Argy Bargy

[Cajun]

Do you think we should have cover across the team, or just one player for every position?

 

Of course we should have cover, however I'd prefer us to have quality in our starting 11 positions rather than good back up in one and nobody of any quality at all in another.

 

Don't you agree?

 

You can only sign players who are available and Duff was available.

 

I wanted the club to sign at least one more quality striker with even another striker as further backup, but it didn't happen for whatever reason. The fact we need strikers doesn't make Duff a shite signing.

 

There were players available though as over clubs proved, people on here (myself and Skirge and a few more) said we should go for McCarthy, he went for about £3m and scored his 15th goal of the season, so are we just world class talent scouts and wasting our time in the jobs we currently do or are there OBVIOUS signings out there but Roeder and the board fucked the window up?

[Mick]

 

So Duff can play left back but Milner and Dyer arent good enough for left wing, you are so full of shit HTL its unreal

 

I honestly can't believe what I read from you at times, in your first paragraph you say you just can't throw a player in a position and "hey presto" its filled then you contradict yourself in the second saying we can do that with Duff!

 

Fact is we have ZERO players who are capable of performing to the required standard at left back so surely that would be a priority over left wing when we have at least one? (although Milner is more than capable down the left wing but lets ignore that for a second). Also we have one player capable of doing a job in the centre of defence when we need at least 2.

 

Aye left wing was definitely where we needed to get another player in.    :rolleyes: 

 

Dyer, Milner and Nobby have all played left wing, even when just switching position during games.  I'm sure Milner played as many games for Leeds on the left as he did on the right, we even signed him because of his form for Leeds.

 

I would think Milner has played more on the left wing than Duff has at the back.

[Cajun]

Exactly, ok we only have one good natural left winger but on the other hand we dont have any good natural left backs. We have one good centre back but he can also be a liability. We have one ageing player who played most of his career as a right winger at right back (although he is doing well). Cover across the team would be great but as Baggio said we need to have quality in the first 11 THEN think about squad players!!

 

Do you understand the concept of availability? Yes, we need to strengthen in other areas as I've just said in my previous post, but Duff became available at a decent price and is a proven qualiity PL player.

 

So if a quality keeper comes on the market at a good price should we go for one of those aswell?

 

A quality striker was available this transfer window on a 6 month loan deal (Montella), very low risk and proven ability BUT has gone to Fulham, im sure we couldn't have competed with their might!

[Howaythelads]

Not Duff. Who do we have at left back and centre back now HTL?

 

If we had any sort of depth in the other positions, the likes of Milner and Dyer could comfortably fill in on the left wing whilst Zog is injured.

 

Because we lack strikers and defenders and havent replaced Jenas, Dyer is having to play up front or centre mid and Nobby is having to play at right back, meaning Milner has to play right wing.

 

Its funny how Duff was supposedly a necessary signing because right now we have noone to play on the left. The reason we have noone to play on the left is because we have noone to play in several other positions, and all those who can play on the left are having to fill in elsewhere.

 

 

Dyer and Milner aren't good enough for the left. You can't just throw someone at a position and say 'hey presto', we've filled that gap on the left.

 

Having just one player (Zog) capable of performing to the required standard on the left is not enough, Duff at the price is a player who can play LM and also LB, he's a proven PL player and is a good signing. Had he not unfortunately been injured as well he'd be playing every game, fully justifying the signing.

 

So Duff can play left back but Milner and Dyer arent good enough for left wing, you are so full of shit HTL its unreal

 

I honestly can't believe what I read from you at times, in your first paragraph you say you just can't throw a player in a position and "hey presto" its filled then you contradict yourself in the second saying we can do that with Duff!

 

Fact is we have ZERO players who are capable of performing to the required standard at left back so surely that would be a priority over left wing when we have at least one? (although Milner is more than capable down the left wing but lets ignore that for a second). Also we have one player capable of doing a job in the centre of defence when we need at least 2.

 

Aye left wing was definitely where we needed to get another player in.  :rolleyes: 

 

Yes, Duff can play LB having done so many times. Same as Solano can perform at RB. Both of these players can fill the fullback positions far more effectively than Dyer or Milner can play left midfield. We've seen Dyer and Milner on the left and both are pretty rubbish. You can disagree if you like, but do yourself a favour, grow up and cut out the "full of shit" juvenile remarks. It makes you come across like a dickhead in what has so far been a reasonable thread.

[Cajun]

Not Duff. Who do we have at left back and centre back now HTL?

 

If we had any sort of depth in the other positions, the likes of Milner and Dyer could comfortably fill in on the left wing whilst Zog is injured.

 

Because we lack strikers and defenders and havent replaced Jenas, Dyer is having to play up front or centre mid and Nobby is having to play at right back, meaning Milner has to play right wing.

