Man Utd snap up Carrick
-
its good they bought Carrick,
re-instill some british blood into the man utd squad.
well, he was influential at spurs last season...
he din do well for England,
erm...which English player did well ar?
Haven't Lampard had most attempts on goals in the WC...
but DID NOT even score one??
relax la...the show has just begin.
-
"Manchester United and Tottenham Hotspur can confirm that they have agreed terms for the transfer of the registration of Michael Carrick conditional upon the player agreeing personal terms with Manchester United," read an official statement from United.
Red Devils boss Sir Alex Ferguson has been a firm admirer of the England midfielder for some time and has been trying to bring him to Old Trafford all summer.
A bid of around £10 million was rejected before the World Cup as Spurs coach Martin Jol looked to build his side around Carrick.
However, Ferguson's persistence has finally paid off, Carrick is now set to complete his protracted move to Old Trafford just as soon as he undergoes a medical and agrees personal terms.
Jol has admitted that he was reluctant to let Carrick leave, but did not want to stand in the way of a lifelong dream. "This is a move that Michael wants to make," he explained. "We have given him every reason to stay, but he has asked to be allowed to leave."
United insist the fee for the 25-year-old Geordie is nowhere near £17m. And Fergie hopes Carrick will be involved at the Amsterdam tournament which starts Friday.
But the United chief will NOT be making a second raid on Spurs for striker Jermain Defoe.
He added: “There has not been any interest from us in Defoe. Carrick is the only Tottenham player we are interested in at the moment and I think it will stay that way.” -
its a done deal...
United are expected to complete the signing of Tottenham Hotspur midfielder Michael Carrick today, following the player's medical and agreement of personal terms.
The transfer fee for the classy 25-year-old, as announced on Tottenham's official website this morning, could reach £18.6million
but probably upfront man utd play 12m with the rest based on performance... -
The Guardian poll:
Is Michael Carrick worth £18.6 million?
5% YES
95% NO
Majority of readers there think tt Man U overpaid....
-
I agree that Carrick is overpriced. I rate him at the cost of $7 millon the most. I think what Man utd needs is a change of management. SAF needs to go , the more he upsets essential players , the more they will leave. Already letting go of RVN for only 11 million and getting a replacement of his calibre is hard. Well all I can say is good luck Man utd.
-
Can't you read, upfront 12m with the rest based on performance... If they don't win anything then where got 18m? If he turn out to be another Keane then how? 18 also still cheap considering SWP went for 21m, Shev 30 yrs old went for 30m... worth it or not?Originally posted by weiqimun:The Guardian poll:
Is Michael Carrick worth £18.6 million?
5% YES
95% NO
Majority of readers there think tt Man U overpaid.... -
i think you're being too over sensitive about your precious man utd. cause all that guy did was to post the results of a poll.Originally posted by zocoss:Can't you read, upfront 12m with the rest based on performance... If they don't win anything then where got 18m? If he turn out to be another Keane then how? 18 also still cheap considering SWP went for 21m, Shev 30 yrs old went for 30m... worth it or not?
maybe if you would have wanted to blast people about being blind, you should have aimed it at the voters, not weiqimun. -
Is Carrick worth £18.6m?
Me think not so leh ...... that is the problem when other club know what is your desperation .
Like Liverpool , most clubs knew we need a right winger , and most would squeeze out every penny from the deal .
£10m more like it leh .
-
ya lah...dun shoot the messenger....Originally posted by stellazio:i think you're being too over sensitive about your precious man utd. cause all that guy did was to post the results of a poll.
maybe if you would have wanted to blast people about being blind, you should have aimed it at the voters, not weiqimun.
also, this is reader's poll. u r entitled to yr opinion, they r too! but the majority speaks...i think
personally, i think also overpaid, even with tiered payment scheme.
maybe he can be a great man u player, good luck to him.
n 1 shudn't benchmark chel$ki. otherwise, everythng else also cheap cheap... like u may think starbuck is ok, but i can onli afford 70cents kopi. -
SAF is trying to mend a problem by inventing another problem.
last season, all of us saw a MF that is as soft as a fish belly.
