Agreed. I suspect Carrick is looking for a few options of where he can play him if not at CB.
Lewis Hall
- Thread starter davidmichael
- Start date
-
Hello, Guest! We have a new competition (with tagline and award as prizes) starting.
A new Odds or Evens competition is starting now. Click here to enter to submit your predictions. Submissions will be open for the next 3 days, 10 hours, 27 minutes, 44 seconds, and will close on Sep 12, 2026 at 15:00.
- Status
Agreed. I suspect Carrick is looking for a few options of where he can play him if not at CB.
Speak for yourself
Ah Lash. As sure as the sun rising in the morning, you’ll find any old excuse to jump in with some pedantic reply to me.
It was a forward/left winger which was obviously contingent on Rashford leaving (and still is), hence the links to left wingers which never went anywhere. We have a consistent history of not being able to sell Rashford due to his wages, relying on loans instead. In the end it looks like Rashford stays so we don’t replace him with another winger. The idea of getting good money for Ugarte was never more than a hope - everyone seemed to recognise going into this window that we wouldn’t get much for him and it may ultimately take a loan. So any reasonable plans going in go this summer would not have been contingent on selling two players who we knew would be hard to sell.
The claim that we “haemorrhaged our transfer funds” for CM and LB because of those two not generating significant returns is nonsense. We’ve raised about 50 million in sales leaving us with a net spend of 35 million ish. We can and will spend more, with CM and or LB rightly looking like the priorities.
While I don't necessarily agree with not buying a LB this summer, I see where you are coming from. The downside to not bringing a LB in this season would mean that clubs will know that we're desperate for one next summer when Shaw leaves.
There could be a compromise in that we bring in cover for Shaw in the meantime so that if he inevitably does get injured then we aren't having to pull players from other areas to cover for Shaw.
This just tugs at the heart strings! Instant classic
I don’t get this. Maz is surely first reserve at RB so you seem to be suggesting that we essentially go into a season with three fullbacks - Shaw, Dalot and Maz? Two of them are injury prone. I appreciate we have Yoro as well who has played there but he’s struggled at times and I don’t see him as a valid option, unless in an absolute crisis.
The only circumstances in which we don’t need one more fullback (preferably a left back as I don’t rate Dalot or Maz there at all) is if the plan is for Dorgu to step up and be back up for Shaw, with a view to him being starter in 26-27. I haven’t got any impression so far though that Carrick is intending to explore that option.
I wonder when Chelsea will be bidding 60 million for him? That's how this normally goes
Sort of. But his ability to get forward is dependent on his ability to get back after. So as his pace and stamina gets ever worse he is increasingly rooted to the backline.
I would go to £70m inc addons, so something close to the record for a full back like £64m plus £6m. Much like Guimaraes he has to be willing to push this or like Ornstein said we won't go for him
Newcastle wouldn't have to do either of those.. They have him signed to a contract for a few years yet. They don't need to sell or offer him a new contract.
If they are to sell then it will be on their terms. You can't just tell them "no, we will only pay £xx" and expect them to fold
Me-ow, catty. Don't take it so personally.
I genuinely think with Rashfords 25% increase on his wage and not actually moving him on has a bigger impact that just the LW. Mount's wage went back up as well, so it's a bit of double whammy with these old contracts. Loaning him out for reduced wages was hard enough or getting Barca to bite. I think we also wanted to move on Zirkzee and Ugarte this summer and would have hoped to get something from at least one those three.
Fair enough that characterisation is hyperbolic, I don't I don't believe it's crippling us, but I'm pretty sure it's making it way harder to manouver the market with no guarentee we'll keep the net spend down. Especially with no obvious sales on the horizon. Our net spend was around £120m last season - I imagine it will be the same (might not be though, as you've mentioned our revenues were significantly down last year). So without sales, we're looking at £85m to spread across a LB, CM and maybe an attacker and also very little upfront cash.
We surely thought it was reasonably likely Rashfords option of £26m + his big wages off the book would happen - that would have had a really big impact to the budget. As it stands, can we really afford to drop £60m on a left back? Especially if we're looking to see if someone like Tchouameni may become available? I don't think we would have budgeted/planned on not moving any of them on. I do think we'll spend more, but I think it's going to have to be creative and to me that's down to the lack of sales.
If United really wanted him, we should have gone for him earlier in the window. Bad leadership.
How do you know that?
He was never going to be the priority over midfield.
I can’t see it.
Leaving it till after Newcastle sell important players makes this less likely.
No indication he’s told Newcastle he wants to leave.
All means it will take a ludicrous bid to sign him and we know how INEOS operate.
Leaving it till after Newcastle sell important players makes this less likely.
No indication he’s told Newcastle he wants to leave.
All means it will take a ludicrous bid to sign him and we know how INEOS operate.
Yeah a monumental feck up not moving when window opened, too much dithering between LB and LW
Nah, the monumental feckup would have been to spend massive money on a LB and LW when we needed to buy a midfield. They've done fine so far, they're just working within a budget that doesn't go as far as you'd think this window.
Your logic, considering how he plays in his natural position feels sound, but weirdly, the most attacking I've ever seen Maz play is an lb. During both the AFCON and the WC. I'm not referring to the odd overlap either, he was a menacing attacking threat, very often beating players and driving towards the 18-yard box with purpose.
It doesn't make sense!
