what the £#%&! are we signing

Originally Posted by treme

Well he has hardly played since his little disappearing act to Brazil. I don't think it's a coincidence.

Originally Posted by Stubbsy

plus the fact hes £#%&!in shite.

Originally Posted by Alan

Plus the fact he's injured

Originally Posted by Terry Silver

He did he knee ligaments in his first game back after his little strop.

It isn't looking good for him then, is it?

Originally Posted by naes_sean

yes, and from what I remember he played quite well in that match.

He didnt last 20 minutes

as for Milner - hed be a good addition, but you just know the money will be all wrong. Itll be the Utd add on way, and itll be announced as 22M or something

We should be looking to the continent because its that creative spark we currently lack.

Is the homegrown players rule still looking likely? If so, this makes a lot more sense.

Originally Posted by Grimson

Is the homegrown players rule still looking likely? If so, this makes a lot more sense.

James Milner signing for United would never make sense in a million years.

£#%&! that shit

Originally Posted by Alan

James Milner signing for United would never make sense in a million years.

£#%&! that shit

yeah lets sign some one thats unproven for 30 mil

vatta sjnieder

Originally Posted by Alan

James Milner signing for United would never make sense in a million years.

£#%&! that shit

Do you not understand the concept of the rule (if enacted)?

Originally Posted by plopborsky

yeah lets sign some one thats unproven for 30 mil

vatta sjnieder

I'd have rather United signed his brother Wesley for about half that, who was proven class.

Originally Posted by Grimson

Do you not understand the concept of the rule (if enacted)?

Yes I understand it. I didn't realise it stated that you must sign shit players you don't need for 4 times their value though.

Originally Posted by Alan

I'd have rather United signed his brother Wesley for about half that, who was proven class.



Yes I understand it. I didn't realise it stated that you must sign shit players you don't need for 4 times their value though.

Which English players likely to be available would you prefer?

Originally Posted by Grimson

Which English players likely to be available would you prefer?

good point grimmers with this new rule an average english man is now worth twice as much.

its not like we have a load of attacking mid's that are not over 28

The story's probably untrue anyway. But there will need to be British reinforcements. I'm not saying Milner is the answer, but Arsenal and Chelsea are going to have to do the same thing, and will be buying from the same pool.

Untill Berbatov dies, i dont care if we sign Messi, we'l be a horrible bastard of a team.

GET OUT !

Originally Posted by Grimson

The story's probably untrue anyway. But there will need to be British reinforcements. I'm not saying Milner is the answer, but Arsenal and Chelsea are going to have to do the same thing, and will be buying from the same pool.

why british enforcements?

The homegrown rule doesn't talk about english nationality at all. For ex anderson qualifies under the home grown rule as does fabregas for arsenal and lucas for liverpool.

Originally Posted by rafabio

why british enforcements?

The homegrown rule doesn't talk about english nationality at all. For ex anderson qualifies under the home grown rule as does fabregas for arsenal and lucas for liverpool.

Because it's never again going to be easy to poach young foreign players, following the heat that has started to come down after Gael Kakuta, et al.

Anyway Anderson is currently no help in this regard. And Liverpool aren't going to be playing Champions League football, so Lucas is also irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Grimson

Because it's never again going to be easy to poach young foreign players, following the heat that has started to come down after Gael Kakuta, et al.

Anyway Anderson is currently no help in this regard. And Liverpool aren't going to be playing Champions League football, so Lucas is also irrelevant.

haha! kakuta issue! ffs chelsea overturned the ban without a wimper. Unless rules are brought which will be directly contradictory of european labour rules, FIFA and other clubs can't do anything. It will continue to happen.

United will again sign few more poached youngsters like pogba this season too.

accept your argument is shit and you are caught with your pants down.

Arsenal have around 14 players who will qualify for this rule.

clichy, gibbs, traore, djorou, fabregas, song, diaby, merida, bendtner just to name 9.

Its only liverpool who are on the borderline of 8.

And to qualify, you have to be trained in england for 3 years below 21 years. It means if you sign someone at 18 years old, they will qualify too.

Originally Posted by rafabio

clichy, gibbs, traore, djorou, fabregas, song, diaby, merida, bendtner just to name 9.

Fabregas is the only one who is any good. Arsenal don't win trophies.

United need British reinforcements IMO because you don't win the Premier League without a few (or more) good Brits.

Originally Posted by Grimson

Fabregas is the only one who is any good. Arsenal don't win trophies.

United need British reinforcements IMO because you don't win the Premier League without a few (or more) good Brits.

arsenal didn't need that many brits to be invincibles to win in 2004 or 2002.

neither did we win in the 3 previous seasons because we had brits.

it's because we had world class players in ronaldo, rooney, vidic, evra, rio and VDS. and a good supporting cast.

this have to have brits to win the league argument is shit. Although I accept it is good for long term since you get more loyalty and they are not easily tempted by the overseas clubs.

Originally Posted by Grimson

Fabregas is the only one who is any good. Arsenal don't win trophies.

United need British reinforcements IMO because you don't win the Premier League without a few (or more) good Brits.

and arsenal came so close to winning it in 2008. It was only the brilliance of united that stopped them.

also looks like the argument has changed from 'we need to sign british players because of homegrown rule' to 'we need to sign british players to win the league'.

Even if the latter was true, that was true from the day premier league started. we are not going to sign average british players just for the sake of it.

I can see us going for rodwell but that's because he is £#%&!ing class not because he is british.

Thankfully this rule based on nationality will never come into play like FIFA want. Otherwise we would have average british players plodding their way in the league every £#%&!ing week

Originally Posted by rafabio

arsenal didn't need that many brits to be invincibles to win in 2004 or 2002.

Not many, but important ones: Adams, Seaman, Cole, Campbell, Keown, Parlour.

neither did we win in the 3 previous seasons because we had brits.

it's because we had world class players in ronaldo, rooney, vidic, evra, rio and VDS. and a good supporting cast.

Well yes. Several of them are British. How do you know we would have won without them?

this have to have brits to win the league argument is shit.

And yet everyone who wins it has them. It appears to be one of those shit arguments that is self-evident.

Originally Posted by Grimson

And yet everyone who wins it has them. It appears to be one of those shit arguments that is self-evident.

They will have a few anyways because they are in £#%&!ing england. its like saying since we have had a few irish players always in our squad, to win the premier league you 'need' to have irish players.

Arsenal, united, chelsea all won the league because they had a £#%&!ing good squad with £#%&!ing good players. It doesn't matter if some of them were british or not since they were good.

It may matter over a period of time since as I say, british players are more likely to stay at a club for longer time.