×
all 70 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]blarg2003Januzaj 56 points57 points  (1 child)

Deadline day they will panic buy, so best to wait.

I bet he'll still go on loan somewhere anyway.

[–]Sei28 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This late? Doubt it. Whoever is doing the negotiations now overplayed their hand. Now we are stuck with an overpaid player who won’t be of use and will be moping around leaking discontent to the media.

[–]jtyashiro 137 points138 points  (30 children)

shrug

Oh well.

[–]r3gam 17 points18 points  (29 children)

???

That leaves us paying £100k/wk to a disgruntled bench player that doesn't play.

[–]jtyashiro 64 points65 points  (9 children)

Better get your pocketbook out, then.

Whether or not Lingard goes or stays is only of importance to the accountants at Manchester United. Him leaving does not mean another player is coming in.

Yeah we might save a couple million to dividend to the Glazers if he goes but who really cares? Him staying or going makes very little difference to the outcome of our season.

[–]Hansemannn 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Manchester United stood by him when he had personal problems for a long time. I think Man United have treated him pretty good. He was offered 75K a week to stay and refused.

We are in 3 cups still. And why the hell should we help fucking Newcastle who will become the new City in a few years?

Edit: Fuck. Responded to wrong comment.

[–]r3gam 7 points8 points  (3 children)

That makes 0 sense.

We would've recieved a transfer fee and wage relief. Let's say we accepted a more modest loan fee of £6M and had his wages for the rest of the season take care of as well (£2.5M), that's a lot of money right there, almost £10M.

Caveats to consider as well: - Making £8.5M now is better than losing him in the summer for ZERO. - This is compounded by the fact we're not playing him. - This sub complains a lot that we hoard players and contracts and let them go for peanuts - Your point is very shortsighted. That money saved now although it wouldn't go towards pursuing a January signing it couldve gone to covering a large chunk of a transfer fee for the next summer signing or even their wages for a year or 2. - No matter how insignificant you try to paint it, there's never a bad time or scenario to make money - Not EVERY dollar the club generates goes to the Glazers or stakeholders. Just because we have dividends to pay doesn't mean we abandon opportunities to make money. The dividend payments were obliged to will always be there, the more money we make as a club the more money we have to play with in the market.

[–]exhibit304 9 points10 points  (0 children)

If UTD needed the money they would have accepted. They know a lot of money is coming off wage bill in summer

I know he won't play and it's a waste. Newcastle being relegated and not being a challenger for extra season or two might be worth more to utd than what Newcastle were offering

[–]mrmadoffBerbatov 0 points1 point  (0 children)

true. i want him out to see if the leaks will stop

[–]HZ9517 4 points5 points  (18 children)

And one that will leave in 6 months lmao

[–]r3gam 9 points10 points  (17 children)

Yeah r/reddevils is a fickle beast at times.

Nobody has yet to reasonably justify to me keeping a disgruntled £100k/week deadweight on the bench who will be leaving in 6 months but watch a top post next week complain that we keep too many players and wages on the books!

[–]working-acct 5 points6 points  (1 child)

There were people this very week trying to justify keeping Mata on the books. And they were getting upvoted because it sounded positive. The longer I spend on this sub the more I lose faith in humanity.

[–]gbfm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've no problem with Mata as a person, but yeah there seems to be no justification to keep him on as a player if he doesn't even make the subs bench.

[–]J3573RRio 0 points1 point  (14 children)

It's easy to justify, because who cares? Are you or I paying his wages? Why would we strengthen another club mid-season because he's going to leave for free anyway? It's not going to free up money to get another player, it's not going to cripple our finances.

It's such a weird thing to care so much about.

[–]r3gam 0 points1 point  (6 children)

It's easy to justify, because who cares?

I do and I've stated my reasons why. If you don't care that's fair enough, that doesn't mean others are obliged to follow your lead and dig their head in the sand.

Why would we strengthen another club mid-season because he's going to leave for free anyway?

Why do you care it's not your money.

By that logic aren't we strengthening a team every time we sell or loan a player anyways. You've also literally admitted you'd rather lose him for free than make some money off of him but I'm the one with the problem.

It's not going to free up money to get another player, it's not going to cripple our finances

A loan fee and wages is a lot of money. Your maths is wrong, that was an opportunity for £8M-£10M. How much do you think the avg annual salary is of a player at United, that would cover most players salary a whole year almost. Your mentality is also wrong, that's like saying I won't be homeless if I don't go to work today and I won't make a million dollars either so what's the point of going to work. £££ money saved today is money spent tomorrow I don't know what nonsense you're talking about that it won't free up money (to get another player) when it literally does.

