Mowen Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Wasn't Xisco called 'shite' in the Hull match thread after 45 minutes Had we signed Drogba in 2003 he'd have lasted a season at most. The attitudes towards unknown foreigners sicken me, I can't understand it. Yeah, Bassong really got some stick from the crowd didn't he. Same with Hugo Viana who had the fans singing his name before anyone even knew if he was any good or not. The likes of Domi, Dabizas, Distin, Hottiger, Jonas and Acuna got dead rough rides too. As for the treatment of Nobby Solano when he arrived, just appauling. Unknown foreigners don't get stick, people who don't put a shift in or are horrendously overpriced get stick. I'd wager that the vast, vast majority of fans (myself included) knew little to nothing about those players before they arrived and they were all well appreciated whilst here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gggg Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Had we signed Drogba in 2003 he'd have lasted a season at most. A season eh, the local lads don't even get a day. Smith, Nolan, Taylor, Duff have all been branded shite since the day they signed whereas no matter which mediocre foreigner we sign from a mediocre club they're class and have their own little fanclub. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Had we signed Drogba in 2003 he'd have lasted a season at most. A season eh, the local lads don't even get a day. Smith, Nolan, Taylor, Duff have all been branded s**** since the day they signed whereas no matter which mediocre foreigner we sign from a mediocre club they're class and have their own little fanclub. Taylor in particular has been given loads of slack I reckon. And none of the others are local lads. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Had we signed Drogba in 2003 he'd have lasted a season at most. A season eh, the local lads don't even get a day. Smith, Nolan, Taylor, Duff have all been branded s**** since the day they signed whereas no matter which mediocre foreigner we sign from a mediocre club they're class and have their own little fanclub. Taylor in particular has been given loads of slack I reckon. And none of the others are local lads. Shola, on the other hand, has been given no slack at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Libertine Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Had we signed Drogba in 2003 he'd have lasted a season at most. A season eh, the local lads don't even get a day. Smith, Nolan, Taylor, Duff have all been branded s**** since the day they signed whereas no matter which mediocre foreigner we sign from a mediocre club they're class and have their own little fanclub. Taylor in particular has been given loads of slack I reckon. And none of the others are local lads. Shola, on the other hand, has been given no slack at all. or far too much. depends on how sarcastic you're being. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Had we signed Drogba in 2003 he'd have lasted a season at most. A season eh, the local lads don't even get a day. Smith, Nolan, Taylor, Duff have all been branded shite since the day they signed whereas no matter which mediocre foreigner we sign from a mediocre club they're class and have their own little fanclub. I don't see how this is a foreigner issue, it's more similar to the Michae Chopra situation imo. A lot of people thought that Chopra never really got a chance to prove he could do a job and if they don't get first team chances then it's hard to make a call on whether they would sink or swim given the opportunity. Xisco was obviously last in line behind even the junior strikers so obviously he'll want to get away. Far better than sitting on a fat pay packet like Geremi or Cacapa at the end of the day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Agree with Village Idiot - none of those players were impossible for us. Even Lampard, who was approaching the final year of his contract and was apparently looking to leave to get the bumper pay deal he wanted, may have been a possbility. One of the maddest posts ever in internet history Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Jerusalem Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 "if","probably" and at least one was signed....guthrie. is it possible zayatte wanted more than we were prepared to pay ? umpteen reasons why players don't sign for clubs. i'll waiy for evidence as opposed to looking for things that suit a specific view. Guthrie signed for us midway through July, this was an article printed two days before the tranfer deadline. very true, don't see what it has to do with what we are discussing but very true nonetheless. Just thought I'd have to correct an oversight as it had gone unchecked for a few hours and Dave wasn't logged in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 NO CHANGE FOR XISCO He fails to make the bench Eurosport now have Xisco as a starter got taken off late in the game when his side had 10 men. