The latest Title Update for FIFA 20 is now available on PC and includes the changes listed here.

Manchester United Football Club

Comments

  • Low Ki
    12097 posts Has That Special Something
    UM4R wrote: »
    Shshj wrote: »
    Sky are hilariously bad when it comes to transfers these days, they've been so wrong with Chelsea news. Gone are the days when their word was gospel, now all they do is make **** up to cause a stir on the socials.

    Tbh it's not even for the social, it's for their sky bet things.

    Most shady thing going on and government should step in intervene how can the biggest sports "news" channel/site have its own betting site

    Make up **** to get people to bet and profit

    It's actually disgusting.

    This right here is why their reporting quality went down so sharply.
  • Apollo
    18484 posts World Class
    Thankfully that Sporting game is now out the way, so hopefully the Bruno deal can be finalised in the next few days.
  • Retro_G
    31966 posts National Team Captain
    Apollo wrote: »
    Thankfully that Sporting game is now out the way, so hopefully the Bruno deal can be finalised in the next few days.

    Did he wave to fans or anything?
  • Apollo
    18484 posts World Class
    Retro_G wrote: »
    Apollo wrote: »
    Thankfully that Sporting game is now out the way, so hopefully the Bruno deal can be finalised in the next few days.

    Did he wave to fans or anything?

    Not that I saw, but he could've done after I suppose, only kept it on briefly after the match finished.
  • Sellish
    10024 posts Has That Special Something
    Apollo wrote: »
    Thankfully that Sporting game is now out the way, so hopefully the Bruno deal can be finalised in the next few days.

    How did he play?
  • Low Ki
    12097 posts Has That Special Something
    Retro_G wrote: »
    Apollo wrote: »
    Thankfully that Sporting game is now out the way, so hopefully the Bruno deal can be finalised in the next few days.

    Did he wave to fans or anything?

    He gave his shirt to a fan and waved kisses at the crowd while being on the verge of tears.
  • Sellish
    10024 posts Has That Special Something
  • Low Ki
    12097 posts Has That Special Something
    Ahmer50x wrote: »

    You sure it isnt the face of a man who just lost 2-0 to their rivals?
  • Ahmer50x
    22012 posts Club Captain
    Low Ki wrote: »
    Ahmer50x wrote: »

    You sure it isnt the face of a man who just lost 2-0 to their rivals?

    That's what the ? is for.

    I think its nothing special personally. Deal is a ways off
  • Ahmer50x
    22012 posts Club Captain
    edited January 18
    Post edited by Ahmer50x on
  • Snugglebites
    1478 posts Professional
    I remember when we almost signed him in the summer, had a friendly with Sporting to seal the deal and he cried after the match finished. Still waiting...
  • Pietu
    5956 posts Big Money Move
    My quick 2 cents on Maguire.

    There are people who overrate him and there are people who underrate him, now that's normal as a fan, we overrate and underrate everything, rarely we get it spot on.

    Is he better than Lindelöf? Can't say, haven't watched them enough to know but for your sake, I hope he is because if he isn't, your scouts really effed up.
  • Southgatology
    1549 posts Play-Off Hero
    Pietu wrote: »
    My quick 2 cents on Maguire.

    There are people who overrate him and there are people who underrate him, now that's normal as a fan, we overrate and underrate everything, rarely we get it spot on.

    Is he better than Lindelöf? Can't say, haven't watched them enough to know but for your sake, I hope he is because if he isn't, your scouts really effed up.

    Don’t worry. He is much better than Lindelof 😅
  • Tornado31619
    20207 posts Club Captain
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.
  • TakeItSlow
    8726 posts League Winner
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    I like that stance though, for once you won't be held to ransom. Bruno isn't guaranteed to set the premier league on fire. Getting someone like Maddison in the summer for less than 70m would be better than getting Bruno for that price imo.

    City spend a lot of money across the board but are never held to ransom in terms of fee's, they have never spent more than 60/65m on a single footballer. United adopting that thought process would be good to see.
  • Apollo
    18484 posts World Class
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    I like that stance though, for once you won't be held to ransom. Bruno isn't guaranteed to set the premier league on fire. Getting someone like Maddison in the summer for less than 70m would be better than getting Bruno for that price imo.

    City spend a lot of money across the board but are never held to ransom in terms of fee's, they have never spent more than 60/65m on a single footballer. United adopting that thought process would be good to see.

    The club want both. They want Bruno this window and one of Maddison/Grealish in the summer.
  • TakeItSlow
    8726 posts League Winner
    Apollo wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    I like that stance though, for once you won't be held to ransom. Bruno isn't guaranteed to set the premier league on fire. Getting someone like Maddison in the summer for less than 70m would be better than getting Bruno for that price imo.

