Vurnon Anita Completes Newcastle United Signing, Twitter Reacts
Newcastle United have made their biggest move in an otherwise flat transfer window, by completing the deal for Ajax midfielder Vurnon Anita.
Anita, who can play at left back or defensive midfield, has signed a five-year contract and was wrested from Ajax for an undisclosed fee, believed to be about £6.7 million.
The Dutch national will effectively be an upgrade on Danny Guthrie, who joined Reading on a free transfer earlier in the off-season.
The move provides much-needed depth for United's midfield, and comes as welcome relief with Chieck Tiote in doubt for the season opener against Tottenham Hotspur.
Newcastle fans have been quick to welcome Anita to the club, with Jamie Sanderson celebrating the work of United's scouts:
Vurnon Anita another sensible Newcastle buy. Strong, rugged, versatile. Fits philosophy. Reaping rewards of trusting their scouts.
Inside Football agreed:
VurnonAnita is an exceptional signing for Newcastle United, always seem to get their signings spot on #NUFC
Tom Varney said Anita's versatility will prove an excellent asset:
Vurnon Anita is a fantastic signing for Newcastle, I'm slightly jealous of this 1 A great versatile midfielder that can cover at full back 2
Another fan said he should fit well into the team:
Newcastle is going to enjoy Vurnon Anita. Very small but highly-technical and energetic deep-lying midfielder. Will pair well with Cabaye.
Not everyone is completely sold on the signing, with Nick Williams suggesting he may be another link in a long chain of self-interested players:
Theres only one negative about Vurnon Anita. He has his own name tattooed onto his forearm for some reason...
At any rate, Anita is the top signing United have made during this transfer window, with Romain Amalfitano, Gael Birgirimana and Curtis Good the others brought in.
With about two weeks left of the transfer window, it remains to be seen whether anyone else will join the Tyneside outfit.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?