Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

We're already helping to develop Iheanacho for Man City, we don't have to help develop Rashford for Man Utd as well.

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, brucey said:

We're already helping to develop Iheanacho for Man City, we don't have to help develop Rashford for Man Utd as well.

 

Pretty much my thoughts. We can buy our own players rather than aiding the top clubs in stockpiling talent.

 

The guy needs to leave Mourinho behind though, stagnating there. Martial in all.

Edited by Miquel The Work Geordie
Posted
6 minutes ago, brucey said:

We're already helping to develop Iheanacho for Man City, we don't have to help develop Rashford for Man Utd as well.

I don't think they'll take him back. 

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, StanSP said:

I don't think they'll take him back. 

If he gets good enough they will. If only just for resale purposes.

I don't like having to hope one of our players improves just enough, but not too much.

  • Like 1
Posted

Would love him in a City shirt, also helps with the homegrown quota and we need competition on the left. Maybe Gray can learn a thing or two in terms of finishing and decision-making from Rashford.

 

Imagine a front three of Rashford - Vardy - Jahanbakhsh

simpson-jpg.141906

Posted

Rashford already took Vardy's England spot, taking his Leicester spot as well could spark a murder, so on the basis of that it will have to be no.

Posted

Where exactly will he play? Out wide in a 4231? He will never be central striker for us. And either way, I'd rather we signed our own players outright. 

 

I like him a lot but he's a striker, not a winger.

Posted

Agreed with the above. All they will do is stick a lowball buy back clause in like Iheanacho, and effectively we just have a player on indefinite loan again. However there is no chance of us signing him anyway...

Posted

Assuming he wants to play up top and doesn’t want to leave England there’s probably only Everton who don’t have a better striker already and could afford him.

Posted
1 hour ago, brucey said:

We're already helping to develop Iheanacho for Man City, we don't have to help develop Rashford for Man Utd as well.

If it wasn’t for us Kane wouldn’t be the player he is today... 

Posted

If he were available on a permanent transfer with no buy back, yes. Man needs to get out of Man Utd for the good of his career unless Mourinho gets ****ed off.

Posted (edited)

1) United wont sell him

 

2) he would only come here on loan if there was something we had that united want ............ I’d rather keep harry 

Edited by st albans fox
Posted

It says "loan" people, no way do they sell to a club like us only to be potentially embarrassed in a few years.

 

I'd bet a very pretty penny he doesn't go on loan anywhere, total non story IMO.

Posted
14 minutes ago, Gerard said:

It says "loan" people, no way do they sell to a club like us only to be potentially embarrassed in a few years.

 

I'd bet a very pretty penny he doesn't go on loan anywhere, total non story IMO.

Anyone that can sell Pogba for 860k and buy him back for £96m is capable of anything.

  • Haha 2
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...