It’s now become very clear why NUFC didn’t sign Chelsea’s Ruben Loftus-Cheek on deadline day…

This time yesterday, The Times’ Martin Hardy said that a potential move to St James’ Park for Ruben Loftus-Cheek was “not happening”.

Not what we wanted to hear when he could’ve been that “mouthwatering” loan deal to grab Steve Bruce’s attention on deadline day, however it’s now become clear why we seemingly opted against a loan bid for the England international.

As revealed by both Sky Sports News and The Telegraph, he’s on a whopping £150,000 per-week at Chelsea – wages demands that would’ve been a non starter for us, especially when we’ve struggled to move out several outcasts who are stealing a living on £30,000 plus (Saivet and Lazaar, I’m looking at you).

He’s still managed to find himself a deadline day move, joining Fulham on a season-long loan, however his wage demands were described as a ‘stumbling block’ at one stage last night – and it’s easy to see why!

Harry Redknapp then had this to say on it all when finding out how much the 24-year-old earns on Sky Sports News!

He could’ve added some much needed power, explosiveness and creativity to our midfield, however it isn’t hard to work out why we opted against a potential loan move if he’s on that sort of money!

It’s Mike Ashley’s cash, not ours, so I would’ve still been happy to see him arrive last night, but this helps explain why we left this deal alone.

Follow us on Twitter (@NUFCBlogcouk) and on Facebook HERE

About Olly Hawkins

Olly has been a Junior Magpie from birth. As a season ticket holder and avid Newcastle United fan - he eats, sleeps and breathes all things NUFC.

6 thoughts on “It’s now become very clear why NUFC didn’t sign Chelsea’s Ruben Loftus-Cheek on deadline day…

  1. He wasn’t something we need, a defender was priority.
    Lazar and Saivet needed moving on for sure.

    We completed 1 signing which was arranged a while ago so deadline day looks like a damp squid all round lol.

    Where where all the sources close to on deadline day.

      (Quote)

  2. Overall a 60-40 transfer window for the Toon

    Two brilliant players in Lewis and Wilson – then questionable signings with Hendrick and Fraser = why? When we’ve got so many midfielder’s

    And short on Defender’s and we needed another Striker = Carroll being here over a year with a goal return of 0 = joining Joelinton in Midfield (!!???)

    Bunch of clowns

    Above every the ONLY way to look and smile is we can still get a ‘MANAGER’

      (Quote)

  3. Very harsh for those you accuse of stealing a living. I’d rather blame the club for directionless recruitment. From memory, Saivet has performed well whenever he has played… Must be damn hard to only get a few games here and there. And I don’t recall any of them being difficult.

      (Quote)

  4. I would say stealing a living. They were offered a contract and accepted. Both have been out on loan to play football. Not their issue. Just a sign of the clubs poor strategy at giving long deals hoping they come good.

      (Quote)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green