Manchester United Transfer News: United Must Increase Offer for Leighton Baines
Manchester United transfer target Leighton Baines was believed by many to be United's top transfer target this summer on the defensive front—boosting the Red Devils back line and adding great depth to the back four at Old Trafford.
However, so far, he is no closer to joining United than he was at the start of the season, with Everton confirming that no bid has been made for Baines.
We have not even had a single enquiry from Manchester United...Every week we are asked the same question, but it is the same answer, and we are getting fed up with it. For two months it has been suggested that United have bid for Baines, but it is simply not true.
The England international was believed to be the subject of a £12 million offer from United earlier in the week, but as Goal reports, the Red Devils were not going to pay more than that amount for the player—limiting themselves at £12 million.
Which, it seems, might not be enough to land Baines.
Everton have already valued the player at closer to £17 million and are reportedly in the process of drawing up a new and improved contract to keep the defender at Goodison Park, since he is vital to the team's plans this season.
According to The Daily Mirror, it was thought that the club's well-known financial problems would force the Toffees to accept United's reduced offer, but it now seems that they are completely content to hang on to Baines throughout the summer transfer window.
If Manchester United want to land the defender, they will have to pay closer to the £17 million that Everton desire—a move that should be made by manager Sir Alex Ferguson.
Sir Alex has already conceded that United are a little short at left back and given the way in which injuries to their defense crippled United's chances for a 20th English Premier League title, he would be wise not to allow the same mistake to happen again.
How much should Manchester United offer Leighton Baines?
Comment below or hit me up on Twitter: Follow @dantalintyre
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?