So this transfer market, SAF got MC, but then he sold RVN.
So I believe next year transfer market, we will be looking for a scorer.
The days where MUFC can splash are gone, all are fed back to the US..
when the new season starts, with all players on deck, and after 38 league games, we will then know whether MC is a worthwhile buy.
To me, now the big media who-ha is still how to play ronaldo on english soil without utilising the queens' guards.
No doubt, we will miss RVN, just as we did Stam, Beckham.
But while the ball rolls on, players will come and go.
The tradition of the club goes on. -
Where got over sensitive? You conveniently omit out the actually figure and put the amount that would cost if they win the CL, EPL , FA cup or he gets into the England team as a first team regular... to be honest, if they can win all those things then i think he is also worth more than $18m...Originally posted by weiqimun:ya lah...dun shoot the messenger....
also, this is reader's poll. u r entitled to yr opinion, they r too! but the majority speaks...i think
personally, i think also overpaid, even with tiered payment scheme.
maybe he can be a great man u player, good luck to him.
n 1 shudn't benchmark chel$ki. otherwise, everythng else also cheap cheap... like u may think starbuck is ok, but i can onli afford 70cents kopi.
You don't seem to understand that one have to pay more if you want to buy english players. As a team in England, representing England, it is important to have english base players in your team. It represents not just your team but also your country heritage too. United are prepare to pay more for english players as it has shown in the pass.
Of course you can choose to be like Arsenal no english player around after the sale of cole, but it is a sad way to go for a once proud team full of english players. The team that had the best defence not to mention in other departments of english players and also England's no1 keeper... is now a team of foreigners... Its a sad way to go, only English in name & the butt of jokes all the time across Europe & the world over. Personally if i was an gunner supporter, i would feel disappointed that no fellow countrymen is playing for my team...
On the subject of over-priced, Arsenal paid $5m for a boy that didn't even played a single match in the premiership. He played mostly in the southamton reserve only and he would have gone to another lower club for maybe less than $2m but since its arsenal its $5m. In percentage terms, they over-paid 2 1/2 times for him. In carrick's case, maybe 1 1/2 time but if they don't win, they only pay the 1 without the half so... still ok what.
Irregardless of what you may think, it the price one pay to keep the heritage of the club and obviously, at united they still value theirs unlike the gonners.
And lastly, if you think one shouldn't benchmark with chelsea as i see no reason why not to cos they are also a club and buying from others, How about Chelsea to Chelsea then?
The only english player Chelsea have bought since Mourinho... SWP.
Chelsea paid $12m for Robben
They paid $21m for SWP
Get the point? -
after reading more posts, it seems two things are constant.
1) the selling team will trump up the prices and the buying team pull down the prices.
2) for Carrick to truly cost MUFC 18.6M, then MUFC would be successful for the next 5 seasons. small price. -
yes, it is a joke when Gooners can't field non-english players.
For the English FA, it is a slap on the face.
I feel that they should restrict players not of UK passports to only 3-4 per game. That will allow young English players to have more chance to play and break into EPL.
Currently, the English FA is only interested in killing the goose that lay the golden egg. $$$$$$$. -
Originally posted by zocoss:
1. i nvr accused u of being oversensitive...someone else made the comment(but u appear to be so with your verbage)
Where got over sensitive? You conveniently omit out the actually figure and put the amount that would cost if they win the CL, EPL , FA cup or he gets into the England team as a first team regular... to be honest, if they can win all those things then i think he is also worth more than $18m...
You don't seem to understand that one have to pay more if you want to buy english players. As a team in England, representing England, it is important to have english base players in your team. It represents not just your team but also your country heritage too. United are prepare to pay more for english players as it has shown in the pass.
Of course you can choose to be like Arsenal no english player around after the sale of cole, but it is a sad way to go for a once proud team full of english players. The team that had the best defence not to mention in other departments of english players and also England's no1 keeper... is now a team of foreigners... Its a sad way to go, only English in name & the butt of jokes all the time across Europe & the world over. Personally if i was an gunner supporter, i would feel disappointed that no fellow countrymen is playing for my team...