 

Its funny how Duff was supposedly a necessary signing because right now we have noone to play on the left. The reason we have noone to play on the left is because we have noone to play in several other positions, and all those who can play on the left are having to fill in elsewhere.

 

 

Dyer and Milner aren't good enough for the left. You can't just throw someone at a position and say 'hey presto', we've filled that gap on the left.

 

Having just one player (Zog) capable of performing to the required standard on the left is not enough, Duff at the price is a player who can play LM and also LB, he's a proven PL player and is a good signing. Had he not unfortunately been injured as well he'd be playing every game, fully justifying the signing.

 

So Duff can play left back but Milner and Dyer arent good enough for left wing, you are so full of shit HTL its unreal

 

I honestly can't believe what I read from you at times, in your first paragraph you say you just can't throw a player in a position and "hey presto" its filled then you contradict yourself in the second saying we can do that with Duff!

 

Fact is we have ZERO players who are capable of performing to the required standard at left back so surely that would be a priority over left wing when we have at least one? (although Milner is more than capable down the left wing but lets ignore that for a second). Also we have one player capable of doing a job in the centre of defence when we need at least 2.

 

Aye left wing was definitely where we needed to get another player in.   :rolleyes: 

 

Yes, Duff can play LB having done so many times. Same as Solano can perform at RB. Both of these players can fill the fullback positions far more effectively than Dyer or Milner can play left midfield. We've seen Dyer and Milner on the left and both are pretty rubbish. You can disagree if you like, but do yourself a favour, grow up and cut out the "full of shit" juvenile remarks. It makes you come across like a dickhead in what has so far been a reasonable thread.

 

Well you are really, to claim Duff can do a better job at left back than Milner can on the left wing when he has looked very effective there (especially for Villa) is just moronic, tbh.

 

As said before we had one player who can do a good job on the left wing and NO players who could do a good job at left back. Signing a left winger who has played there a few times in the past isnt the answer at all.

[Howaythelads]

Do you think we should have cover across the team, or just one player for every position?

 

Of course we should have cover, however I'd prefer us to have quality in our starting 11 positions rather than good back up in one and nobody of any quality at all in another.

 

Don't you agree?

 

You can only sign players who are available and Duff was available.

 

I wanted the club to sign at least one more quality striker with even another striker as further backup, but it didn't happen for whatever reason. The fact we need strikers doesn't make Duff a shite signing.

 

There were players available though as over clubs proved, people on here (myself and Skirge and a few more) said we should go for McCarthy, he went for about £3m and scored his 15th goal of the season, so are we just world class talent scouts and wasting our time in the jobs we currently do or are there OBVIOUS signings out there but Roeder and the board fucked the window up?

 

Aye, just because the club didn't sign players YOU wanted them to sign means the club has got it wrong.

 

Hilarious.

[Howaythelads]

Exactly, ok we only have one good natural left winger but on the other hand we dont have any good natural left backs. We have one good centre back but he can also be a liability. We have one ageing player who played most of his career as a right winger at right back (although he is doing well). Cover across the team would be great but as Baggio said we need to have quality in the first 11 THEN think about squad players!!

 

Do you understand the concept of availability? Yes, we need to strengthen in other areas as I've just said in my previous post, but Duff became available at a decent price and is a proven qualiity PL player.

 

So if a quality keeper comes on the market at a good price should we go for one of those aswell?

 

A quality striker was available this transfer window on a 6 month loan deal (Montella), very low risk and proven ability BUT has gone to Fulham, im sure we couldn't have competed with their might!

 

Aye, just because the club didn't sign players YOU wanted them to sign means the club has got it wrong.

 

Hilarious.

[Cajun]

Do you think we should have cover across the team, or just one player for every position?

 

Of course we should have cover, however I'd prefer us to have quality in our starting 11 positions rather than good back up in one and nobody of any quality at all in another.

 

Don't you agree?

 

You can only sign players who are available and Duff was available.

 

I wanted the club to sign at least one more quality striker with even another striker as further backup, but it didn't happen for whatever reason. The fact we need strikers doesn't make Duff a shite signing.

 

There were players available though as over clubs proved, people on here (myself and Skirge and a few more) said we should go for McCarthy, he went for about £3m and scored his 15th goal of the season, so are we just world class talent scouts and wasting our time in the jobs we currently do or are there OBVIOUS signings out there but Roeder and the board fucked the window up?

 

Aye, just because the club didn't sign players YOU wanted them to sign means the club has got it wrong.

 

Hilarious.

 

Ok they signed a left winger for more money Blackburn signed a striker for, they definitely got it right 

[Howaythelads]

Not Duff. Who do we have at left back and centre back now HTL?