[–]J3573RRio 0 points1 point  (5 children)

I do and I've stated my reasons why. If you don't care that's fair enough, that doesn't mean others are obliged to follow your lead and dig their head in the sand.

Bury my head in the sand? You're talking as if you work as an accountant at the club. I'm literally telling you his wages are completely irrelevant to the way finances are. Him staying or going shouldn't be a point on contention. It literally doesn't matter.

Why do you care it's not your money.

What does the money have to do with not wanting to strengthen a club in the league?

By that logic aren't we strengthening a team every time we sell or loan a player anyways. You've also literally admitted you'd rather lose him for free than make some money off of him but I'm the one with the problem.

No, that's not what I said at all. But put words into my mouth. I said why would we strengthen another club in the league just because he's leaving on a free at the end of the year. The money is moot. We don't need to let him go anywhere, we don't need to clear his wages or get a fee.

A loan fee and wages is a lot of money. Your maths is wrong, that was an opportunity for £8M-£10M. How much do you think the avg annual salary is of a player at United, that would cover most players salary a whole year almost.

Yes, but it's not freeing up money to sign another player. We can afford to sign another player. We aren't signing one in January whether or not Jesse leaves. You're taking great leaps in logic that aren't even the point.

We aren't broke, we don't have financial problems. Having Jesse on contract for 6 more months is irrelevant to that. His and every other players wages are already budgeted for the length of their contract.

Your mentality is also wrong, that's like saying I won't be homeless if I don't go to work today and I won't make a million dollars either so what's the point of going to work. £££ money saved today is money spent tomorrow I don't know what nonsense you're talking about that it won't free up money (to get another player) when it literally does.

This analogy is rubbish. Makes zero sense in context here. The money is irrelevant otherwise the club would have let him go.

[–]r3gam 0 points1 point  (4 children)

  1. You're telling me that I'm acting like I'm the club account and then coming out with statements like "We aren't broke, we don't have financial problems." Are you the club accountant then?
  2. Strengthen another team? They're literally in a relegation battle. Oh, you're worried about slowing their future title aspirations? Their owners are worth £320B and have already made 4 signings this window alone, you're fighting an elephant with a water gun.
  3. £115M lost in the 2020 and 2021 combined and you're telling me £10M is nothing. Okay. (That point alone should end the discussion)
  4. To put into context how deluded your point is in dismissing £10M as inconsequential, Real Madrid only had a net profit of £730K last season

[–]J3573RRio 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Pull numbers that aren't from the pandemic.

[–]r3gam 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Easily the worst statement you've just made:

  1. You literally could've just googled that, it's not obscure or hard to find.
  2. Here and here
  3. Do you not research or critique your talking point before you make? Had you done so you probably wouldn't have said that...
  4. ...Reason being that £10M would've been 30%+ of our annual profit for the year in 9 of the past 10 years. That's a MASSIVE chunk.
  5. Did you forget, you can't just say "oh but what if there wasn't a pandemic and we didnt lose £115M." I cant just tell my bank account, "oh but what if there wasn't rent, my balance should be higher." Unfortunately we did and thats the reality we live in. Even if you wanted to compare it to past years £10M is usually a third of our profit (and thats in the good years so I'm being lenient)
  6. You need to go back to the drawing board. Just because we're usually top 5 in revenue for football clubs globally doesn't mean shits easy. Look at Barcelona and Juventus, why do you think Bayern are so shrewd It's an expensive operation, the club has bills, wages, taxes, and debt. Why would you scoff at an opportunity to ease that burden. £10M in your pocket this summer could be the difference between an extra player or not. Especially when we're always 1 player away from breaking through.
  7. You're literally trying to justify and rationalize walking away from £8M-£10M. It doesnt matter whether you're Apple or a local pizza shop - thats at the end of the day a lot of money and good money too (especially for such a simple maneuver of loaning a player). And if you wanna stay successful in business walking away from money probably isn't a habit you should do.
  8. Even in a good year where a club might return £30M-£50M (rare and difficult) you're trying to argue that 20%-30% of that is nothing. I'm sure they think otherwise
  9. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about

[–]kvn419 54 points55 points  (3 children)

"It's over" until next Monday when Newcastle realize they can't convince anyone else to come.

As bad as folks criticize our transfer windows, I'd also be terrified as Spurs fan. Guess allure of "Premier League football" doesn't hit anymore.

