Danny 0 Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Apologies if this has been posted elsewhere, but I've seen reports, admittedly sourced to that bastion of journalistic integrity that is the Sun, that we rejected a �£4M deadline day swoop for Allan McGregor from Spurs? If this is true, it's very interesting. We shipped out with glee Mendes because we have the cover, and we need the money, but for 2 or 3 times the amount we've said no to selling McGregor. If this report is true, it does seem like we're not just going to sell our assets willy nilly and at the drop of a hat. And suggests also that we value him more highly than �£4M. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazza_8 233 Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 There's quotes from 'Arry that he wanted McGregor in on loan untiul the end of the season with an option to buy him outright if he impresses. �£4m is a little cheap. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted February 2, 2010 Author Share Posted February 2, 2010 To Rangers it's a fortune. Or should I say, to our money men. That's what surprised me - that we rejected it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Preston Burke 0 Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 �£4 million isn't enough for a 28 year old who is easily amongst the top 5 or 6 British goalkeepers I'd consider �£7 million 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 They were trying to pull a swifty on us and get McGregor till the end of the season for a �£500k loan fee with an option to buy him for a further �£3.5m in the summer. Not a good deal for us, but a good deal for dodgy 'arry... There wasn't time for McGregor to complete a medical apparently and that's the reason they didn't offer to buy the player outright (according to press reports), but I don't believe a word of it. If they'd wanted the player, they could just have bought him. They know fine well that he's fit and amongst the best keepers in Britain, but they were just trying to pull a swifty because going on loan McGregor would probably have been on his Rangers wage, but payed by them, whereas if they were buying him and signing him on a 3 or 4 year deal, his wage would be far far higher. Dodgy 'Arry can p*ss off!!.. is probably what Walter said. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Preston Burke 0 Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 That's a good point about the wages. Apparently Mido was claiming yesterday that he's playing for West Ham for just �£1000 a week to prove he still cares about football etc. He forgot to point out that he's on loan from Middlesbrough, where he earns in excees of �£40,000 a week. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted February 2, 2010 Author Share Posted February 2, 2010 That's a good point about the wages. Apparently Mido was claiming yesterday that he's playing for West Ham for just �£1000 a week to prove he still cares about football etc. He forgot to point out that he's on loan from Middlesbrough, where he earns in excees of �£40,000 a week. Isn't that 'earned' as opposed to 'earns'? Are Brough still paying his wages? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted February 2, 2010 Author Share Posted February 2, 2010 �£4 million isn't enough for a 28 year old who is easily amongst the top 5 or 6 British goalkeepers I'd consider �£7 million By British do you mean based or nationality. Because if it's 'based' then he's barely in the top 10. If it's nationality then I'd say he's joint best with Gordon because all the English and Welsh goalies are quite ruddy awful. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted February 2, 2010 Author Share Posted February 2, 2010 They were trying to pull a swifty on us and get McGregor till the end of the season for a �£500k loan fee with an option to buy him for a further �£3.5m in the summer. Not a good deal for us, but a good deal for dodgy 'arry... There wasn't time for McGregor to complete a medical apparently and that's the reason they didn't offer to buy the player outright (according to press reports), but I don't believe a word of it. If they'd wanted the player, they could just have bought him. They know fine well that he's fit and amongst the best keepers in Britain, but they were just trying to pull a swifty because going on loan McGregor would probably have been on his Rangers wage, but payed by them, whereas if they were buying him and signing him on a 3 or 4 year deal, his wage would be far far higher. Dodgy 'Arry can p*ss off!!.. is probably what Walter said. I can see that being the headline in the Record tomorrow 'WALTER in DODGY 'ARRY CAN P*SS OFF SHOCKER' 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 By British do you mean based or nationality. Because if it's 'based' then he's barely in the top 10. If it's nationality then I'd say he's joint best with Gordon because all the English and Welsh goalies are quite ruddy awful. Who are the 9-10 keepers better? Not saying there's not, but it would take some thinking. Van der Sar Cech? (questionable how good he is these days) Friedel Reina 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.