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Agree with Village Idiot - none of those players were impossible for us. Even Lampard, who was approaching the final year of his contract and was apparently looking to leave to get the bumper pay deal he wanted, may have been a possbility. One of the maddest posts ever in internet history It's mad now, sure, but at the time Lampard was in the final year of his contract with Chelsea stalling on a new deal, whilst we on the other hand had a billionaire owner in charge who was supposedly willing to pump money into landing a major star player or two. If we had done what Man City did regarding Robinho (or what we did with Owen from Real), and offered Lampard £200k per week or more, would he honestly have said "no"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Agree with Village Idiot - none of those players were impossible for us. Even Lampard, who was approaching the final year of his contract and was apparently looking to leave to get the bumper pay deal he wanted, may have been a possbility. One of the maddest posts ever in internet history It's mad now, sure, but at the time Lampard was in the final year of his contract with Chelsea stalling on a new deal, whilst we on the other hand had a supposed billionaire owner in charge who was willing to pump money into landing a major star player or two. If we had done what Man City did regarding Robinho (or what we did with Owen from Real), and offered Lampard £200k per week or more, would he honestly have said "no"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Agree with Village Idiot - none of those players were impossible for us. Even Lampard, who was approaching the final year of his contract and was apparently looking to leave to get the bumper pay deal he wanted, may have been a possbility. One of the maddest posts ever in internet history It's mad now, sure, but at the time Lampard was in the final year of his contract with Chelsea stalling on a new deal, whilst we on the other hand had a supposed billionaire owner in charge who was willing to pump money into landing a major star player or two. If we had done what Man City did regarding Robinho (or what we did with Owen from Real), and offered Lampard £200k per week or more, would he honestly have said "no"? if rochdale offered him 1mill per week he probably wouldn't turn it down. however that wasn't the case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 I stand by that post. Lampard was being linked with a move to Juve at the time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 I stand by that post. Lampard was being linked with a move to Juve at the time. He was being linked with Mourinho at Inter but what are facts when the sudject is soo flawed to start with? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Agree with Village Idiot - none of those players were impossible for us. Even Lampard, who was approaching the final year of his contract and was apparently looking to leave to get the bumper pay deal he wanted, may have been a possbility. One of the maddest posts ever in internet history It's mad now, sure, but at the time Lampard was in the final year of his contract with Chelsea stalling on a new deal, whilst we on the other hand had a supposed billionaire owner in charge who was willing to pump money into landing a major star player or two. If we had done what Man City did regarding Robinho (or what we did with Owen from Real), and offered Lampard £200k per week or more, would he honestly have said "no"? if rochdale offered him 1mill per week he probably wouldn't turn it down. however that wasn't the case. I agree, but in the context of the discussion, if Keegan was misled regarding the budget available and Ashley's intentions to make a star signing or two... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Agree with Village Idiot - none of those players were impossible for us. Even Lampard, who was approaching the final year of his contract and was apparently looking to leave to get the bumper pay deal he wanted, may have been a possbility. One of the maddest posts ever in internet history It's mad now, sure, but at the time Lampard was in the final year of his contract with Chelsea stalling on a new deal, whilst we on the other hand had a billionaire owner in charge who was supposedly willing to pump money into landing a major star player or two. If we had done what Man City did regarding Robinho (or what we did with Owen from Real), and offered Lampard £200k per week or more, would he honestly have said "no"? Without doubt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Agree with Village Idiot - none of those players were impossible for us. Even Lampard, who was approaching the final year of his contract and was apparently looking to leave to get the bumper pay deal he wanted, may have been a possbility. One of the maddest posts ever in internet history It's mad now, sure, but at the time Lampard was in the final year of his contract with Chelsea stalling on a new deal, whilst we on the other hand had a supposed billionaire owner in charge who was willing to pump money into landing a major star player or two. If we had done what Man City did regarding Robinho (or what we did with Owen from Real), and offered Lampard £200k per week or more, would he honestly have said "no"? if rochdale offered him 1mill per week he probably wouldn't turn it down. however that wasn't the case. I agree, but in the context of the discussion, if Keegan was misled regarding the budget available and Ashley's intentions to make a star signing or two... err mods could we limit tmonkeys use of "if" in future. