Woodsyla

technique is too vague though Gerrard has far superiour technique, Aquilanin has quick feet an excellent first touch.

It also included the 4 assists he got in one game. He may not be everyones cup of tea but he clearly isn't s***. I'd like to see him stay and play for this manager if the alternative is pack him off on loan or sell him for buttons.

I think the word technique is being misused here. What Aquilani has is great touch, he's brilliant at give and goes in tight spaces. He's no Gerrard clearly but he, in my opinion, is a better footballer than the rest of our midfielders bar Lucas. If he stays and we can get him playing I believe a Lucas Gerrard Aquilani midfield has great potential.

He got more assists per minutes on the pitch than anyone else when he played. The only facts in this is we were had over by two clubs with this fella. He is not s***, he is a good player. you are, however, a f***ing troll.

I've only ever seen him play live once, but in that one performance he did enough for me to leave the ground KNOWING that he was a very good player. Whatever the circumstances around his none performance are in a red shirt, they are not because he is s***. This in itself is not a reason to keep him but it is a reason to dismiss out of hand mindless opinions like the above (that Swan replied to).

So would I. I reckon it's the sort of deal we would take much later in the transfer window. Andy is a very saleable asset, just not for anything like what we paid for him. Mind you, I said that about Aquilani.

In this instance, it appears, the purpose of the loan is purely to avoid being saddled with a premier league wage in the championship rather than assessing a player with a view to purchase. It's effectively a deal structured like this. We will give you 18m for Carroll, in two installments, £2m now, and £16m next year. If we get relegated though you agree to buy him back for £16m.

No more risky than paying £35m for a 22yr old striker. At least this way they don't have to pay him £80K a week if they get relegated. Portsmouth are facing being wound up because they are still paying premier league wages to players. Doesn't surprise me that West Ham are trying to cover themselves in this manner. This is a deadline day deal for me. I wouldn't be selling him now on this basis.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

I couldn't find the 700 page thread from last year but this is an interesting development http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18995512 I'm delighted a) that he has 2 years left b) that he is actually saying this stuff who knows could the new system get the best out of him in the Sigurdsson role?

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

It's a valid comparison, we spent the Torres money they have not spent the Ronaldo money, they have spent no more over 5 seasons than Stoke in the transfer market. If we sold a player for a massive amount of money we would expect that money to be reinvested in players. The money went on debt instead. Anyway, they are a football juggernaut and their spending doesn't match, long may it continue.

Are our figure skewed by a stupid fee for Torres? Swings and roundabouts.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/may/05/manchester-united-spending-power In total, United's net spend over the past five years amounts to £51.6m. Which is considerably below the £25m per season the Glazers once promised. City's total is £418.9m, Chelsea £155.9m, Liverpool's £83.3m and Tottenham's £66.7m. Perhaps most surprisingly, Sunderland have also spent more than United, with £69.2m, as have Aston Villa on £68.4m. And who would have thought that Stoke, on £59.7m, would be more prolific spenders than England's best-supported club?

For some reason I found this response f***ing hilarious dear linda please talk with ur husband and tell him that we need re inforcements we need players to get forward.. ynwa...

Of course they are not in real trouble but they are currently spending on a par with Stoke. Long may that continue.

It they didn't have the debt they would have £60m per year to spend on players. so if we include the Ronaldo money over the last 3 years they would have had roughly £260m to spend. and they have spent £120m maybe. figures here http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/ It's making a massive difference.

I'm just greatful we have the Glazers, if United were running debt free with Ferguson they would have 25 titles by now. Mockers alert : This is the weakest United squad I can remember. I'm not saying they won't compete but their strength in depth for a side competing for the title is poor. If you had to choose a 22 from City and United you wouldn't end up with double figures. They received £80m for Ronaldo, £80m !!! They should have spent huge over the last 3 years, £50m+ every summer.

beardy c*** doesn't have the same ring as fat c***. Moyles is another example where fat c*** is the perfect description, s*** beard not withstanding.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

That's a wiki page that needs an edit or two

You're keen, I am waiting to see the result in tomorrow's paper. Is that Joe Allen, can't say I've seen enough to judge.

What a sense of humour though Owen has shown himself to have a good sense of humour in the past when confronted by Twitter taunts. After being taunted by TV's Piers Morgan over the time he spent on the bench last season, he Tweeted a photograph of his trophy cabinet.