Tottenham Hotspur Reportedly Nearing Deal for Emmanuel Adebayor
UPDATE: Tuesday, Aug. 21 at 12:35 p.m. by Alex Hall
We are delighted to announce that we have completed the transfer of Emmanuel Adebayor from Manchester City. More to come soon!— Tottenham Hotspur (@SpursOfficial) August 21, 2012
--End OF UPDATE--
Peter O'Rourke of Sky Sports is reporting that Tottenham Hotspur is closing in on acquiring Emmanuel Adebayor from Manchester City.
It appears that Tottenham enjoyed the 17 goals Adebayor scored for the club while on loan from City during the 2011-2012 English Premier League season and would like to lock up a deal that would make him a permanent member of the club.
In another interesting development in the possible move for Adebayor, Matt Scott of the Daily Telegraph recently reported that the discussions have gotten to the financial stage, stating:
It appears City are now willing to make significant one-off contribution to compensate for the reduction in Adebayor’s future salary if Spurs meet the Premier League champions’ transfer-fee valuation.
This marks the second time this summer that the Togo striker has neared a move to Spurs, with a similar deal breaking down between the two clubs over personal reasons awhile back.
Manchester City manager Roberto Mancini recently told ESPN, "There is no chance of [Adebayor] playing for us, so for that reason it’s important we find a solution."
City appears ready to move on from its 28-year-old attacker according to Mancini, and RotoWire believes that Tottenham is just as desperate to obtain him as Adebayor's current team is to move him.
If the veteran does make the move over to Tottenham, this will mark Adebayor's fifth team in his career, as he has previously played for Metz, Monaco and Arsenal before joining Man City in 2009. Adebayor's contract with his current team expires in the summer of 2014.
Over the past three seasons, Adebayor has scored 37 goals while with City, as well as his loan stints with Real Madrid and Tottenham.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?