Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Kaka at Madrid













Without Limits

New member
Jan 14, 2007
250
Lewes Road Area
Well, tough one. I'd say if the buying club was a British one and they spent £56m then it would rightly be seen to us as a world record. However, because the buying club is a spanish one dealing in euros (and they happen to hold the previous record), you have to use their currency. Facts are they paid more euros for Zidane than they did Kaka.

They are all saying its a new record Sky Sports just went though all of them but nevermind. 6 year deal? hope he breaks his leg.
 




Mr deez

Masterchef
Jan 13, 2005
3,532
I don't consider this a world record signing- the currency for the clubs involved is euro's, and zidane cost more.
 


Northstander

Well-known member
Oct 13, 2003
14,031
In word he is yes, the shirt sales alone will recopu that money!
 




Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,921
Brighton
I think the idea of the value of the pound would be contentious, and could lead to Rio Ferdinand's deal being more expensive than Robinho's. OK, I'm not too hot on the historical values of the pound, but my point is that one pound today is not worth the same as it was in 83, so a £1m transfer in 83 is more expensive than a £1m transfer today. Was that taken into account with Shearer's record breaking transfer, or with Rio's or with Robinho's?

So, I think "most expensive" simply means the larger numerical value.


As for the euros v pounds thing, I think that would probably win the argument for whether this is the most expensive transfer or not.
 




Monsieur Le Plonk

Lethargy in motion
Apr 22, 2009
1,860
By a lake
:shrug:
Is it just me, as I can't quite see, compared to the other 'best' players in the world, just why he is so raved about? Maybe I simply havent seen enough footage of him. Will someone advise me please?
 








Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here