Royal Lady Seriously - do you really think we would sell Cox for peanuts and then pay a million to get him back??? It's not the "Reading way".
Did you not once say that there was no way he would return to Reading ??? HAs something changed?
by The 17 Bus » 12 Jun 2009 18:41
Royal Lady Seriously - do you really think we would sell Cox for peanuts and then pay a million to get him back??? It's not the "Reading way".
by Royal Lady » 12 Jun 2009 18:43
by Ian Royal » 12 Jun 2009 23:31
by Royal Lady » 13 Jun 2009 10:15
by Rawlie19 » 13 Jun 2009 10:19
Royal Lady We haven't spent a million pounds or more in resigning someone. Hope this helps.
by Royal Lady » 13 Jun 2009 12:36
by Ian Royal » 13 Jun 2009 12:43
Royal Lady Why would we bother selling someone for peanuts if there was the remotest chance that if they did well we'd spend a million to get them back? He won't come back here this season and RFC won't bid for him.
by Muskrat » 13 Jun 2009 13:49
Ian Royal Whether we bid or not is a case of whether Rodgers wants him and thinks he's worth the amount we'd have to spend.
by Ian Royal » 13 Jun 2009 15:05
MuskratIan Royal Whether we bid or not is a case of whether Rodgers wants him and thinks he's worth the amount we'd have to spend.
No shit Sherlock..
by Royal Lady » 13 Jun 2009 18:08
by The 17 Bus » 13 Jun 2009 20:03
by Ian Royal » 13 Jun 2009 21:43
by brendywendy » 15 Jun 2009 10:52
Ian RoyalRoyal Lady Why would we bother selling someone for peanuts if there was the remotest chance that if they did well we'd spend a million to get them back? He won't come back here this season and RFC won't bid for him.
We sold him because he wanted to go and play first team football, which he wasn't ready for in the Prem in all probability. He's developed a hell of a lot as a player doing that and we're now in a lower division. He knows the club. He knows the Manager and he knows a lot of the players. He's still local. We have probably got some quite handy clauses in his sale.
It is an ideal signing and what we sold him for is immaterial. Whether we bid or not is a case of whether Rodgers wants him and thinks he's worth the amount we'd have to spend. Dismissing the idea is simply foolish.
by brendywendy » 15 Jun 2009 10:52
The 17 Bus I would suggest that he would consider coming back if we are in the hunt, i would agree that he would not return while Coppell was here, and i doubt Coppell would have gone after him, Rodgers might well like to have him back, time will tell, and lets wait and see.
HOWEVER, at the moment he would still be at least third in line, behind Doyle and n Hunt, with Long and Church showing potential we will only sign a striker that Rodgers thinks is better than Hunt, or as good as Hunt if Doyle moves on.
by Royal Lady » 15 Jun 2009 13:37
I'm not upset anymore - he's done far better for himself than if he'd been kept in the reserves here. I would, however, venture to suggest, that if RFC thought he might go on to be such a good player that they would consider buying him back at some point, they would have loaned him out for another season before selling him for £200k.brendywendyIan RoyalRoyal Lady Why would we bother selling someone for peanuts if there was the remotest chance that if they did well we'd spend a million to get them back? He won't come back here this season and RFC won't bid for him.
We sold him because he wanted to go and play first team football, which he wasn't ready for in the Prem in all probability. He's developed a hell of a lot as a player doing that and we're now in a lower division. He knows the club. He knows the Manager and he knows a lot of the players. He's still local. We have probably got some quite handy clauses in his sale.
It is an ideal signing and what we sold him for is immaterial. Whether we bid or not is a case of whether Rodgers wants him and thinks he's worth the amount we'd have to spend. Dismissing the idea is simply foolish.
because shes still very upset that we let him go in the first place, and cant pass an opportunity to say so.
by Sun Tzu » 15 Jun 2009 13:45
I'm not upset anymore - he's done far better for himself than if he'd been kept in the reserves here. I would, however, venture to suggest, that if RFC thought he might go on to be such a good player that they would consider buying him back at some point, they would have loaned him out for another season before selling him for £200k.Royal Lady
because shes still very upset that we let him go in the first place, and cant pass an opportunity to say so.
by brendywendy » 15 Jun 2009 13:47
Royal LadyI'm not upset anymore - he's done far better for himself than if he'd been kept in the reserves here. I would, however, venture to suggest, that if RFC thought he might go on to be such a good player that they would consider buying him back at some point, they would have loaned him out for another season before selling him for £200k.brendywendyIan Royal
We sold him because he wanted to go and play first team football, which he wasn't ready for in the Prem in all probability. He's developed a hell of a lot as a player doing that and we're now in a lower division. He knows the club. He knows the Manager and he knows a lot of the players. He's still local. We have probably got some quite handy clauses in his sale.
It is an ideal signing and what we sold him for is immaterial. Whether we bid or not is a case of whether Rodgers wants him and thinks he's worth the amount we'd have to spend. Dismissing the idea is simply foolish.
because shes still very upset that we let him go in the first place, and cant pass an opportunity to say so.
by Royal Lady » 15 Jun 2009 19:23
Harry Carry He's sh1t anyway.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 53 guests