    City spend a lot of money across the board but are never held to ransom in terms of fee's, they have never spent more than 60/65m on a single footballer. United adopting that thought process would be good to see.

    The club want both. They want Bruno this window and one of Maddison/Grealish in the summer.

    Two number 10's? Surely not.
  • Apollo
    18484 posts World Class
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    Apollo wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    I like that stance though, for once you won't be held to ransom. Bruno isn't guaranteed to set the premier league on fire. Getting someone like Maddison in the summer for less than 70m would be better than getting Bruno for that price imo.

    City spend a lot of money across the board but are never held to ransom in terms of fee's, they have never spent more than 60/65m on a single footballer. United adopting that thought process would be good to see.

    The club want both. They want Bruno this window and one of Maddison/Grealish in the summer.

    Two number 10's? Surely not.

    Bruno can play in midfield as well and it's been widely reported by good sources. The club want both. Whether we get them is a different matter with our board.
  • Tornado31619
    20207 posts Club Captain
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    I like that stance though, for once you won't be held to ransom. Bruno isn't guaranteed to set the premier league on fire. Getting someone like Maddison in the summer for less than 70m would be better than getting Bruno for that price imo.

    Yeah, like that’s actually going to happen. Maguire went for £85m. We’re talking Coutinho money for Maddison.
    City spend a lot of money across the board but are never held to ransom in terms of fee's, they have never spent more than 60/65m on a single footballer. United adopting that thought process would be good to see.

    City spent £70m on Mahrez for him to play second fiddle to Sané (until Sané was dropped). They spent the equivalent of another £60 on Cancelo, a bench-warmer. They spent £50m on Stones, who has been nothing but a laughing stock at the back.

    Heck, even you guys paid £70m for Pepe, who was a massive gamble. But you needed a winger as much as we need a 10. Are you telling me that we shouldn’t take a similar risk with Fernandes?
  • Sellish
    10024 posts Has That Special Something
    edited January 18
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    This is why we need to work on multiple deals at the same time.
    We will end this window empty handed as expected.
  • TakeItSlow
    8726 posts League Winner
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    I like that stance though, for once you won't be held to ransom. Bruno isn't guaranteed to set the premier league on fire. Getting someone like Maddison in the summer for less than 70m would be better than getting Bruno for that price imo.

    Yeah, like that’s actually going to happen. Maguire went for £85m. We’re talking Coutinho money for Maddison.
    City spend a lot of money across the board but are never held to ransom in terms of fee's, they have never spent more than 60/65m on a single footballer. United adopting that thought process would be good to see.

    City spent £70m on Mahrez for him to play second fiddle to Sané (until Sané was dropped). They spent the equivalent of another £60 on Cancelo, a bench-warmer. They spent £50m on Stones, who has been nothing but a laughing stock at the back.

    Heck, even you guys paid £70m for Pepe, who was a massive gamble. But you needed a winger as much as we need a 10. Are you telling me that we shouldn’t take a similar risk with Fernandes?

    Mahrez was 60m. My point still stands, Mahrez has been excellent for City on the whole, he also doesn't play the same side as Sane. I can see why your board are being tentative spending 68m on a Portuguese league player, would make sense spending 40m on Soumare and then going in for Maddison next summer. No way he's Coutinho money either, maximum of 80m.
  • Apollo
    18484 posts World Class
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    Fresh report from Sky this morning,



    https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/11911241/bruno-fernandes-says-sporting-goodbyes-ahead-of-manchester-united-switch

    BBC vs Sky continues from yesterday :joy: Round 2

    The BBC are obviously way more likely to be right but it goes without saying that I'm hoping Sky are
  • Apollo
    18484 posts World Class
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    I like that stance though, for once you won't be held to ransom. Bruno isn't guaranteed to set the premier league on fire. Getting someone like Maddison in the summer for less than 70m would be better than getting Bruno for that price imo.

    Yeah, like that’s actually going to happen. Maguire went for £85m. We’re talking Coutinho money for Maddison.
    City spend a lot of money across the board but are never held to ransom in terms of fee's, they have never spent more than 60/65m on a single footballer. United adopting that thought process would be good to see.

    City spent £70m on Mahrez for him to play second fiddle to Sané (until Sané was dropped). They spent the equivalent of another £60 on Cancelo, a bench-warmer. They spent £50m on Stones, who has been nothing but a laughing stock at the back.

    Heck, even you guys paid £70m for Pepe, who was a massive gamble. But you needed a winger as much as we need a 10. Are you telling me that we shouldn’t take a similar risk with Fernandes?

    Mahrez was 60m. My point still stands, Mahrez has been excellent for City on the whole, he also doesn't play the same side as Sane. I can see why your board are being tentative spending 68m on a Portuguese league player, would make sense spending 40m on Soumare and then going in for Maddison next summer. No way he's Coutinho money either, maximum of 80m.

