Liverpool FC Forum

by **Reg** » Wed Dec 30, 2009 11:08 pm

December 30, 2009

Sir Alex Ferguson resigned to losing £30m Nemanja Vidic to Real Madrid

Nemanja Vidic’s days at Manchester United look increasingly numbered, with Real Madrid confident of signing the Serbia defender in the summer.

Having lured Cristiano Ronaldo from Old Trafford in a world-record £80 million deal in June, Real are planning another raid on the Barclays Premier League champions after identifying Vidic as their first-choice defensive target. Real will face competition from Barcelona and AC Milan, but expect to see off both as they prepare to embark on another frenzied shopping spree after their £220 million outlay last summer.

The Times revealed in November that Sir Alex Ferguson, the United manager, has reluctantly come to accept that he is fighting a losing battle trying to retain Vidic’s services.

It is not entirely out of the question that United will offer the defender a new contract before the end of the season, but they will not allow his present deal — which expires in June 2012 — to run down and will look to cash in if the player wants to leave.

United, who will move to within two points of Chelsea at the top of the Premier League if they beat Wigan Athletic at Old Trafford this evening, are likely to demand at least £30 million for the 28-year-old.

Simon Kjaer, the £15 million-rated Palermo and Denmark centre back, is understood to be figuring prominently in Ferguson’s thoughts. United could also move for Jack Rodwell, 18, of Everton, who is comfortable in midfield or defence, while reports in Spain have linked United with moves for Bruno Alves, of Porto.

Ferguson claimed yesterday that the departure of Ronaldo had not hit his team as hard as some probably hoped and is confident that they will go on a long unbeaten run now that their injury problems are easing.

Although United have lost five league games already this season and have struggled for momentum, they are only one point worse off than they were at the halfway stage last term and have scored 40 league goals compared with 32 after 19 games last season.

Asked if his opponents were disappointed United had not suffered more for the loss of Ronaldo, the United manager said: “It’s possible. Obviously, Cristiano is an unbelievable player and it was inevitable that at some point he was going to leave, but I think we’ve adjusted fairly well to it.

“I think a lot of people were looking at us losing Ronaldo as being crucial and that we wouldn’t be nearly as good, but it’s only a one-point difference in the league.

“You can’t go into the season with the loss of 26 goals, which Cristiano Ronaldo gave us last season, thinking you can improve that, but we’ve had [14] goalscorers this season. They’re weighing in from different positions, so why worry?

“We’ve got the experience and the players to go on a run now. I think we’re better placed than most teams in that respect and they’ll know that.”
++

So Ure lose 3 first team players within 6 months and still put in sterling performances.... hhhmmmm....

Also looks like they're happy to reduce debt.

by **bigmick** » Wed Dec 30, 2009 11:56 pm

If we'd had to sell a player like Ronaldo, it's like selling Torres plus a bit, we'd have been crying in our beer. Particularly if we weren't given all the funds to replace him. I can hear them now "how on Earth can we be expected to compete" etc etc. As it is, they've lost him and Tevez (they didn't get ANY money for Tevez) and are still right up there. Now they are going to lose Vidic as well (who's been injured all season anyway along with Ferdinand) and no doubt they'll still be right up there. We lose Alonso and Arbeloa, are given all the funds to reinvest and we're seventh.

I can't be doing with Ferguson, he's a c..., but he does know how to run a football club you've got to give him that.

by **NANNY RED** » Wed Dec 30, 2009 11:58 pm

cough cough Michael , Alonso funds?

by **bigmick** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 12:12 am

NANNY RED wrote:cough cough Michael , Alonso funds?

Aquilani and Johnson Nan

by **NANNY RED** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 12:20 am

bigmick wrote:
NANNY RED wrote:cough cough Michael , Alonso funds?

Aquilani and Johnson Nan

Non,

How much did madrid give us for Xabi ,?
weve only paid 5 mill so far for Alberto
If your talking about reinvesting i suppose you could call droping down a loan that :laugh:

Im not nit picking here like but as far as i was aware we used the Xabi money for the loan, maybe im wrong

by **bigmick** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 1:33 am

By the end of the season Nan, THIS season, in about four months time, we'll have paid 15 million Euros for Alberto. It's a non argument.

by **Greavesie** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:22 pm

Gotta agree with Mick, fergie knows what he's doing youve got to give it to him. but he's an absolute filthy alcoholic :censored:

. Can't wait for him to get lost, he's a right :censored:

of a man. I'm talking about Fergie there btw, not Mick

by **Igor Zidane** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:36 pm

bigmick wrote:
NANNY RED wrote:cough cough Michael , Alonso funds?

Aquilani and Johnson Nan

And there ladies and gents is the myth that is peddled by the media and swollowed up by the fans .

GLEN JOHNSON = £17 MILLION

Pompey owed us £9 million for crouch , so we in effect paid £8 million for johnson .

Madrid paid £30 million for Alonso .