Newcastle know they're going to lose Hall this season or next while they rebuild the squad. I would like to have gotten this one done first, but the door is still open to a deal even if it means we will have, at least theory, spent 10m for Hall now than we might have six weeks ago.
The mad thing beyond all this was Tuchel not calling up either Shaw or Hall, both of whom had great seasons, but that's a different issue.
Likewise - I was just poking a little fun bud.
It was the hyperbole from that poster which I was responding to, because it was being used to push a particular narrative that didn't stand up to scrutiny when his own logic was applied consistently through the whole back and forth.
In that back I forth I said that I doubted we would spend the money on Hall and would likely get a cheaper LB. But when you look at the full picture, there’s far more at play than the Ugarte and Rashford situations. The reduction of match day and TV revenue due to the lack of games last season; the fact that we’re still paying for big purchases from previous windows; what seems to be an attempt at a cultural reset around our transfer business - not chasing or getting into bidding wars for players that might not want to come here and instead being willing to walk away from big deals and look for market opportunities instead. Despite all that, the notion that even with such a minimal net spend so far we don’t have any more money to spend without further sales I think is false, and a certain amount of expenditure is still possible which is not contingent on sales (which were never guaranteed to materialize anyway). I think we will spend more and a couple players will come in. We’re likely just biding our time on particular deals and things will start moving again as other dominos fall and the deadline approaches.
We don’t actually seem to differ that much in our opinions, try as you might to find them!
Fair point
Tonali and Bruno G had made it clear months ago that they wanted out of Newcastle, so it was always going to be that Newcastle would have been bringing in lots of cash this window and not been too keen on losing many more senior players.
I don't think it would have made much of a difference.
It's a damning indictment of this club that we even need to think like this.
We knew we needed 3 midfielders and a left back coming in. There is no priority to be had in that scenario, there's only the bare minimum.
If Hall doesn't fit into your budget, move on and sign someone who is in your budget.
We're in a constant state of "let's see how this deal goes and then we'll reevaluate everything else", which is how we wasted the entire month of June waiting to sign Fernandes with zero chance of anything else happening during that time.
Are we really so skint we can't even afford the minimum number of players needed. It's very worrying.
So was I, annoyingly it's reason blocked me from using the emojis or formatting, so couldn't hammer it home!
To be fair, I got lost in your guys back and forth, so maybe only caught one stream of it and missed that bit. I agree on the cheaper LB, although if we miraculously do raise some funds, I think we'd pay for Hall. That's why I don't think it's so much of a cultural reset, as to just adapating to the prices and the budget. Which is just the reality for us at the moment and they're doing a good job so far with what they've got. Totally agree with you on the last bit, I think we've got to find a solution with the money left and the targets we like. That could be a cheaper LB or a cheaper CM, but depends on who's available - if Tchouameni is, the likes of Salinas would be the target. If he's not maybe spend the bulk on Hall and get a cheaper midfield option.
Only slightly, but boy do I seem to find that one thing we don't!
Yeah, I agree it is on how we've been run. I don't think it's necessarily on the recruitment team this year, we'll see come the end of the window though.
You still have to understand how much you're going outlay on each and also your budget may stretch you to a better player, after sales. I would be happy to bide their time if it gets them a better quality player.
I don't think that's necessarily true, I think we just have a budget and needs that can be solved in different ways. The two midfielders so far is a good start and a solid base for negotiating. I would prefer to be further on, but at least we are going into the season with a new look midfield. As I said, net spend wise, we probably have about £85m left without sales. I imagine they're trying to get the biggest bang for your buck with that.
It’s ludicrous that we are well into August and have only signed two players with so much still to address
If you lot don't sign him this summer, I think we will next summer.
Have you got a buy back?
With several other players wanting to leave, you have to act faster and go get him first.
Of course a) the price will be much higher, or b) they won't sell, after having sold a few profiles now and they don't need the cash.
At this point, with all the negative news about midfield, just plunge on this deal already. Even if he's overpriced. That way we'll at least have sorted another position and won't have to spend a lot on a left-back next summer, when we will already be in need of multiple center-backs, a right-back etc.
There has to enough in our budget for at least one more decent signing. Hall could probably even play in midfield in a pinch.
There has to enough in our budget for at least one more decent signing. Hall could probably even play in midfield in a pinch.
That's what I said. We will try and come back in next summer but he will go back to Chelsea, then our fans will say he's not that good anyway and we didn't even want him
Maybe they are being smart with their money and not rushing in.
There’s nothing at all to indicate we are after Hall at all.
Of course a good % of us would want him, but it’s nothing more than complete conjecture from fans.
Of course a good % of us would want him, but it’s nothing more than complete conjecture from fans.
Only if you chose to ignore all the reports from pretty much every journalist connected with United.
Proclaiming Mitten, Whitwell, Stone etc. are all pulling this from their collective a**es is quite the take.
Pay the 70 and get done with it. If our board wasn't brainless, they would have gone for him at a much lower price, but even at 70m, you get a great LB for the next 7-8 years
Ornstein played this down, I doubt this will happen.
I've not seen anything stronger than a passing intrest.
It seems highly unlikely to happen at this point unless we paid an exorbitant fee.
And that's not gonna happen.
Damn right we will!
you don’t leave the pub at 8:30pm with the 2:00am banker.
Yep because he’s 21 that would be the maximum we should offer!
- Status