Because we want Hammond on the (relative) cheap. If Brighton had offered £200k for Murphy he'd still be at the Lane and if we offered £1m for Hammond and matched his current wages he'd be playing in a Blades kit on Saturday.
And is Hammond banging down the owners' door asking to go or is he shrugging his shoulders and wondering if a Championship club will come in for him?
I think it's a little more nuanced than you've explained. Yes, if Brighton had offered £200K of course Murphy would still be here, but that rationale applies to most players. The point about matching Hammond's current wages was never going to be a comparable point worth discussing. Leicester's wage structure will have risen with their climb up the league, while ours has remained at the lower end of the scale, and will do so for the immediate future, so being able to compete with Hammond's wage, or even 50% of it was never a realistic question.
As for Hammond knocking on anyone's door, somehow I doubt it as he'll be happy to pick up his current salary from Leicester. What I can state is that Hammond and Murphy are very different discussions upon which it's unwise to compare their circumstance. We chose to let Murphy leave, and all within a matter of weeks of the supporters being told he wasn't going to be sold. So we go from a position of standing firm with regard to retaining our best player to that of doing a u-turn. What is it about "We're not selling Murphy" that's difficult to understand?
My point all along has been what's in the club's best interests. At the beginning of this season Adkins made it clear that our aim has to be promotion this term. He then followed this with the rather obvious comment that a club which intends to seek promotion doesn't sell its best players.....the logic of then selling our best player, given what was said, should be self-evident, especially as Murphy hasn't been replaced or that we haven't strengthened other areas of the team.
Never mind what we received for Murphy, money can't slip on a shirt or tie up the laces on it's boots and help us win games. On the other hand, players are what make the difference, not how much money sits safely in the club's bank account. I'm not the least bit interested in convoluted ideas about unhappy players causing unrest. Ask WBA about their want-away player Berahino. He went public about how 'unhappy' he is about being
'held' to his agreement. Funny that, I doubt he was unhappy when West Brom paid him a princely sum to sign a new contract. This works both ways, and WBA seem to understand what's in their best interests and therefore what
may help them retain their Premiership status. These points have been covered before on this forum, so I guess you either accept the 'uncomplicated' line that we've been told by the club, or you can look at other clubs and ask why they decide
not to adopt the same approach as United?
I'm normally a poster who chooses to support United, but on this particular point.....let's just say it doesn't stand up to examination.