Aquilani will cost us another £17 million by the end of 2011 if i recall correctly .

We never spent the keane money we got back , we sold arbeloa and leto and various others for small fees .

But don't let the facts cloud your judgement .

:veryangry

by **bigmick** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 9:15 pm

How the 17 million for Johnson is made up is neither here nor there though surely. I don't see the fact that we were owed money by them as being relevent at all. Aquilani will have cost us 15 million Euro's by the end of THIS season. all this "add on" nonsense is precisely that, nonsense. Every transfer contains clauses about what happens if such and such trophies are won, appearances, goals etc and Aquilani's is no different.

Whichever way you look at it, the Mancs made a profit of 62 million quid in the Summer, AND THEY GOT NOTHING FOR TEVEZ. As such, if we are going to be obsessive about transfer funds which some of our fans are on a selective basis, then it is reasonable to expect us to be quite close to them this season as we were last season.

by **tubby** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:18 pm

For those who say Rafa misses out on the bargains well I believe we were in for Vidic initially but could not afford 12Mil.

by **Owzat** » Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:30 am

bigmick wrote:How the 17 million for Johnson is made up is neither here nor there though surely. I don't see the fact that we were owed money by them as being relevent at all. Aquilani will have cost us 15 million Euro's by the end of THIS season. all this "add on" nonsense is precisely that, nonsense. Every transfer contains clauses about what happens if such and such trophies are won, appearances, goals etc and Aquilani's is no different.

Whichever way you look at it, the Mancs made a profit of 62 million quid in the Summer, AND THEY GOT NOTHING FOR TEVEZ. As such, if we are going to be obsessive about transfer funds which some of our fans are on a selective basis, then it is reasonable to expect us to be quite close to them this season as we were last season.

Exactly. People will believe what they want to believe, making it sound like we paid about five pence for Johnson and twenty-five pence for Aquilani fits in with their belief system - known to some of us as living in cloud cuckoo land.

If Pompey owed us money that still counts as money towards the transfer. If we pay £5m up front for a player with £15m in instalments or clauses, we intend paying, or are bound by contract to pay, the £15m at some point. The same people doing this maths for the insane almost certainly will magic instalments away, call it £5m for Aquilani and not add the £15m anywhere else.

Enough people saying it won't make it true, just accept standard quoted fees and STFU. You don't question other fees, readily accept the quoted fees for Berbatov, ALONSO, Rooney, Shevchenko, Tevez etc etc, but because it might back up your "limited funds" bullshine you pick at fees paid by Liverpool. Somehow without one shred of evidence we made a profit, broke even or made a minimal loss on Keane depending on which person you believe. Probability suggests no club would sell a 28 year old for £20.3m, even with clauses, and buy him back six months later for the same. I expect they wrote off clauses and instalments and paid back maybe half of what was paid up front, BUT I DON'T KNOW FOR SURE SO MY GUESSES ARE NO BETTER THAN MOST OF THE UNEDUCATED ONES ON HERE. The Johnson fee is undeniable, whether £7m or £9m was owed, it still forms part of the fee as we lost that money. I bet those talking of £7m written-off don't say we sold Crouch for £4m and a £3m loss...............................

Shame on you mick for the mentions and dragging up the same old debate with the same lame claims made by those trying to disprove how much Rafa spends. You do know he's never spent more than 500 pence on a player, the rest is magically waived away in instalments, old debts, clauses we'll never achieve and such :laugh:

by **Owzat** » Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:32 am

Moving on to Vidic, well you have to wonder what is going on if the mancs are selling key players. Ferdinand is highly (over) rated by many in England, yet how often is he linked with a move? It is a risk you run by buying top johnny foreigners, always likely to have big clubs overseas casting their beady little eyes over English based foreigners.

by **Zidane** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 6:41 pm

Keane money went toward Johnson, Alonso money went toward Aquilani, that plus the other small sales we had should still have left us with at LEAST 10m no? Somewhere around there, plus the supposed 20m we were going to be given on top of that from revenue and that gives us 30m that was NOT spent so it isn't all about what this or that team owes us or what we haven't yet paid it's simple math and yes it's not complicated but to say we weren't on limited funds is stupid. It's stupid because we didn't have any funds to begin with, we sold to buy.

by **Yossi_Benaloon** » Thu Jan 07, 2010 11:30 am

It would be a great error for Manchester United to allow Vidic to leave, but it would be great for the rest of the Premier League if they did. Vidic is the best centre back they have, Ferdinand is getting ropey and Evans/Brown/Neville cant cut it, so they would have a dodgy defence if he was to go to Madrid. I heard his wife does not like it in England and that is why he may leave.
It should affect United in the long run though as this Manchester United Premier League review reckons they keep over the double the amount of clean sheets when he plays than when Vidic is missing. Could be interesting times, especially as there are increased rumours that Ferguson is willing to let him leave.

Liverpool FC Forum

£30m nemanja vidic to real madrid

Who is online