Andy Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 don't know if its been posted, but .com have vented their splein on this, and its hard to argue with what they say: No it isn't. The entire article can be shot-down on the virtue of the sentence "to allow Milner to leave seems illogical" - - the only thing that would be illogical would be to reject a £12 million bid for him. In fact, no, that wouldn't be illogical, it would be utterly ridiculous. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovejoy Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 don't know if its been posted, but .com have vented their splein on this, and its hard to argue with what they say: No it isn't. The entire article can be shot-down on the virtue of the sentence "to allow Milner to leave seems illogical" - - the only thing that would be illogical would be to reject a £12 million bid for him. In fact, no, that wouldn't be illogical, it would be utterly ridiculous. agree on the fee, but you can see ther epoint on that his replacement will probably be on the wage (or more) that milner sought? in fact fuck it, i didnt think this through, you're right, the fee makes the whole thing sensible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 The writing on that .com site is of an excellent standard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wspence_uk Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 don't know if its been posted, but .com have vented their splein on this, and its hard to argue with what they say: No it isn't. The entire article can be shot-down on the virtue of the sentence "to allow Milner to leave seems illogical" - - the only thing that would be illogical would be to reject a £12 million bid for him. In fact, no, that wouldn't be illogical, it would be utterly ridiculous. Think they mean in the contex of the boards plan of bring young players through, rather than the players who come here for the cash, Here is a regular in the under-21's, vice captain no-less, maybe our hardest worker and one of our more dignifyed players allowed to leave when an accepteble bid is made. The next time we get an "accepatble bid" for one of our promising players - same again? I'm not saying I agree, but they have a point Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 The writing on that .com site is of an excellent standard. pity the ideas are holier than thou, patronising, aloof shite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Logic Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 The writing on that .com site is of an excellent standard. They've got this one wrong though, I frequently feel moved to defend them on here from irrational hatred but don't agree with this article at all. Summed up succinctly by tmonkey : There's not much to indicate that there's anything wrong with whats going on. If we're judging things on Keegan's first spell here, then by the same logicc we could say that James Milner is not a Keegan player in any way, shape or form - Keegan wont want grafters in attacking positions, when given money to spend he went for the Gillespie's, Ginola's and Apsrilla's in those positions - attacking players with pace or great skill. Keegan was a flair player himself, and I think he has a preferrence for what a good attacking player needs to have. Added to which, he'd have noted how much the performances improved last season when Milner, Duff and Smith were out of the side - that spell would have opened his eyes as to who needed to be shipped out because they werent contributing to what matters for their respective positions - assists and goals. .coms slant on things takes all that away from Keegan and leaves him a hapless victim whilst advocating we keep people due to having a good workrate and a clean nose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 The writing on that .com site is of an excellent standard. pity the ideas are holier than thou, patronising, aloof shite. nailed. beautifully crafted sanctimonious bullshit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 don't know if its been posted, but .com have vented their splein on this, and its hard to argue with what they say: No it isn't. The entire article can be shot-down on the virtue of the sentence "to allow Milner to leave seems illogical" - - the only thing that would be illogical would be to reject a £12 million bid for him. In fact, no, that wouldn't be illogical, it would be utterly ridiculous. Think they mean in the contex of the boards plan of bring young players through, rather than the players who come here for the cash, Here is a regular in the under-21's, vice captain no-less, maybe our hardest worker and one of our more dignifyed players allowed to leave when an accepteble bid is made. The next time we get an "accepatble bid" for one of our promising players - same again? I'm not saying I agree, but they have a point I'm aware of the context. However, there's a difference between an "acceptable" bid and an "unrejectable" bid. Villa's bid for Milner fits into the latter category. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazza ladra Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Holier than thou? It's just not glib that's all. Well considered, but wrong. £12m! Get-fuckin-in! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 don't know if its been posted, but .com have vented their splein on this, and its hard to argue with what they say: No it isn't. The entire article can be shot-down on the virtue of the sentence "to allow Milner to leave seems illogical" - - the only thing that would be illogical would be to reject a £12 million bid for him. In fact, no, that wouldn't be illogical, it would be utterly ridiculous. agree on the fee, but you can see ther epoint on that his replacement will probably be on the wage (or more) that milner sought? in fact fuck it, i didnt think this through, you're right, the fee makes the whole thing sensible. Although unlike Milner hopefully he will make some sort of decent contribution to our goals and assists tally as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Glad some of the idiots who would have "given him away" aren't running our club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 The media will love this, they'll run with the "Penniless Newcastle" angle while not mentioning the firesale at Spurs including at least one, possibly both, of their best two players when the sheer fact of the matter is you cannot turn down that sort of money for a player of James Milner's quality. He's got plenty going for him, he's not shit as many will make out - genuinely two footed, versatile, works extremely hard, very fit, decent shot from range - but most of those things are window dressing for a winger who can't cross, has no passing ability to speak of, is a poor finisher and is extremely one paced. His previously impressive ability to beat his man seemed to have deserted him last season and all you're left with is genuine hard work. I wonder about Villa too. For a team built around the incredible counter-attacking pace of Agbonlahor and Young, as well as the latter's superb crossing ability, they couldn't have signed a less fitting player. He's the antithesis of Ashley Young and is extremely frustrating on the counter-attack. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 £12m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattypnufc Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 I must admit, I have kept relativity quite during this whole saga, so here is my two penneth...sorry for the lengthy read. Whilst I normally agree with .com 100%, I still feel 12m (even with some addons/percentage to Leeds) is a very decent amount for a player who has, not for lack of trying, not improved vastly since his first spell at Villa. Yes he has been steadfast, has grafted, kept his head down and got on with things, but unfortunately statistics prove (oooo BSA time) that he is not that much of a Key Player/Match Winner. His goals per season ratio is poor, as is his assists. I thought the idea of being a winger was to provide your strikers with crosses/passes to bring them goals. Forgive me if I'm wrong mind you. I admire his commitment, his determination and his ability to take on a player, but for 12million its hard to say no given the above. Let us not forget, although he was not on 'soopa' wages, he still most likely earns more in a week than all of us do in a year. And I agree he should have been on a par with Taylor wages wise, I don't believe putting a transfer request is a mature way to go about things (neither is Taylor's dad going to the Comical mind). But there's ways and means, time and a place. Yes forcing the clubs hand is a way to go about things if you are a key player, but a squad player has less leeway. Imagine me or you going to the boss and saying, I'm leaving unless you pay me more than I'm worth... Tara! I wish the lad all the luck in the world, and maybe MON can develop him into a better player. As long as our manager, players and fans see the benefit from this sale then I do not have a problem with it. In KK we trust. It's going to be an interesting couple of days to say the least. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Holier than thou? It's just not glib that's all. Well considered, but wrong. £12m! Get-fuckin-in! it's more that they seem to think their opinions are more worthy and valuable than those of your average fan or the posters on here - look at the constant sniping about those on websites and forums. last time i checked they were running a website too. they run a great factual resource but it doesn't make their opinions any more credible. i'd much rather log on here and read what tmonkey or ohmelads or big tron or wullie thinks. in this instance i struggle to agree with many or any of the points raised. one argument in particular suggests that we shouldn't have sold Milner because we now have to take the risk on a new signing who might be another Emre or Luque. fucking hell what rubbish. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wspence_uk Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 don't know if its been posted, but .com have vented their splein on this, and its hard to argue with what they say: No it isn't. The entire article can be shot-down on the virtue of the sentence "to allow Milner to leave seems illogical" - - the only thing that would be illogical would be to reject a £12 million bid for him. In fact, no, that wouldn't be illogical, it would be utterly ridiculous. Think they mean in the contex of the boards plan of bring young players through, rather than the players who come here for the cash, Here is a regular in the under-21's, vice captain no-less, maybe our hardest worker and one of our more dignifyed players allowed to leave when an accepteble bid is made. The next time we get an "accepatble bid" for one of our promising players - same again? I'm not saying I agree, but they have a point I'm aware of the context. However, there's a difference between an "acceptable" bid and an "unrejectable" bid. Villa's bid for Milner fits into the latter category. Really? even at a time when we are struggling for players, he was our best player in the last match we played and the boards plan is to go with the young players? As much as its really good deal, i just think its sends out all the wrong signals - Work your ass off, we will pay the bigger names who dont do half as much - twice what you earn, then when a team notice's your hard work we will sell you, and then gamble on a player to replace you. Like i say, I still cant decide who got the best deal - Us or Villa, sure we have £12M in the bank but they have a young english player that will only improve. I am braceing myself for this one to come back and haunt us, O'neill is a shrewd as they come, and milner will thrive under him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Niall and Biffa are both sound, from the times I've spoken to them. I'm sure Rich would back that up... I don't think they believe their opinions are more worthy than others, and when they "snipe" at forums they're referring to 606 and the like more often than not, as opposed to ours... However, their opinions are so far-reaching (and thus potentially damaging) that sometimes I can't help but feel that they'd be better off sticking to just posting facts... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 don't know if its been posted, but .com have vented their splein on this, and its hard to argue with what they say: No it isn't. The entire article can be shot-down on the virtue of the sentence "to allow Milner to leave seems illogical" - - the only thing that would be illogical would be to reject a £12 million bid for him. In fact, no, that wouldn't be illogical, it would be utterly ridiculous. Think they mean in the contex of the boards plan of bring young players through, rather than the players who come here for the cash, Here is a regular in the under-21's, vice captain no-less, maybe our hardest worker and one of our more dignifyed players allowed to leave when an accepteble bid is made. The next time we get an "accepatble bid" for one of our promising players - same again? I'm not saying I agree, but they have a point I'm aware of the context. However, there's a difference between an "acceptable" bid and an "unrejectable" bid. Villa's bid for Milner fits into the latter category. Really? even at a time when we are struggling for players, he was our best player in the last match we played and the boards plan is to go with the young players? As much as its really good deal, i just think its sends out all the wrong signals - Work your ass off, we will pay the bigger names who dont do half as much - twice what you earn, then when a team notice's your hard work we will sell you, and then gamble on a player to replace you. Like i say, I still cant decide who got the best deal - Us or Villa, sure we have £12M in the bank but they have a young english player that will only improve. I am braceing myself for this one to come back and haunt us, O'neill is a shrewd as they come, and milner will thrive under him And when was the last match before that where he was our best player, or even in the top three? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 It is shame to see him go & I wasn't his biggest fan. If it is £12 million we cant turn that down, this is hardly KK's 2nd Andy Cole moment. With a small squad JV & DW need have spotted at least 3 players & DW & TJ better be able to sort incoming players contracts out better/quicker than they have seem to have dealt with Taylor, Owen & Milners deals. Get CNZ on left, Jonas on the right & LETS ATTACK THESE COCKNEY PRICKS THE MORRA!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 don't know if its been posted, but .com have vented their splein on this, and its hard to argue with what they say: No it isn't. The entire article can be shot-down on the virtue of the sentence "to allow Milner to leave seems illogical" - - the only thing that would be illogical would be to reject a £12 million bid for him. In fact, no, that wouldn't be illogical, it would be utterly ridiculous. Think they mean in the contex of the boards plan of bring young players through, rather than the players who come here for the cash, Here is a regular in the under-21's, vice captain no-less, maybe our hardest worker and one of our more dignifyed players allowed to leave when an accepteble bid is made. The next time we get an "accepatble bid" for one of our promising players - same again? I'm not saying I agree, but they have a point I'm aware of the context. However, there's a difference between an "acceptable" bid and an "unrejectable" bid. Villa's bid for Milner fits into the latter category. Really? even at a time when we are struggling for players, he was our best player in the last match we played and the boards plan is to go with the young players? As much as its really good deal, i just think its sends out all the wrong signals - Work your ass off, we will pay the bigger names who dont do half as much - twice what you earn, then when a team notice's your hard work we will sell you, and then gamble on a player to replace you. Like i say, I still cant decide who got the best deal - Us or Villa, sure we have £12M in the bank but they have a young english player that will only improve. I am braceing myself for this one to come back and haunt us, O'neill is a shrewd as they come, and milner will thrive under him He was our best player in the last match. But let's put it into context... He was our best player against coventry city. People keep saying he has promise, but has he really improved all that much since he signed? He still has the same limitations -- he can't cross/shoot/pass. Yes, he's a grafter, but a premiership winger doesn't just need graft he also needs craft, and Milner lacks that drastically. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wspence_uk Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 don't know if its been posted, but .com have vented their splein on this, and its hard to argue with what they say: No it isn't. The entire article can be shot-down on the virtue of the sentence "to allow Milner to leave seems illogical" - - the only thing that would be illogical would be to reject a £12 million bid for him. In fact, no, that wouldn't be illogical, it would be utterly ridiculous. Think they mean in the contex of the boards plan of bring young players through, rather than the players who come here for the cash, Here is a regular in the under-21's, vice captain no-less, maybe our hardest worker and one of our more dignifyed players allowed to leave when an accepteble bid is made. The next time we get an "accepatble bid" for one of our promising players - same again? I'm not saying I agree, but they have a point I'm aware of the context. However, there's a difference between an "acceptable" bid and an "unrejectable" bid. Villa's bid for Milner fits into the latter category. Really? even at a time when we are struggling for players, he was our best player in the last match we played and the boards plan is to go with the young players? As much as its really good deal, i just think its sends out all the wrong signals - Work your ass off, we will pay the bigger names who dont do half as much - twice what you earn, then when a team notice's your hard work we will sell you, and then gamble on a player to replace you. Like i say, I still cant decide who got the best deal - Us or Villa, sure we have £12M in the bank but they have a young english player that will only improve. I am braceing myself for this one to come back and haunt us, O'neill is a shrewd as they come, and milner will thrive under him And when was the last match before that where he was our best player, or even in the top three? I am talking about the here and now, its early in the season - he might have gone from strength to strength after that, now he takes that confidence and momentum to Villa, ive always thought he was a player with good atributtes, just needs it all to come together. I just hope we do have "irons in the fire" because if the deadline passes and the 12M was untouched due to deals breaking down - Like I said, it sends out all the wrong signals Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 I am talking about the here and now, its early in the season - he might have gone from strength to strength after that, now he takes that confidence and momentum to Villa, ive always thought he was a player with good atributtes, just needs it all to come together. I just hope we do have "irons in the fire" because if the deadline passes and the 12M was untouched due to deals breaking down - Like I said, it sends out all the wrong signals Sorry, but all of that is absolute nonsense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brazilianbob Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 The writing on that .com site is of an excellent standard. pity the ideas are holier than thou, patronising, aloof s****. A case of the pot calling the kettle black, I think! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wspence_uk Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 I am talking about the here and now, its early in the season - he might have gone from strength to strength after that, now he takes that confidence and momentum to Villa, ive always thought he was a player with good atributtes, just needs it all to come together. I just hope we do have "irons in the fire" because if the deadline passes and the 12M was untouched due to deals breaking down - Like I said, it sends out all the wrong signals Sorry, but all of that is absolute nonsense. No, that is an opinion Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Milner £12 mill, Jonas £10 mill I would have spidey everytime. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now