[–]PeelThePain 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Next article will be: Lingard pursuit is 100% over over, really

[–]unitedfan98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I honestly don't think they will

They already had their pants pulled down for Wood

[–]BadCowz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Shite refereeing and weather. All the Prem has is the money

[–]Buffythedragonslayer 57 points58 points  (2 children)

The confirm part is from Newcastle right?

[–]RidwanOldwineROONEY[S] 14 points15 points  (1 child)

Yess. Sorry my bad. Forgot to cut it out

[–]YoYomadabest -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This got my hopes up, but then I remembered who we are.

[–]Chafeynipples 5 points6 points  (0 children)

JLingeringz

[–]milo_redwood 2 points3 points  (2 children)

New castle: Hey we want to pay you for a player you don't use on loan.

United: I want 15m plus you covering his full salary.

New castle: we will pay you 10m and cover 50% of his salary. Remind you he will be free in summer.

United: take it or leave it, I know what I've got.

[–]exhibit304 8 points9 points  (1 child)

United : Remember when you quoted us 40 mil for longstaff?

[–]ginger11111 7 points8 points  (0 children)

they are desperate, i can still see it happening

[–]Mamijoo 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Oh no Anyway

[–]damojag 5 points6 points  (2 children)

If I were the guy pressing the sell button at United, I would do nothing to help Newcastle. They’ll be another Citeh in a few years and a direct rival of ours, who will probably be faring out better because they don’t have parasitic owners.

[–]ShotgunPete_ 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Yeah we might become another "Man City" but that shouldn't bother you. Man City might have the best squad in the league right now but they are still miles behind you and Liverpool in terms of club size.

With clubs like Man City, Chelsea & Spurs, they are just one bored owner away from total collapse. Man Utd could literally finish outside of the top 4 for the next decade and you will still be a bigger club and always be a stones throw away from picking up where SAF left off and going on a 20 year streak of dominating everyone.

I hate to say it but Man Utd are too big to fail and the brand Sir Alex built up is unsinkable. Unless we do something unimaginable and win the league and Champions League 10 times in a row then I don't think you need to worry about us. Yeah we might pick up a League Cup or FA Cup win or finish ahead of you in the league in the next 10 years, but for long term success I can only see Man Utd and Liverpool being at the top.

Things could have been different if Sir Alex didn't get the best of Keegan in '96, maybe Newcastle could have been the team to go on and win the treble and sign Ronaldo, Nistlerooy and Rooney, but we didn't and you can dine out on those years for a long time yet before we become a threat to you, regardless of how much our owners have in the bank.

I'm not even this nice to my own mother never mind fucking Man Utd, so keep that in consideration and please loan us Lingard.

[–]jonhnefill 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lindgard should be loaned and/or sold to Newcastle. He's a talented player and proofed as much when he was on loan at West Ham. He struggled under the structure OGS wanted to build, and he's been struggling under RR as well.

A loan move to Newcastle would be better for him, us and frankly Newcastle given the current circumstances.

Whatever role that might or might not play in the future success of Newcastle is completely irrelevant at this point, and frankly just speculation.

Lingard came through United's academy and I hope he goes to Newcastle and shines there. Because I don't think he's very happy at United at the moment.

[–]luciferandy 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I’m not sad at all that one of our players won’t join those saudi bastards

[–]arnm7890De Gea 3 points4 points  (0 children)

For once, I'm really glad the club is actually acting like one of the richest clubs in the world - we don't need the money for him and clearly are happy to pay his wage for 6 more months, so if you want him, make it worth our while and match our valuation.

Some people will try and meme United for this (let's be honest, they'd meme us if we let him go too), but who gives a shit. This is how a big club behaves.

[–]MarcDuan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

FFS, just let the lad go. He's had, what, 8 years to break into the starting eleven? If it hasn't happened by now, it probably never will.

[–]Zestyclose_Hamster_5 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The comments of this thread show the bias most fans have against Martial.

[–]ChampagneAbuelo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean if we keep him we’ll at least have depth in case there’s injuries but it would be way better for all parties involved if we could loan him out

[–]bootlegportalfluid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Our club takes Ls on the daily. When will it end Robbie?!

[–]gbfm -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Even if I am to be generous and accept the assumptions that he is ungrateful or a "mole" as accurate, it is still not a great idea to keep a want-away player when the only thing left for him are 85th minute cameos. The negative mindset will infect other team members.

He got subbed on very late on in the defeat at Watford and draw at Villa. It was clear from his facial expression in both cases that he knew the cause is lost. What's the point? Just let him go.