On the subject of over-priced, Arsenal paid $5m for a boy that didn't even played a single match in the premiership. He played mostly in the southamton reserve only and he would have gone to another lower club for maybe less than $2m but since its arsenal its $5m. In percentage terms, they over-paid 2 1/2 times for him. In carrick's case, maybe 1 1/2 time but if they don't win, they only pay the 1 without the half so... still ok what.
Irregardless of what you may think, it the price one pay to keep the heritage of the club and obviously, at united they still value theirs unlike the gonners.
And lastly, if you think one shouldn't benchmark with chelsea as i see no reason why not to cos they are also a club and buying from others, How about Chelsea to Chelsea then?
[b]The only english player Chelsea have bought since Mourinho... SWP.
Chelsea paid $12m for Robben
They paid $21m for SWP
Get the point?[/b]
2. i do understand english player do cost more..i just dun know why...
3. the club exist to win honours, not to maintain heritage or tradition. u can hv your first 11 all ingerlish players but if they win diddly squat, what's the pt?
4. how did u arrve @ the conclusion tt theo costs 2.5X more than carrick?
5. there is no such word as `irregardless'. only `regardless'. i think a squad tt's capable of winning is what matters, regardless of nationalities. got ingerlish players, ok, good...
6. jus shows tt chel$ki as a club is a blooming idiot, tt's all. -
Considering Carrick cost 18m overall, I think 8m for Pennant is not that bad after all.
-
zocoss always wearing a 360 spike armour
-
ya.. consider pennant gt steve bruce's team relegated....Originally posted by CoolMyth:Considering Carrick cost 18m overall, I think 8m for Pennant is not that bad after all. -
pennant was in jail...Originally posted by tarcki:ya.. consider pennant gt steve bruce's team relegated....
so its not his fault he cannot help birmingham win... -
I never said you did what... i was just starting with a simple reply to stellazio cos i am sure he will see as he is the moderator mah... Nothing wrong rite? If you thought I was referring to you then sorry lah, can?Originally posted by weiqimun:1. i nvr accused u of being oversensitive...someone else made the comment(but u appear to be so with your verbage)
2. i do understand english player do cost more..i just dun know why...
3. the club exist to win honours, not to maintain heritage or tradition. u can hv your first 11 all ingerlish players but if they win diddly squat, what's the pt?
4. how did u arrve @ the conclusion tt theo costs 2.5X more than carrick?
5. there is no such word as `irregardless'. only `regardless'. i think a squad tt's capable of winning is what matters, regardless of nationalities. got ingerlish players, ok, good...
6. jus shows tt chel$ki as a club is a blooming idiot, tt's all.
Since you say you understand English players do cost more but you just dun know why. So i just explain to you only what, the teams in the EPL represent english football, they also represent England, so it is important to have English base players. It represents not just your estate team, but also your country.
If Chelsea or Arsenal wins the CL, people in England will feel more proud with a Chelsea win cos they have a few English born players in their team, something they can relate to but in Arsenal's case, probably their supporters and a few others only as ordinary Englishmen wonÂ’t be too proud that a team without any fellow countrymen won it.
This is not something only special to England, even in Singapore, The passed few years the Singapore football team when to play with 2 to 3 so call new citizen players in the team and people were not happy already calling them foreign talent. They were not happy to see Australians, Africans or an Englishman playing in our team and they even make fun of it like even if they had won, itÂ’s not a win for Singapore football.
Yes, clubs exist to win honours, but it is also important to maintain heritage and traditions as much as it is possible. Cos fans feel passionate of such thingsÂ…
Nobody is asking for all 11 to be home grown players but at least a few will help, like 3 or 4. You ask yourself would you be proud if our Singapore team was made up of Australians, Africans and other foreigners? Obvious not rightÂ… you will probably be a shame of the team knowing they didnÂ’t grow up or develop their talent in this country in the first place and should they win anything, others will always make jokes about it too. Like we donÂ’t even have our own talent must get foreigners to do the job for us.
As to theo, I think you have mistaken what I said… if you go see it again you will know. I didn’t say he costs 2.5X more than carrick, I said he cost 2 ½ more than his actual value and Carrick 1 ½ more than his actual value.
