- Jan 9, 2014
- 14,914
- 26,616
You would have been better off ending the post there, mate.I'm not saying drop anyone. But it's a waste of time playing Sissoko.
You would have been better off ending the post there, mate.I'm not saying drop anyone. But it's a waste of time playing Sissoko.
It's not his fault he cost 30m. I'm not angry with Sissoko for costing 30m, I'm angry with anyone and everyone at the club who suggested and approved - on a footballing level - his signing for 30m, because it's a massive misuse of limited funds.
I never wanted him at any price. This was not an Alli, Nkoudou, or even a Lamela, a relatively unknown signing or one with buckets of potential built into the price. This was player with a long CV, a big body of work to be referenced, and nothing in that CV said anything like 30m or that he was the type of player we desperately needed, a player to up the IQ of our creativity, a player who would interact with Eriksen, Alli and Kane in an intelligent way. The problem with Sissoko has never been his attitude IMO, he's always been a robust trier who ploughs forwards relentlessly, the problem is he's never been that gifted or smart. He's a tractor with a Ferrari engine, great in a straight line, but football isn't just about straight lines.
Sure, I don't disagree. I'm not saying he's been good, just the reaction tonight after 15 minutes and he's "dogshit" and "cancer".
Being called 'dogshit' and 'cancer' are two totally different things in my opinion.
People should remember it wasn't 30M up front and we can easily afford the rate of repayment at 5M a season. I doubt there was much down payment too...in affect it's an extend loan.
Sissoko does offer some qualities and we should just let Poch get on with it....if it doesn't work out you win some you lose some, but one things for damn sure, Levy has got us financially in check all corners covered.
I don't think he's done badly since middle/late december.
He's played a hand in quite a few goals since then and been generally troublesome for opposition.
The whole team didn't play well against Sunderland, it's not fair to single out one player, who didn't even play the whole match for abuse.
We probably won't know the details, but I'd question anybody who doesn't question whether the full amount that's due regardless of all events is 30M. I said so on the day we signed him and I still think it is true, there is no way we have bought him and committed to paying 30M regardless of events. Now, do I think that it is an extended loan deal in question as some are suggesting? Possible not, that seems a bit too easy. But do I think that there are heaploads of clauses, minimum fees, triggers, and add-ons which MAY take the total sum to 30M? Sure. Do I think that Newcastle is promised those 30M irrefutably no matter what? No a chance, IMO.oh for fucks sake. Will people please stop posting this bullshit which starts another round of people trying to find creative ways to show the fuckwits that £30 million is still £30 million even if it means that you pay for it over 3,4 or even 5 years. What is so bloody hard to understand about this? every transfer fee in football today is spread out over a period of time FFS, this one is no different.
oh for fucks sake. Will people please stop posting this bullshit which starts another round of people trying to find creative ways to show the fuckwits that £30 million is still £30 million even if it means that you pay for it over 3,4 or even 5 years. What is so bloody hard to understand about this? every transfer fee in football today is spread out over a period of time FFS, this one is no different.