Teasy

Less unimpressive if you look at the time he spent on the pitch vs goals rather than just the total number of times he was involved. He only started 19 games last season and played under 20 full matches total, scored 10 goals, not that bad really, obviously he isn't good enough at the moment to be a important player for Monaco, but they do have some decent players.

Pretty similar record the season before coming here.

He did score a hat-trick during the first game of the season. Ok, but still he was only on the pitch for 1752 minutes last season (less than 20 full games). We'll see, could be that his attributes actually suit the Premier League more so than Ligue 1.

10 goals in 19 starts and 11 sub appearances last season, not amazing but far from poor.

Didn't say it was, I'm saying that no club is going to freeze a lad out when he's just come back from injury, if we did there'd be people on here on about how heartless we are. If we actually give him a new contract then I'll have a problem. If he's not going to play much of a part in the first team this season, it might be better to let him go to another club where he can regain his match fitness rather than 3 seasons of non-football in a row. And I'd argue we have shown plenty of heart in such a case. He might end up going elsewhere.in the end, that doesn't mean we should leave the lad without a squad number in the mean time.. Who is advocating that? Edit: Pretty sure he means he rather Raylor not be at this club. The poster at the top of this page? Raylor turns up at photo ops (with a squad number), otherwise he's nowhere near the squad. That's how I read it. Think you are reading too much into it. He responded to Raylor getting a squad number by saying that if we were a proper club he wouldn't be near apart from photo ops. Really not sure how its unreasonable to read that as a suggestion that he shouldn't be allowed to be any part of the squad.. Ehm... yeah... he didn't say we should heartlessly "leave the lad without a squad number in the mean time" though. So we gave Raylor a squad number and we became "not a proper club" why? You know this has reached that point where I don't even care anymore

Context is apparently something you've never quite grasped. Lets just forget that the opriginal poster hasn't even claimed that wasn't his meaning though just keep on bickering about it.

Didn't say it was, I'm saying that no club is going to freeze a lad out when he's just come back from injury, if we did there'd be people on here on about how heartless we are. If we actually give him a new contract then I'll have a problem. If he's not going to play much of a part in the first team this season, it might be better to let him go to another club where he can regain his match fitness rather than 3 seasons of non-football in a row. And I'd argue we have shown plenty of heart in such a case. He might end up going elsewhere.in the end, that doesn't mean we should leave the lad without a squad number in the mean time.. Who is advocating that? Edit: Pretty sure he means he rather Raylor not be at this club. The poster at the top of this page? Raylor turns up at photo ops (with a squad number), otherwise he's nowhere near the squad. That's how I read it. Think you are reading too much into it. He responded to Raylor getting a squad number by saying that if we were a proper club he wouldn't be near apart from photo ops. Really not sure how its unreasonable to read that as a suggestion that he shouldn't be allowed to be any part of the squad..

Do you have learning difficulties?

Didn't say it was, I'm saying that no club is going to freeze a lad out when he's just come back from injury, if we did there'd be people on here on about how heartless we are. If we actually give him a new contract then I'll have a problem. If he's not going to play much of a part in the first team this season, it might be better to let him go to another club where he can regain his match fitness rather than 3 seasons of non-football in a row. And I'd argue we have shown plenty of heart in such a case. He might end up going elsewhere.in the end, that doesn't mean we should leave the lad without a squad number in the mean time.. Who is advocating that? Edit: Pretty sure he means he rather Raylor not be at this club. The poster at the top of this page?

Should we sack him the moment he recovers from a potentially career ending injury?, dont think that's the way a "proper" club would.do.it.. Of course he isn't good enough to be a real part of our plans. But the suggestion we've done something wrong by not freezing him out just as he returns from serious injury is just ridiculous. I never advocated sacking him. There aren't any grounds to do that. Having him playing any sort of role on the pitch, even as a squad player, is pretty fucking unacceptable for a club of this size. Should've been sold years back. No he shouldn't be given a role in the first team, but there's nothing wrong with giving him a squad number until be moves on. He shouldn't be completely frozen out as the poster I replied to suggested.

Didn't say it was, I'm saying that no club is going to freeze a lad out when he's just come back from injury, if we did there'd be people on here on about how heartless we are. If we actually give him a new contract then I'll have a problem. If he's not going to play much of a part in the first team this season, it might be better to let him go to another club where he can regain his match fitness rather than 3 seasons of non-football in a row. And I'd argue we have shown plenty of heart in such a case. He might end up going elsewhere.in the end, that doesn't mean we should leave the lad without a squad number in the mean time..

Didn't say it was, I'm saying that no club is going to freeze a lad out when he's just come back from injury, if we did there'd be people on here on about how heartless we are. If we actually give him a new contract then I'll have a problem.

Should we sack him the moment he recovers from a potentially career ending injury?, dont think that's the way a "proper" club would.do.it.. Of course he isn't good enough to be a real part of our plans. But the suggestion we've done something wrong by not freezing him out just as he returns from serious injury is just ridiculous.

Don't talk such fucking drivel.

Must be thinking of someone else He'll be right now though just to make me look like a fool

Gignac? Really hope not.

Probably a throw back to when Ashley arrived and realised how much we still owed for past signings.

Think that just means we don't pay in instalments rather than not doing bonuses. As in if we agree to pay £7m plus bonuses they get £7m in one go straight away, while most clubs would pay the £7m in instalments spread of 2 or 3 years. A few sources have mentioned bonuses with this transfer anyway so it seems likely we're paying something extra (unless its a cup winning bonus )

Might be giggs but SSN are claiming the fee is 9m Euro's (just over £7m). Seems low, maybe its that plus bonuses.

Cheers for translating that into French, couldn't understand it at first.

He'll be comfort eating in no time once Pardew gets his hands on his career.

Just waiting for confirmation before I put him in my FIFA side, then its rape time online with him and Ben Arfa on the wings

That's a different argument though, something nobody here would disagree with either. What I'm saying is that while I'm not particularly concerned about how much we spend on any single player I don't understand this argument people keep throwing out that it doesn't matter what we bring in for a player or what we spend on a player because Ashley won't invest what he should. If we make £60m Ashley might invest £20m, but make no mistake if we'd made £50m instead he'd only spend £10m and if we spent the whole £10m on one player no other players would come in. That doesn't mean anyone should accept this penny pinching bollocks or start thinking like they do and worrying about exactly what we spend on a player, its just the reality of the situation with this cunt in charge