    The club want both. :joy: Considering you clearly haven't been following United news (unsurprisingly as you're an Arsenal fan), take the word from people who have been following United transfer reports all window. Ole wants Bruno now and one of Maddison/Grealish in the summer.
  • Tornado31619
    20207 posts Club Captain
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    I like that stance though, for once you won't be held to ransom. Bruno isn't guaranteed to set the premier league on fire. Getting someone like Maddison in the summer for less than 70m would be better than getting Bruno for that price imo.

    Yeah, like that’s actually going to happen. Maguire went for £85m. We’re talking Coutinho money for Maddison.
    City spend a lot of money across the board but are never held to ransom in terms of fee's, they have never spent more than 60/65m on a single footballer. United adopting that thought process would be good to see.

    City spent £70m on Mahrez for him to play second fiddle to Sané (until Sané was dropped). They spent the equivalent of another £60 on Cancelo, a bench-warmer. They spent £50m on Stones, who has been nothing but a laughing stock at the back.

    Heck, even you guys paid £70m for Pepe, who was a massive gamble. But you needed a winger as much as we need a 10. Are you telling me that we shouldn’t take a similar risk with Fernandes?

    Mahrez was 60m. My point still stands, Mahrez has been excellent for City on the whole, he also doesn't play the same side as Sane. I can see why your board are being tentative spending 68m on a Portuguese league player, would make sense spending 40m on Soumare and then going in for Maddison next summer. No way he's Coutinho money either, maximum of 80m.

    Because the French league is so much better.

    If we keep putting signings off for the following summer, then we’ll never have a good squad.

    If Leicester charged £85m for Maguire, then Maddison will be in excess of £100m.
  • TakeItSlow
    8726 posts League Winner
    Apollo wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    I like that stance though, for once you won't be held to ransom. Bruno isn't guaranteed to set the premier league on fire. Getting someone like Maddison in the summer for less than 70m would be better than getting Bruno for that price imo.

    Yeah, like that’s actually going to happen. Maguire went for £85m. We’re talking Coutinho money for Maddison.
    City spend a lot of money across the board but are never held to ransom in terms of fee's, they have never spent more than 60/65m on a single footballer. United adopting that thought process would be good to see.

    City spent £70m on Mahrez for him to play second fiddle to Sané (until Sané was dropped). They spent the equivalent of another £60 on Cancelo, a bench-warmer. They spent £50m on Stones, who has been nothing but a laughing stock at the back.

    Heck, even you guys paid £70m for Pepe, who was a massive gamble. But you needed a winger as much as we need a 10. Are you telling me that we shouldn’t take a similar risk with Fernandes?

    Mahrez was 60m. My point still stands, Mahrez has been excellent for City on the whole, he also doesn't play the same side as Sane. I can see why your board are being tentative spending 68m on a Portuguese league player, would make sense spending 40m on Soumare and then going in for Maddison next summer. No way he's Coutinho money either, maximum of 80m.

    The club want both. :joy: Considering you clearly haven't been following United news (unsurprisingly as you're an Arsenal fan), take the word from people who have been following United transfer reports all window. Ole wants Bruno now and one of Maddison/Grealish in the summer.

    From a logical point of view getting Bruno and Maddison is pointless and something I don't think you'll do. Think about it, you aren't going to play Bruno deep, if you do its a complete waste. You'll sign one of them and then a deeper CM in the summer. Or vice versa.
  • Apollo
    18484 posts World Class
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    Apollo wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    I like that stance though, for once you won't be held to ransom. Bruno isn't guaranteed to set the premier league on fire. Getting someone like Maddison in the summer for less than 70m would be better than getting Bruno for that price imo.

    Yeah, like that’s actually going to happen. Maguire went for £85m. We’re talking Coutinho money for Maddison.
    City spend a lot of money across the board but are never held to ransom in terms of fee's, they have never spent more than 60/65m on a single footballer. United adopting that thought process would be good to see.

    City spent £70m on Mahrez for him to play second fiddle to Sané (until Sané was dropped). They spent the equivalent of another £60 on Cancelo, a bench-warmer. They spent £50m on Stones, who has been nothing but a laughing stock at the back.

    Heck, even you guys paid £70m for Pepe, who was a massive gamble. But you needed a winger as much as we need a 10. Are you telling me that we shouldn’t take a similar risk with Fernandes?

    Mahrez was 60m. My point still stands, Mahrez has been excellent for City on the whole, he also doesn't play the same side as Sane. I can see why your board are being tentative spending 68m on a Portuguese league player, would make sense spending 40m on Soumare and then going in for Maddison next summer. No way he's Coutinho money either, maximum of 80m.

    The club want both. :joy: Considering you clearly haven't been following United news (unsurprisingly as you're an Arsenal fan), take the word from people who have been following United transfer reports all window. Ole wants Bruno now and one of Maddison/Grealish in the summer.