And on the why Chelsea paid $12m for establish Robben and willing to pay $21m for new boy SWP, ThatÂ’s the point I am trying to say, Chelsea has a shrewd CEO and manager who knows how to run the club and they are certainly no idiots to such deals, they might probably have weight the pros & cons to pay such huge amount for a player and the importants of having english base players in their teamÂ… They are trying not just to build a football team but a football club so having home base players will attract fans to their club and in the long run, your fans base will grow bigger that is why they are also willing to spend $25m on A cole tells you their emphasis on home base players.
Btw, I have read a number of your post before and you seem like a nice guy so hope no hard feeling ahÂ… cos I never take it too serious here, just exchange of opinions thatÂ’s all. Anyway, thanks for your word correction I seem to have forgotten it, I will also return one to you. I think there is no such word as verbageÂ… if my dictionary serve me correctly. -
It is still proven that English players transfer fee are inflated.
-
verbageOriginally posted by zocoss:Anyway, thanks for your word correction I seem to have forgotten it, I will also return one to you. I think there is no such word as verbageÂ… if my dictionary serve me correctly.
/ver'b*j/ A deliberate misspelling and
mispronunciation of verbiage that assimilates it to the word
"garbage". Compare content-free. More pejorative than
"verbiage".
source: dictionary.com
this is not made up from me, hoh... -
SAF overpaid for lot of players.
wenger is probably the most prudent buyer among the top managers. -
sorry i did not keep my words...Originally posted by zocoss:I never said you did what...............................................................................................................................serve me correctly.
1. blame stella...
2. epl doesn't technically represent english football, not in this day and age. if the e FA wants to be insular, they cld have kept a foreign quota. the thing is, they didn't. it's an `open' market so to speak. it's a commercial entity. and tt alone cannot logically explain why ingerlish costs more especially they suck @ the international level...
3. club & ctry affiliation r 2 completely separate matters. the core supporter of england are the english (sgporean ingerland supporter are all pseudo ones) whereas for west ham, the supporters can be all over the world. no geographical or constitutional boundaries to distinguish them. so cannot compare....
4. if sg's foreign talent delivers, i am sure sgreans will lap them up. look @ t-tennis (the pioneer batch from china) and the chaps who climbs mt. everest. they were heroes, nvr mind tt they come for the $ ( the chinese i.e). $pore gahmen too happy to hand them cheques for doing us proud. problem is, sg football sucks, even with the `so-called' talents. surely everyone `pui chao nua' (i know english dick dun have this word) becos they are paid good $ and deliver nothing.
5. club fans will be passionate if the clubs win honours, whether w local or foreign players. ask any arsenal fan if they think they successes are any less valuable becos their team all eu paspot. u know the answer alredi. as a reds fan myself, i also red eye. but i wun go arnd diminishing their achievement becos they got only half an english player in their squad. a champion is a champion...
6. ok, mistaken abt the theo bit. still, yr valuation of theo being 2.5x more ex is all subjective... what's your basis and assimptions of his original valuation?
7. of cos chel$ki r blooming idiots. they have overpaid for EVERY single players they bought since Abro came on board. jus becos they can afford it doesn't negate the fact tt they are being suckered by everyone queueing to mk an extra buck off them.
8. see my last post.
the feelings r mutual... no ill intention on my part also... -
Originally posted by weiqimun:
I know verbiage but not verbage... So i guess you created a new word lah... as there is no such word as verbage officially yet...
[b]verbage
/ver'b*j/ A deliberate misspelling and
mispronunciation of verbiage that assimilates it to the word
"garbage". Compare content-free. More pejorative than
"verbiage".
source: dictionary.com
this is not made up from me, hoh...
[/b]
Anyway, this isn't the point. so are you much clear on my reasons? -
`verbage' got more punch and oomph than `verbiage'. useful when cannot win argument....Originally posted by zocoss:I know verbiage but not verbage... So i guess you created a new word lah... as there is no such word as verbage officially yet...
Anyway, this isn't the point. so are you much clear on my reasons?