Guest Loven11 Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 CaulkinTheTimes George Caulkin Sorry, to clarify for few who hadn't seen, Nolan on way to West Ham for medical. Those criticising him for 5yr deal request - it was a negotiation! Would have taken less, but wanted time so could get family settled in schools etc. Once club accepts bid writing on wall. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED209 Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 How does jose get on with nolan? could this be what finally pushes him over the edge to leave? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 same as mick. pardews comments should make for interesting reading. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCormick Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I'm not bothered about this as long as we get in forwards to score goals and we have a more athletic replacement in midfield. I'm more concerned about what this transfer says about the club than actually losing the player. This. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonsays Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Craig Gardner would be a massive upgrade on Nolan. Craig Gardner would be no more than a sideways step in terms of ability. He has more to his game than Nolan, also is fairly young. Nolan is hardly old at 28 He turns 29 on 24th June. Oh, my mistake - he's clearly past it then Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
junkhead Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 ah well.. good luck Kevin! Thanks for the leadership and the good moments! Hopefully his replacement is not Scott Brown like Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Just hope there are more reinforcements coming in as when we hit our usual mid-season injury crisis who do we turn to? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Pardew wanted to keep him. Absolutely no doubt Nolan wanted to stay. Only 1 man to blame. wanted to stay so much that with 2 years left on his contract he's willing to drop a division Pardew wanted to keep him? So now we believe all the twitter cunts all of a sudden? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 We are starting to get the stability we need into the football club, both financially and within the squad. That stability is one of our most important goals. “That would give us the security that the club and the playing side needs. We need to get that stability back here, including on the managerial side. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 CaulkinTheTimes George Caulkin Sorry, to clarify for few who hadn't seen, Nolan on way to West Ham for medical. Those criticising him for 5yr deal request - it was a negotiation! Would have taken less, but wanted time so could get family settled in schools etc. Once club accepts bid writing on wall. No reason why we couldn't have gone back to the negotiating table in 12 months and tried again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest johnson293 Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Craig Gardner would be a massive upgrade on Nolan. Craig Gardner would be no more than a sideways step in terms of ability. He has more to his game than Nolan, also is fairly young. Nolan is hardly old at 28 He turns 29 on 24th June. Oh, my mistake - he's clearly past it then Just saying, man! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 So that's why Cabaye was signed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEEJ Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Craig Gardner would be a massive upgrade on Nolan. But we don't have Craig Gardner. And until we do, we shouldn't think of selling Nolan. We've already had our hopes dashed by Gervinho and Gameiro, let's not start putting yet another player who isn't coming here into lineups and claiming we've improved our squad when we've done no such thing. We're not interested in that Gardner bloke. Would be a horrible switch. Why? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 CaulkinTheTimes George Caulkin Sorry, to clarify for few who hadn't seen, Nolan on way to West Ham for medical. Those criticising him for 5yr deal request - it was a negotiation! Would have taken less, but wanted time so could get family settled in schools etc. Once club accepts bid writing on wall. No reason why we couldn't have gone back to the negotiating table in 12 months and tried again. This club.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Craig Gardner would be a massive upgrade on Nolan. Craig Gardner would be no more than a sideways step in terms of ability. He has more to his game than Nolan, also is fairly young. Nolan is hardly old at 28 He turns 29 on 24th June. I forgot he shares my birthday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I wanna ask, which of the following scenario you guys think is more likely? A. The club is forced to let Nolan go as it is unlikely to tie his contract down at a reasonable cost B. The club wants to get rid of Nolan for a long time and use the contract row as an excuse To me it's likely to be B. I feel like there's a hidden agenda behind the scene to get rid of these high cost players, e.g. Barton, Smith and Nolan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Craig Gardner would be a massive upgrade on Nolan. But we don't have Craig Gardner. And until we do, we shouldn't think of selling Nolan. We've already had our hopes dashed by Gervinho and Gameiro, let's not start putting yet another player who isn't coming here into lineups and claiming we've improved our squad when we've done no such thing. We're not interested in that Gardner bloke. Would be a horrible switch. Why? Because he is not better than Nolan, and is not the person Nolan is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I wanna ask, which of the following scenario you guys think is more likely? A. The club is forced to let Nolan go as it is unlikely to tie his contract down at a reasonable cost B. The club wants to get rid of Nolan for a long time and use the contract row as an excuse To me it's likely to be B. I feel like there's a hidden agenda behind the scene to get rid of these high cost players, e.g. Barton, Smith and Nolan. But the player we've brought in who plays in his role is on higher wages. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 We are starting to get the stability we need into the football club, both financially and within the squad. That stability is one of our most important goals. “That would give us the security that the club and the playing side needs. We need to get that stability back here, including on the managerial side. Indeed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I wanna ask, which of the following scenario you guys think is more likely? A. The club is forced to let Nolan go as it is unlikely to tie his contract down at a reasonable cost B. The club wants to get rid of Nolan for a long time and use the contract row as an excuse To me it's likely to be B. I feel like there's a hidden agenda behind the scene to get rid of these high cost players, e.g. Barton, Smith and Nolan. or C the club has a chance to get some money back (fee) and hopefully recycle the wages on a player many wouldn't be putting in their starting XI's next season ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonsays Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Craig Gardner would be a massive upgrade on Nolan. Craig Gardner would be no more than a sideways step in terms of ability. He has more to his game than Nolan, also is fairly young. Nolan is hardly old at 28 He turns 29 on 24th June. Oh, my mistake - he's clearly past it then Just saying, man! Sorry, not meaning to have a go, but the idea that only players who are under 25 are worth having, that seems quite common on this forum, really pisses me off. I think we'd all admit that Nolan's game is limited but he has experience and leadership qualities that are already severely lacking in our team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I wanna ask, which of the following scenario you guys think is more likely? A. The club is forced to let Nolan go as it is unlikely to tie his contract down at a reasonable cost B. The club wants to get rid of Nolan for a long time and use the contract row as an excuse To me it's likely to be B. I feel like there's a hidden agenda behind the scene to get rid of these high cost players, e.g. Barton, Smith and Nolan. or C the club has a chance to get some money back (fee) and hopefully recycle the wages on a player many wouldn't be putting in their starting XI's next season ? Christ, shut up man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufc4eva Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Damn, I am gonna have to start liking west ham now , The bloke changed my opinion of some footballers, actually seemed genuine and seemed to enjoy it here. He was not the greatest and kept going missing in games but was a big influence. If Barton goes also then we will be shooting ourselves in foot. We should be building on what we have not replacing Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I wanna ask, which of the following scenario you guys think is more likely? A. The club is forced to let Nolan go as it is unlikely to tie his contract down at a reasonable cost B. The club wants to get rid of Nolan for a long time and use the contract row as an excuse To me it's likely to be B. I feel like there's a hidden agenda behind the scene to get rid of these high cost players, e.g. Barton, Smith and Nolan. Even high cost players they signed themselves, well after the apparent state of the finances was known. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Mongo Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Ashley showed with Hughton that he has a ruthless streak. If it leads to success, we won't be complaining. Too bad that 'success' in Ashley's terms only means more free advertising for SportsDirect.com. 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