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crumpy Gunt Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 NO CHANGE FOR XISCO He fails to make the bench Eurosport now have Xisco as a starter He's still a C Ferret? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 I stand by that post. Lampard was being linked with a move to Juve at the time. He was being linked with Mourinho at Inter but what are facts when the sudject is soo flawed to start with? He was linked with both, and several more. I could have mentioned the Inter link because I remember it in the papers, but it's irrelevant. The point is, Juve weren't in a great position at the time. That had finished 3rd in Serie A but had a team far from capable of doing anything in the CL, nor a squad capable of getting close to a Serie A title challenge. Why would Lampard go to what is universally viewed as a weaker league and a weaker team, for any reason other than money? In fact, that's the only reason why he was even rumoured to have been looking elsewhere for a better deal. He wanted big bucks. Hence, if we could offer considerably more money, Premiership football, no foreign acclimiatisation issues, Keegan was manager and a billionaire owner, etc etc, there might have been a small chance that Lampard would think "why not, the money's good". No matter how small, it's a possibility. Therefore, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say "may have been a possibility". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 I stand by that post. Lampard was being linked with a move to Juve at the time. He was being linked with Mourinho at Inter but what are facts when the sudject is soo flawed to start with? He was linked with both, and several more. I could have posted the Inter link because I remember it in the papers, but it's irrelevant. The point is, Juve weren't in a great position at the time. That had finished 3rd in Serie A but had a team far from capable of doing anything in the CL, nor a squad capable of getting close to a Serie A title challenge. Why would Lampard go to what is universally viewed as a weaker league and a weaker team, if not for money? Hence, if we could offer considerably more money, Premiership football, no foreign acclimiatisation issues, Keegan was manager and a billionaire owner, etc etc, there might have been a small chance that Lampard would think "why not, the money's good". No matter how small, it's a possibility. Therefore, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say "may have been a possibility". Haha thats brilliant, you could have posted the Inter link? As opposed to not posting it as he turned them down and that would be a killer blow to an already punchdrunk arguement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Agree with Village Idiot - none of those players were impossible for us. Even Lampard, who was approaching the final year of his contract and was apparently looking to leave to get the bumper pay deal he wanted, may have been a possbility. One of the maddest posts ever in internet history It's mad now, sure, but at the time Lampard was in the final year of his contract with Chelsea stalling on a new deal, whilst we on the other hand had a billionaire owner in charge who was supposedly willing to pump money into landing a major star player or two. If we had done what Man City did regarding Robinho (or what we did with Owen from Real), and offered Lampard £200k per week or more, would he honestly have said "no"? Without doubt. Kaka was on the verge of a move to Man City. He's easily better than Lampard, recently the best player in the world, has a higher profile worldwide, and was considering a move to a mid table club with a sitting duck in Mark Hughes in charge. Money talks. Lampard is greedy. It was a possibility, even if a remote one, and hence I don't think Keegan including the player on a wishlist is a sign of madness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 I stand by that post. Lampard was being linked with a move to Juve at the time. He was being linked with Mourinho at Inter but what are facts when the sudject is soo flawed to start with? He was linked with both, and several more. I could have posted the Inter link because I remember it in the papers, but it's irrelevant. The point is, Juve weren't in a great position at the time. That had finished 3rd in Serie A but had a team far from capable of doing anything in the CL, nor a squad capable of getting close to a Serie A title challenge. Why would Lampard go to what is universally viewed as a weaker league and a weaker team, if not for money? Hence, if we could offer considerably more money, Premiership football, no foreign acclimiatisation issues, Keegan was manager and a billionaire owner, etc etc, there might have been a small chance that Lampard would think "why not, the money's good". No matter how small, it's a possibility. Therefore, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say "may have been a possibility". Haha thats brilliant, you could have posted the Inter link? As opposed to not posting it as he turned them down and that would be a killer blow to an already punchdrunk arguement What I'm saying (and thought was clear) is that at the time of posting "linked with