Poll - Should Rafa stay?

[BFG]

total spent is still 228 mill!!!!!!

net spend or not 228 mill should have us a far better squad than what we have.

Yes £228million should and would have.

However, we've spent £83million instead so we should be forming our opinion around that figure.

[Guest]

total spent is still 228 mill!!!!!!

net spend or not 228 mill should have us a far better squad than what we have.

It's not FFS.

[the rev leeroy brown]

Yes £228million should and would have.

However, we've spent £83million instead so we should be forming our opinion around that figure.

no, he may have a net spend of 83 but he has still spent 228 so we should look at that too.

[Rich]

total spent is still 228 mill!!!!!!

net spend or not 228 mill should have us a far better squad than what we have.

That just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

You can't just look at gross spend

[Reece]

Oh god not this argument again

[Guest]

no, he may have a net spend of 83 but he has still spent 228 so we should look at that too.

Mate, maths isn't your forte no?

[the rev leeroy brown]

That just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

You can't just look at gross spend

you can though. you cant just close your eyes to the fact that whatever the way he had got the money ( having to sell to buy or whatever ) he has still spent 228 mill assembling a squad that has no depth.

yes he has had to wheel and deal to raise the funds and net spend of 83 mill over x amount of years might not be the best but why the hell cant people see that he has had a **** load of money to spend?!?!?

[the rev leeroy brown]

Mate, maths isn't your forte no?

in the same light that logic and sense obviously isnt yours?

[Guest]

in the same light that logic and sense obviously isnt yours?

He never spent 228m, that's it, this is fact, a mathematical tautology.

[BFG]

no, he may have a net spend of 83 but he has still spent 228 so we should look at that too.

By what logic?

[the rev leeroy brown]

He never spent 228m, that's it, this is fact, a mathematical tautology.

if this is fact then i apologise rafa. but according to post from shanks on previous page he has spent 228 mill.

[Shaggy]

Aaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrggggggghhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!

Rev Leroy Brown - do you own a house? And if so how much do you think you've spent on it? Actually that's personal...I don't want to know, but (nicking the old Tomkins analogy ) you don't add up the prices of every house bought and sold to arrive at the amount you've spent on your current house.

Or do you?

[Shaggy]

If Rafa has spent £228m , then Ferguson must've spent billions! BILLIONS! And they're not even top FFS.

[BFG]

you can though. you cant just close your eyes to the fact that whatever the way he had got the money ( having to sell to buy or whatever ) he has still spent 228 mill assembling a squad that has no depth.

yes he has had to wheel and deal to raise the funds and net spend of 83 mill over x amount of years might not be the best but why the hell cant people see that he has had a **** load of money to spend?!?!?

****ing hell.

How can you judge his squad depth as being inadequate on the basis that he's spent £228mil if you admit he's had to sell players to buy new ones?

Think of it this way. If he'd raised £500mil on sales and spent £300mil on purchases has he still had a **** load of money to spend or would you concede that he's not spent anything and actually raised funds for the club? If you're temporary lunacy has passed and you can see what I'm getting at then why would you apply a different logic just because the money out is more than the money in, it's still the same premise.

[Guest]

It's like teaching a kid how to add up FFS.