Mickey mouse club, should be thrown out tbh...Bought glory by Russian mafia and the like

Don't think we messed up with the clause, sounds like it's pretty standard but rarely does a player stink this much that the buying club would prefer to pay out £5m not to take him.

The reports last week were that Chelsea were willing to take him if he agreed to lower wages in line with the club's wage bill. This move would suggest Sancho was unwilling to do so and that money is his priority.

Moving forward that would seem like any sale this summer is highly unlikely. With just a year left on his contract all I can see us doing is loaning him out for the season and then he's free to go wherever he likes with the hope of a nice signing on fee. Hopefully every club will be put off by the little sh-t and he has no good options next summer.

Rashford, Sancho and Antony back on loan again would be truly disastrous but you can already see it happening. The players hold all the power these days not the clubs.

Sancho will surely leave.

Give him the £5m and he can then take £150k a week rather than £250k a week.

So we now have to pay Sancho £5m to leave the club?

He didn’t tear up any trees at Chelsea, but he wasn’t that bad either.

comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 6 minutes ago
So we now have to pay Sancho £5m to leave the club?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not ideal but if that's what it takes!

comment by Tyranny of the majority (SE85) (U21241)
posted 15 minutes ago
Rashford, Sancho and Antony back on loan again would be truly disastrous but you can already see it happening. The players hold all the power these days not the clubs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We shouldn’t blame the players, this stupid club gave them those contracts

Last summer we had zero leverage in shipping Sancho. Huge salary. No way he could stay at the club. Chelsea weren't going to agree to a cast-iron obligation to buy while taking on his current salary. There was no fuсk up with that deal. The disappointment now is due to incomplete reporting.

As for the future, my initial reaction was that Sancho clearly prioritises protecting his salary over playing football, and as such there's no chance of selling him to another club. But on reflection, we don't know whether Chelsea's offer was *very* low, signalling that he'd be a bit part player. It could be that his advisors have reasonably concluded that they can get a better offer elsewhere, with salary higher than Chelsea offered but lower than his current United deal, and/or at a club where he's going to be a starter. The next weeks will make it clearer.

comment by Tyranny of the majority (SE85) (U21241)
posted 35 minutes ago
Rashford, Sancho and Antony back on loan again would be truly disastrous but you can already see it happening. The players hold all the power these days not the clubs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The contracts we offered those players give them power. But the players probably also want to play football, not just earn. Much too early to catastrophise about the possibility we can't sell any of them.

Can understand the loan as covered the Mudryk absence, however can't see that we were ever going to to sign him permanently unless a serious reduction in wages.

IMO Squad player at best based on what we have seen but no way worth the wages he is seemingly wanting, good luck to the guy though some good moments but not enough.

Oh look, Mr Freedom sent back because he’s still shiiiiiit. I never could have imagined that happening.

Apparently he only 1 year left on his United and it's the club who have the option to extend it by a year.

Surely it's in Sancho's best interests to accept a long term deal elsewhere even for less money.

We won't get a huge fee but I reckon we'll move him on.

I can't imagine Chelsea would have offered him a 'very' low offer, he would still have been part of their first team squad and used often so would have commanded a wage of around £100-150k p/w I reckon. The sides that we can realistically hope will want Sancho all play abroad and I honestly can't see them being able to offer more than what Chelsea would have.

I'm sure Sancho would like to play football but it would seem making as much money as he can is of greater importance than trying to revive his career. He had the oportunity to play for his boyhood club and be close to family. I honestly have no idea where he's going to go now.

Hahahah what a funny load of shiiit .
I want to see rashford and Antony back next, please make it happen.

1982, it's all relative, isn't it? Maybe there's a figure that Sancho's entourage believe they can get (based on discussions with clubs out there) which is higher than Chelsea are offering - doesn't mean he's unwilling to accept any reduction on his contracted United salary. And as I said, it could be that the Chelsea offer reinforced the sense that he wouldn't be getting many minutes. Hypothetically, if Dortmund offered the same salary, he might view it in a different light because that would be at the top of their scale.

This is pure conjecture on my part. I just think there are more possibilities here than seeing it through the 'lazy, greedy, petulant child' lens. Especially, as others have pointed out, as his medium term earnings might benefit from signing a five-year contract now on lower wages than waiting to see what he can achieve next summer after potentially sitting in United's reserves.

comment by Ali - 🇪🇦 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 (U1192)
posted 9 minutes ago
Hahahah what a funny load of shiiit .
I want to see rashford and Antony back next, please make it happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are back as there was no obligation to buy them.

did the 300k wages make sense at the time?

comment by Blarmy (U14547)
posted 37 seconds ago
did the 300k wages make sense at the time?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

At the time a lot of people were congratulating Ed Woodward for "playing hardball" (yes, hardball!) for walking away from the deal the previous summer when Dortmund were asking for £120m. I suppose the one consolation is that we could have been an even bigger laughing stock.

Russian

TBF I think the 'lazy, greedy, petulant child' element is probably a large part of it. Nothing wrong with accepting a lot of players in the modern day are completely out of touch spoilt pr-cks who couldn't give a sh-t about anyone else other than themselves.

comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 33 minutes ago
I can't imagine Chelsea would have offered him a 'very' low offer, he would still have been part of their first team squad and used often so would have commanded a wage of around £100-150k p/w I reckon. The sides that we can realistically hope will want Sancho all play abroad and I honestly can't see them being able to offer more than what Chelsea would have.

I'm sure Sancho would like to play football but it would seem making as much money as he can is of greater importance than trying to revive his career. He had the oportunity to play for his boyhood club and be close to family. I honestly have no idea where he's going to go now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I dunno, Chelsea are pretty strict on their wage bill nowadays. They offer lower wages and longer contracts compared to the rest of the big clubs.

I thought the long contract loophole isn't a thing anymore and was also more for young players, Sancho is 25.

Looking at this I could see him being offered a wage between 100-150k p/w.

https://www.capology.com/club/chelsea/salaries/

We still offer the long contracts

It just cant be used in the PSR calcs in the way it used to be

The long contracts are also about protecting the player value, it wasnt only about PSR

You think he wouldn't have been offered a wage to put him in the top 15 paid players (100k+) at the club?

i think you're in the right ballpark yeah