by winchester_royal » 03 Jan 2010 16:13
by Victor Meldrew » 03 Jan 2010 16:14
PlatypussVictor Meldrew One other bit of info-the new Icelandic is supposedly yet another littl'un.
A quick glance at wiki says he's 5 ft 11+1⁄2. Is the rest of your info just as reliable?
by Barry the bird boggler » 03 Jan 2010 16:17
Victor Meldrew Before the game last night I was told that Marek was about to leave as well as Shane Long plus one other.
I was also told that Long has been working really hard on his fitness (shouldn't he have done this back in the summer?)as well as the reported one-to-ones with Mr Lampard before he left but (surprise,surprise) the club has lost patience with him.
Marek would be no surprise to anybody because of the wages and he really hasn't been consistent enough for us.
One other bit of info-the new Icelandic is supposedly yet another littl'un.
by Victor Meldrew » 03 Jan 2010 16:19
Terminal BoardomVictor Meldrew Before the game last night I was told that Marek was about to leave as well as Shane Long plus one other.
I was also told that Long has been working really hard on his fitness (shouldn't he have done this back in the summer?)as well as the reported one-to-ones with Mr Lampard before he left but (surprise,surprise) the club has lost patience with him.
Marek would be no surprise to anybody because of the wages and he really hasn't been consistent enough for us.
One other bit of info-the new Icelandic is supposedly yet another littl'un.
Bye. Who is the one other or are you making that up for a laugh?
by Victor Meldrew » 03 Jan 2010 16:20
Ian RoyalBath HoopsI think we'd probably have to pay about £1.25m to get him even Portsmouth wont take such a big hit. Question would be whether we'd pay that much when we haven't got a new manager unless McDermott has already been given the nod. Smith may not be up for the move either, but it could be worth it if the money was available.howser Yeah Bath have thought that myself, Smith doesnt seem to be much involved at Portsmouth so maybe a cheeky £500k might encourage them to get him off the Pompey wage bill ??
That could have been worth a shout with Rodgers still at the club. Maybe we'd put feelers out already and it wasn't going to happen...
by Ian Royal » 03 Jan 2010 16:31
by surrounded by saints » 03 Jan 2010 16:43
Ideal I'm sorry Dan, but it is like keeping the pretty but stupid girlfriend who cheats on you, only because she is good in bed.
You have to think that his contributions have been few and far between, and the disappointments frequent.
He is probably on good wages as well. If we sold him we could possibly fund a striker.
We have plenty of midfielders and no decent strikers.
by Terminal Boardom » 03 Jan 2010 17:14
Ian Royal Think Madejski had flash backs to Burns spending heavily on mediocrity again and again. I don't think Rodgers did too badly in the transfer market, but he spent a lot and didn't get a great deal out of his money once the season started. I get the feeling Madj just wasn't prepared to risk Rodgers spending another million or two on more players that aren't good enough or sit on the bench.
by Ian Royal » 03 Jan 2010 17:28
by FiNeRaIn » 03 Jan 2010 17:28
by Terminal Boardom » 03 Jan 2010 18:36
Ian Royal It's quite simple. I don't think the players he signed were that bad. But he didn't really get great value for money out of them.Bertrand has been good, but far from excellent.
McAnuff took a while to get fit and has been mostly excellent
Rasiak is doing his job fairly well.
Howard started to come good once he stopped being used as the attacking midfielder but got injured. Early on he was keeping Sig out the side which was not clever.
Cummings showed small flashes of quality whilst being not really good enough. This has left us desperate at right back. Would have been better in a more confident team with a better centreback combination next to him.
Mills has been a flop for the amount paid, mainly because Rodgers hasn't played him IMO
O'Dea was a bit of a waste of time given the amount he played.
by Ian Royal » 03 Jan 2010 18:50
by Victor Meldrew » 03 Jan 2010 19:05
Ian Royal RG?
by Boyband » 03 Jan 2010 19:18
by Rev Algenon Stickleback H » 03 Jan 2010 20:20
Royalwaster One thing worth considering though is that I think that our lack of ability upfront has meant that Marek's abilities haven't been fully recognised - if we had a decent striker with pace and finishing ability, it might be a different story.
by Southbank Old Boy » 03 Jan 2010 20:37
Ian Royal It's quite simple. I don't think the players he signed were that bad. But he didn't really get great value for money out of them.Bertrand has been good, but far from excellent.
McAnuff took a while to get fit and has been mostly excellent
Rasiak is doing his job fairly well.
Howard started to come good once he stopped being used as the attacking midfielder but got injured. Early on he was keeping Sig out the side which was not clever.
Cummings showed small flashes of quality whilst being not really good enough. This has left us desperate at right back. Would have been better in a more confident team with a better centreback combination next to him.
Mills has been a flop for the amount paid, mainly because Rodgers hasn't played him IMO
O'Dea was a bit of a waste of time given the amount he played.
by Southbank Old Boy » 03 Jan 2010 20:38
Victor MeldrewIan Royal RG?
No,I don't know Ron.
by Victor Meldrew » 03 Jan 2010 21:00
Southbank Old BoyVictor MeldrewIan Royal RG?
No,I don't know Ron.
My money would be on RI
by Southbank Old Boy » 03 Jan 2010 21:01
by Samrfc01 » 03 Jan 2010 23:17
Users browsing this forum: Who Moved The Goalposts? and 119 guests