle become one of the biggest clubs in the world, they're not going to be associated with the word United over Manchester United.

 

Leeds United are known as Leeds. Sheffield are known as Sheffield. West Ham United are West Ham. It is what it is.

Sheffield are known as Sheffield ? Really ?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which clubs united to become Manchester United?

 

I live in London and I rarely hear people refer to Man Utd and simply 'United'.  The only guy I know who refers to them as 'United' is a Man Utd fan from Manchester so I'll give him a break.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's mainly in the media and Man utd fans themselves and kids who've been fed it on sky. I don't think I know of anyone who was around before the Premier league who calls them that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Eveready said:

Which clubs united to become Manchester United?

 

None.

 

Something to do with them originally representing a small area of Manchester, then deciding they actually represent the whole of Manchester. United...

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Smal said:

we already have a better version of McTominay in Longstaff. We should be looking at an upgrade for Longstaff so that he can be a squad player. I can’t think of a single reason to sign McTominay at all, but then I couldn’t for Gordon either.

I don't want McTominay, but the version of Longstaff you're talking about is the Longstaff Eddie Howe has moulded. The comparison will only work if EH works with McTominay - at the end of 18 months of the same coaching we'd be able to make a meaningful comparison. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Theregulars said:

I don't want McTominay, but the version of Longstaff you're talking about is the Longstaff Eddie Howe has moulded. The comparison will only work if EH works with McTominay - at the end of 18 months of the same coaching we'd be able to make a meaningful comparison. 

Longstaff was this good under Benitez as well. He's always had this level in him. McTominay has not. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Smal said:

Longstaff was this good under Benitez as well. He's always had this level in him. McTominay has not. 

 

He played about 10 games tbf. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...