Forum
{{ post.commentCount }}

Didn't find anything.

{{ searchResult.errors[0] }}



Virgil Van Dijk on the move?
Comments
Emobot7 7 years ago
538 11426

OH SH...!!!

Anyway, if he does move, the saint will get plenty for him from what I heard, so its not all bad. Just checked right now and rumours say's Southampton want 60 million £ for him. Considering what City paid for Stone (XD), I don't think they would be able to pay that. Then again, if Stone is worth 47.5M, then Van Djik is certainly worth at least 60M. XD

0
Aiden_Finland 7 years ago Edited
Real Madrid, Finland 18 1236

Southampton know how to make money they purchased Van Dijk for £11.5m and are about to make around £48.5m if Van Dijk leaves.I prefer him to stay because he is the Sergio Ramos of Southampton.

1
  • History
Showing previous versions of this text.

Southampton know how to make money they purchased Van Dijk for £11.5m and are about to make around £38.5m if Van Dijk leaves.I prefer him to stay because he is the Sergio Ramos of Southampton.

SunFlash 7 years ago
USA 19 3260

He's an excellent defender, quietly one of the best in the league the past few years. If he gets a move, he deserves it.

0
saatvik10 7 years ago
Manchester United, India 27 540

Does nobody notice the life size cutout of Ronaldo in the right??

0
kyoekyar 7 years ago
12 163

How can city buy these players without breaking FFF?

0
SunFlash 7 years ago
USA 19 3260

They make a ton of money. FFF is used to prevent clubs from spending beyond their means and folding. City would have to buy everyone on Earth to run out of money.

0
Emobot7 7 years ago Edited
538 11426

While talking about Van Djik going to City to fix the defense, can we also discuss what a stupid idea it was from City and Pep to buy Stones, especially for this ridiculous prize. I mean, he wasn't so good in the 2015-2016 season in my opinion and was quite a bit overated in my opinion. Even I at first was thinking Pep would make him a better defender but its certainly didn't turn this way, as it. I would even ask if they wouldn't have been better keeping Mangala instead. :S I mean, it might have been a move for the future, but for that kind of money, it seem like a very big risk, especially considering the lack of decent player at his position to replace him when he is not consistent.

0
  • History
Showing previous versions of this text.

While talking about Van Djik going to City to fix the defense, can we also discuss what a stupid idea it was from City and Pep to buy Stone, especially for this ridiculous prize. I mean, he wasn't so good in the 2015-2016 season in my opinion and was quite a bit overated in my opinion. Even I at first was thinking Pep would make him a better defender but its certainly didn't turn this way, as it. I would even ask if they wouldn't have been better keeping Mangala instead. :S I mean, it might have been a move for the future, but for that kind of money, it seem like a very big risk, especially considering the lack of decent player at his position to replace him when he is not consistent.