Manchester United have made a habit of dragging out transfers and while much of this summer’s business was done swiftly, their move for Sofyan Amrabat was anything but.
Erik ten Hag made no secret of his desire to add more defensive strength to his midfield unit, with cover and competition for Casemiro badly needed.
Amrabat’s name was a regular in the gossip columns and the 27-year-old was constantly linked with the Reds while the likes of Liverpool and Barcelona were also mentioned. He was more than open to a move and Fiorentina were seemingly happy to cash in for the right price - which begs the question as to why it was not done sooner.
It’s important not to over-simplify the process of signing a player, and modern supporters tend to use computer games as a reference point for the real world. But United showed in signing Mason Mount and Andre Onana how quickly they can get a deal over the line.
ALSO READ:Morocco manager issues Amrabat update after United confirm injury
It’s also worth mentioning that a United official screwed up his face when Amrabat’s name was mentioned during the pre-season tour. However, the opening-day win over Wolves made it clear United needed to bolster their options in the centre of the pitch.
Despite the evidence on show at Old Trafford on August 14, United waited until the final day of the window the add to their midfield ranks again and paid the price as a result.
Such is the nature of deadline-day deals, everyone involved is desperate. Buying clubs are scrambling to fill the last gaps in their squad while selling teams need to squeeze out every last pound in order to justify losing a player without having the time to replace them.
Financial concerns meant that United could only take Amrabat on loan for the season, potentially making the deal permanent in the future. They reportedly offered to pay a €2million loan fee for the midfielder but ended up forking out five times that.
“I don’t believe in the €10m loan, we’ll see in the budget,” former sporting director Pino Vitale told Tuttomercatoweb recently. “Because if they wanted to give €2m and then all together they reached €10m it doesn’t make much sense to me.
“Then if in the final budget [of Fiorentina] there really is €10m I’ll change my mind, but until I see, I don’t believe it.”
€10m is a high fee for a loan deal - around the same amount that Chelsea paid Atletico Madrid for Joao Felix last season - but the option to make it permanent raises further questions. Should United be impressed by Amrabat’s debut campaign with them, they would be able to sign him for €25m plus €5m in add-ons.
Amrabat’s contract with Fiorentina is set to expire next summer, albeit the Italian side have an option to extend it by a further 12 months. That will likely be done regardless of his future in order to maintain some value.
However, what it would mean for United is that they could essentially pay €35m plus €5m in add-ons. That seems a lot to pay for a player who will have one year left on his contract.
Some supporters won’t care too much about the intricacies, and the argument that Ten Hag got the man he wanted is valid. Amrabat is an excellent player and should add much-needed steel to the midfield.
But the deal is not a particularly good one for United financially, and it is certainly not evidence that they have banished their reputation in the transfer market.
Story Saved
You can find this story in My Bookmarks.Or by navigating to the user icon in the top right.
