Those West Ham United supporters are not the only London-based fanbase taking issue with Mohammed Kudus’ impending £55 million switch to Tottenham Hotspur.
In the grand scheme of things, and while this obviously adds insult to injury as Kudus prepares to leave the Hammers for a bitter rival, £55 million is pretty good value for a footballer of such supreme natural talent.
If Tottenham can harness the very best of the Ghana international – Alan Pardew said it best when he claimed that Kudus can be utterly ‘unplayable’ on his day – then £55 million could prove to be a bargain.
Especially in an era where Jack Grealish, Kai Havertz, Omar Marmoush and Jadon Sancho have been traded for far more.
Hammers News have been informed, via football correspondent Graeme Bailey, that chairman David Sullivan ‘buckled’ in negotiations with Daniel Levy.
Tottenham have now agreed a deal for less than West Ham’s initial £60 million-plus asking price, and at a massive discount on the £85 million release clause in his London Stadium contract.
A great deal for Spurs, less so for West Ham even if Mohammed Kudus’ sale frees up much-needed funds for new arrivals.
As for Arsenal, suggestions that the Gunners could stump up a similar fee to bring Noni Madueke to the Emirates from down the road at Chelsea has many wondering why the Premier League’s perennial bridesmaids did not just go for Kudus themselves.
MORE WEST HAM STORIES
Arsenal fans are not happy as Tottenham close in on West Ham United’s Mohammed Kudus
Fabrizio Romano reported on Wednesday that Madueke has agreed personal terms with Arsenal. They have also made an offer of around £50 million for the one-time Tottenham starlet.
Chelsea want closer to £55 million, however.
Meaning that, if Madueke does follow in the footsteps of Jorginho, William Gallas, Willian, Havertz and more, Arsenal will end up investing a very similar fee to the one Spurs paid for Kudus.
“There is no way in hell Madueke is worth anywhere near this,” one frustrated Gunners supporter writes on social media. “If Kudus is £55 million, Madueke is £35 million max!”
“We could’ve got Kudus [for the fee Chelsea are demanding for Madueke],” another adds.
“Tottenham paid £55 million for Kudus. Arsenal want to pay £55 million [for] Madueke,” one agrees, his comments accompanied with a gif of a particularly dejected-looking Cristiano Ronaldo.
“£55 million for Kudus and you’re telling me £50 million-plus for Madueke… I’m sorry but my eyes don’t lie. You can’t convince me that Noni Madueke is a better player than Mohammed Kudus. Madness!”
Chelsea want over £50 million from Arsenal for Noni Madueke
In his defence, Madueke did outperform Kudus last season both in terms of goals [seven to five] and assists [four to three].
However, taking into account their respective natural ability and the height of their individual ceilings, Kudus still feels like a potentially world-class footballer in waiting. The feeling around Madueke, in contrast, is that he could very well develop into an extremely good forward player, but not a particularly great one.
“Kudus is a better player for that money…,” another fan sighs. “The same genius Mikel Arteta who chose Kai Havertz over Cole Palmer when both were available.”
“I don’t have a problem with signing Madueke. What I have a problem with is the fee. £50 million as an opening bid is pure foolishness. We are definitely going to pay, like, £60 million for him and that’s more than what Spurs paid for Kudus.”
“£55 million for Kudus is a better deal than £50 million for Madueke.”