Juve", I was well aware that he was linked with Inter in the same papers too. For some reason, you think that because I've mentioned one and not the other, my entire arguement has somehow been debunked. That's entirely your faulty logic where you've spotted what you think to be a mistake and then jumped on it. As for turning them down, he signed a new contract after Chelsea increased their offer. Quite clearly he was using interest from other clubs to force Chelsea to up their offer. Before anyone goes off on one pointing out how this means Lampard would never have left, I'll say that noone can really know 100% what will happen in situations like this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Agree with Village Idiot - none of those players were impossible for us. Even Lampard, who was approaching the final year of his contract and was apparently looking to leave to get the bumper pay deal he wanted, may have been a possbility. One of the maddest posts ever in internet history It's mad now, sure, but at the time Lampard was in the final year of his contract with Chelsea stalling on a new deal, whilst we on the other hand had a billionaire owner in charge who was supposedly willing to pump money into landing a major star player or two. If we had done what Man City did regarding Robinho (or what we did with Owen from Real), and offered Lampard £200k per week or more, would he honestly have said "no"? Without doubt. Kaka was on the verge of a move to Man City. He's easily better than Lampard, recently the best player in the world, has a higher profile worldwide, and was considering a move to a mid table club with a sitting duck in Mark Hughes in charge. Money talks. Lampard is greedy. It was a possibility, even if a remote one, and hence I don't think Keegan including the player on a wishlist is a sign of madness. you will have to find one reason why keegan,with the club having hocked everything,having about 65% of turnover going on wages would find the money ? also remembering that the only placed it was mentioned was in a news of the world piece purporting to be from inside the club lambasting keegan for even thinking of the likes of lampsrd and henry and intimating that he knew the financial constraints ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Agree with Village Idiot - none of those players were impossible for us. Even Lampard, who was approaching the final year of his contract and was apparently looking to leave to get the bumper pay deal he wanted, may have been a possbility. One of the maddest posts ever in internet history It's mad now, sure, but at the time Lampard was in the final year of his contract with Chelsea stalling on a new deal, whilst we on the other hand had a billionaire owner in charge who was supposedly willing to pump money into landing a major star player or two. If we had done what Man City did regarding Robinho (or what we did with Owen from Real), and offered Lampard £200k per week or more, would he honestly have said "no"? Without doubt. Kaka was on the verge of a move to Man City. He's easily better than Lampard, recently the best player in the world, has a higher profile worldwide, and was considering a move to a mid table club with a sitting duck in Mark Hughes in charge. Money talks. Lampard is greedy. It was a possibility, even if a remote one, and hence I don't think Keegan including the player on a wishlist is a sign of madness. what an absolute load of nonsense Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Agree with Village Idiot - none of those players were impossible for us. Even Lampard, who was approaching the final year of his contract and was apparently looking to leave to get the bumper pay deal he wanted, may have been a possbility. One of the maddest posts ever in internet history It's mad now, sure, but at the time Lampard was in the final year of his contract with Chelsea stalling on a new deal, whilst we on the other hand had a billionaire owner in charge who was supposedly willing to pump money into landing a major star player or two. If we had done what Man City did regarding Robinho (or what we did with Owen from Real), and offered Lampard £200k per week or more, would he honestly have said "no"? Without doubt. Kaka was on the verge of a move to Man City. He's easily better than Lampard, recently the best player in the world, has a higher profile worldwide, and was considering a move to a mid table club with a sitting duck in Mark Hughes in charge. Money talks. Lampard is greedy. It was a possibility, even if a remote one, and hence I don't think Keegan including the player on a wishlist is a sign of madness. what an absolute load of nonsense Not really, but without meaning to be disrespectful (it's your opinion after all) then you've stated you believe Lampard to be better than Xavi, despite Xavi outclassing him in every single meaningful encounter so far, so I'd expect this from you. Kaka has put in high quality performances in the CL and at international level in big games. Not consistently enough given his talent and he can go missing at times, but he's at least shown his class at that level. Lampard on the other hand has done nothing other than look like a plodder at those same levels in similar big games. 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