I know,these kind of players are needed in teams.Liverpool have Mascherano(better all round player though),Chelsea have Makalele,Milan have Gattuso.I would prob. pay 18 million for Gattuso because he is a good passer of the ball and he has unbelievable aggression.but Hargreaves isnt near as good.Man Utd could have easily got someone better(and cheaper) to fill this position.
Chelsea paid £17m for Makelele in 2003, and he was 30 at the time. Was that a bad deal? Hargreaves is a top quality defensive midfielder and, contrary to what you think, he can do more than tackle when he needs to. He showed that against Portugal in the World Cup.
I can't think of a defensive midfielder with International and Champions League experience, like Owen, who'd be much cheaper. United are also paying a premium because he'll settle in a lot easier than an Italian or a South American. He's played alongside Michael Carrick for the England team. I'd rather we spend £17m on him than half that on someone who turns out to be the next Kleberson.
My point is this.While these kind of players are important they aren't worth this kind of money.Hargreaves is very limited.Whats gonna happen Carrick anyway.How much did they pay for him?24 million was it.What a waste of money.
Carrick will, eventually, replace Scholes.
Waste of money? Carrick cost between £14-18m, depending on clauses, and he helped us lift this:
I'd say that's a pretty good return. I'm sure Liverpool would pay ten times that to get their grubby Scouse hands on the Premiership trophy.