    From a logical point of view getting Bruno and Maddison is pointless and something I don't think you'll do. Think about it, you aren't going to play Bruno deep, if you do its a complete waste. You'll sign one of them and then a deeper CM in the summer. Or vice versa.

    We've discussed it in the thread multiple times and I have no intention of going there again. I'm simply informing you as you've been banned of what so many reports have stated this window.
  • TakeItSlow
    8726 posts League Winner
    Apollo wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    Apollo wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    I like that stance though, for once you won't be held to ransom. Bruno isn't guaranteed to set the premier league on fire. Getting someone like Maddison in the summer for less than 70m would be better than getting Bruno for that price imo.

    Yeah, like that’s actually going to happen. Maguire went for £85m. We’re talking Coutinho money for Maddison.
    City spend a lot of money across the board but are never held to ransom in terms of fee's, they have never spent more than 60/65m on a single footballer. United adopting that thought process would be good to see.

    City spent £70m on Mahrez for him to play second fiddle to Sané (until Sané was dropped). They spent the equivalent of another £60 on Cancelo, a bench-warmer. They spent £50m on Stones, who has been nothing but a laughing stock at the back.

    Heck, even you guys paid £70m for Pepe, who was a massive gamble. But you needed a winger as much as we need a 10. Are you telling me that we shouldn’t take a similar risk with Fernandes?

    Mahrez was 60m. My point still stands, Mahrez has been excellent for City on the whole, he also doesn't play the same side as Sane. I can see why your board are being tentative spending 68m on a Portuguese league player, would make sense spending 40m on Soumare and then going in for Maddison next summer. No way he's Coutinho money either, maximum of 80m.

    The club want both. :joy: Considering you clearly haven't been following United news (unsurprisingly as you're an Arsenal fan), take the word from people who have been following United transfer reports all window. Ole wants Bruno now and one of Maddison/Grealish in the summer.

    From a logical point of view getting Bruno and Maddison is pointless and something I don't think you'll do. Think about it, you aren't going to play Bruno deep, if you do its a complete waste. You'll sign one of them and then a deeper CM in the summer. Or vice versa.

    We've discussed it in the thread multiple times and I have no intention of going there again. I'm simply informing you as you've been banned of what so many reports have stated this window.

    Reports are great and good to create conversation. But you have to be more logical with the majority of reports.
  • Apollo
    18484 posts World Class
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    Apollo wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    Apollo wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    TakeItSlow wrote: »
    BBC reporting that we aren’t willing to pay the £68 million that Sporting want.

    I’m surprised that none of our managers have walked since Woodward was appointed.

    I like that stance though, for once you won't be held to ransom. Bruno isn't guaranteed to set the premier league on fire. Getting someone like Maddison in the summer for less than 70m would be better than getting Bruno for that price imo.

    Yeah, like that’s actually going to happen. Maguire went for £85m. We’re talking Coutinho money for Maddison.
    City spend a lot of money across the board but are never held to ransom in terms of fee's, they have never spent more than 60/65m on a single footballer. United adopting that thought process would be good to see.

    City spent £70m on Mahrez for him to play second fiddle to Sané (until Sané was dropped). They spent the equivalent of another £60 on Cancelo, a bench-warmer. They spent £50m on Stones, who has been nothing but a laughing stock at the back.

    Heck, even you guys paid £70m for Pepe, who was a massive gamble. But you needed a winger as much as we need a 10. Are you telling me that we shouldn’t take a similar risk with Fernandes?

    Mahrez was 60m. My point still stands, Mahrez has been excellent for City on the whole, he also doesn't play the same side as Sane. I can see why your board are being tentative spending 68m on a Portuguese league player, would make sense spending 40m on Soumare and then going in for Maddison next summer. No way he's Coutinho money either, maximum of 80m.

    The club want both. :joy: Considering you clearly haven't been following United news (unsurprisingly as you're an Arsenal fan), take the word from people who have been following United transfer reports all window. Ole wants Bruno now and one of Maddison/Grealish in the summer.

    From a logical point of view getting Bruno and Maddison is pointless and something I don't think you'll do. Think about it, you aren't going to play Bruno deep, if you do its a complete waste. You'll sign one of them and then a deeper CM in the summer. Or vice versa.

    We've discussed it in the thread multiple times and I have no intention of going there again. I'm simply informing you as you've been banned of what so many reports have stated this window.

    Reports are great and good to create conversation. But you have to be more logical with the majority of reports.

    They could easily work in the same team. That's the last I'm saying on the matter as I don't want to go over it again. We've all discussed it a lot. I'd have thought you'd rather talk about Arsenal given you've been away so long but clearly you're picking up from where you left off of spending most of the time talking about United.
Sign In or Register to comment.