Paolo Maldini claimed that Milan didn’t want to spend heavily for Paulo Dybala due to their desire to sign young talents, but the costs of the Divock Origi deal cause his argument to collapse.
The Rossoneri director has been widely criticised following the team’s Champions League semi-final exit, with many fans and onlookers pointing to the poor squad options available to Stefano Pioli in the clash.
A key point of criticism has been Milan’s work in last summer’s transfer window, which came just after their Scudetto success. The team invested heavily in youngster Charles De Ketelaere, who has not impressed, and also offered a lucrative contract to free-agent Divock Origi.
Maldini defended his work by saying: “It would’ve been much easier and less expensive to go for a player like Dybala. But would it have been the right purchase for our project? Would it have been shared by the ownership? No… You have to take risks with young players.”
La Gazzetta dello Sport highlights how Roma are paying Dybala around €4.5m net per season plus add-ons, which is only a little more than Origi, who earns €4m net at Milan.
The Rossoneri’s decision to pick up the former Liverpool striker instead of Dybala has not paid off, with the 28-year-old Belgian scoring just two goals in 35 appearances across all competitions.
You have completely misinterpreted what he said! Charles was signed instead of dybala! Origi was signed as backup to giroud and not instead of dybala!
You’re right sogliano rosario = however havent seen much of charles since after the world cup ended, whats happened ?
Pioli keeps playing the completely ineffective Diaz, and as a result ruined Charles confidence in the process. I would actually be surprised if he doesn’t ask for a transfer himself.