Liverpool

Liverpool

Premier League • England

£60m Liverpool deal ‘more important’ than Erling Haaland transfer, says pundit

Mo Salah Ian Rush May 2022

Danny Murphy believes that Liverpool’s new deal for Mo Salah is a bigger statement than Manchester City signing Erling Haaland this summer.

Haaland arrived at The Etihad last month for a bargain £51m fee after City met the striker’s release fee at Dortmund. Soon after Liverpool announced that Sadio Mane had left them for Bayern Munich.

Those moves had looked to have tipped the balance towards City. With just once point separating the teams last season, City all of a sudden, on paper, looked to have the upper hand.

The Athletic report Barcelona were keeping a close eye on Salah’s situation. The LaLiga side were ready to line up a free-transfer move next summer upon the expiry of his contract.

But the extension of Salah’s contract at Anfield has steadied the nerves of the Anfield faithful. And former Liverpool midfielder Murphy thinks the Salah extension is “more important” than City signing Haaland.

“The Salah re-signing is more important [than Haaland],” Murphy told talkSPORT.

“City won the league without Haaland, so you could argue they didn’t need him, although he does make them better.”

Salah ‘guarantees’ goals

Salah has penned a new three-year contract worth in the region of £350,000 to £400,000 a week.  The striker’s new deal is understood to be heavily incentivised on his performance.

Still it’s a significant outlay of around £60m for a 30-year-old. It will make the former Chelsea man the club’s highest ever paid player. But with 156 goals in 254 appearances, Murphy argues the new deal for the Egypt star makes sense.

“If Liverpool were to lose Mane and Salah in the same summer, I think it would be difficult for them to fill both those voids. I know they’ve brought in Nunez and they’ve got Luis Diaz, but Salah’s guaranteed goals,” added Murphy.

“If you look at it from a financial point of view, if it is £400,000 [per week], I’m not sure it’s probably that much, but even if it is, that’s £20m-a-year. Times three, £60m. If you were to go out and try to replace him, you’d have to spend more than that and the wages, so it’s a good business deal as well as a good football move.”