 

If we had any sort of depth in the other positions, the likes of Milner and Dyer could comfortably fill in on the left wing whilst Zog is injured.

 

Because we lack strikers and defenders and havent replaced Jenas, Dyer is having to play up front or centre mid and Nobby is having to play at right back, meaning Milner has to play right wing.

 

Its funny how Duff was supposedly a necessary signing because right now we have noone to play on the left. The reason we have noone to play on the left is because we have noone to play in several other positions, and all those who can play on the left are having to fill in elsewhere.

 

 

Dyer and Milner aren't good enough for the left. You can't just throw someone at a position and say 'hey presto', we've filled that gap on the left.

 

Having just one player (Zog) capable of performing to the required standard on the left is not enough, Duff at the price is a player who can play LM and also LB, he's a proven PL player and is a good signing. Had he not unfortunately been injured as well he'd be playing every game, fully justifying the signing.

 

So Duff can play left back but Milner and Dyer arent good enough for left wing, you are so full of shit HTL its unreal

 

I honestly can't believe what I read from you at times, in your first paragraph you say you just can't throw a player in a position and "hey presto" its filled then you contradict yourself in the second saying we can do that with Duff!

 

Fact is we have ZERO players who are capable of performing to the required standard at left back so surely that would be a priority over left wing when we have at least one? (although Milner is more than capable down the left wing but lets ignore that for a second). Also we have one player capable of doing a job in the centre of defence when we need at least 2.

 

Aye left wing was definitely where we needed to get another player in.  :rolleyes: 

 

Yes, Duff can play LB having done so many times. Same as Solano can perform at RB. Both of these players can fill the fullback positions far more effectively than Dyer or Milner can play left midfield. We've seen Dyer and Milner on the left and both are pretty rubbish. You can disagree if you like, but do yourself a favour, grow up and cut out the "full of shit" juvenile remarks. It makes you come across like a dickhead in what has so far been a reasonable thread.

 

Well you are really, to claim Duff can do a better job at left back than Milner can on the left wing when he has looked very effective there (especially for Villa) is just moronic, tbh.

 

As said before we had one player who can do a good job on the left wing and NO players who could do a good job at left back. Signing a left winger who has played there a few times in the past isnt the answer at all.

 

Aye, just because the club didn't sign players YOU wanted them to sign means the club has got it wrong.

 

Hilarious.

[Cajun]

Well they signed a player we really couldn't afford to waste the money on.

[tmonkey]

Do you think we should have cover across the team, or just one player for every position?

 

Of course we should have cover, however I'd prefer us to have quality in our starting 11 positions rather than good back up in one and nobody of any quality at all in another.

 

Don't you agree?

 

You can only sign players who are available and Duff was available.

 

I wanted the club to sign at least one more quality striker with even another striker as further backup, but it didn't happen for whatever reason. The fact we need strikers doesn't make Duff a shite signing.

 

"You can only sign players who are available and Duff was available." So because Duff was available, we HAD to sign him, despite having one good first team left winger and several good attacking players capable of filling in in that position, whilst also having severe weaknesses in various other positions on the pitch?

 

And of course you can only sign players who are available. Sorin, a solid international fullback, was available and considered going to Bolton, turning them down because he wanted 35k per week, but were we interested? No, we were too busy snapping up Duff and scouting Kuyt in pre-seaon friendlies. Weve badly needed a decent left back, and weve suffered without one. But hey, all those leaked goals and terrible performances down the left flank mean nowt, because weve signed Duff.

 

Benni McCarthy could have been signed for 4-5 mill. Hes scored 10 in the Prem, 15 overall so far, and will most likely hit 20, possibly 25, by the season is finished. Weve had to put up with dross like Sibierski, Duff and Rossi up front, so could really have done with a decent goalscorer like McCarthy. Who cares about that though, weve got Duff.

 

Plenty of good players were available, players who would have been major improvements for us simply because they played in positions that we desperately needed reinforcements for, but our board/manager went for the easy big name crowd pleaser because its easy to throw money at a big name like Duff, and at the same time our directors and managers lack the foresight or footballing knowledge to do what is hard - scouting, planning, strategy, etc. You know, the same lot who thought Graeme Souness would be a spankingly good idea, when everyone else with an ounce of footballing knowledge either laughed their tits off at that decision (non-toon fans), or threw up (toon fans).

[Howaythelads]

Do you think we should have cover across the team, or just one player for every position?

 

Of course we should have cover, however I'd prefer us to have quality in our starting 11 positions rather than good back up in one and nobody of any quality at all in another.

 

Don't you agree?

 

You can only sign players who are available and Duff was available.

 

I wanted the club to sign at least one more quality striker with even another striker as further backup, but it didn't happen for whatever reason. The fact we need strikers doesn't make Duff a shite signing.

 

"You can only sign players who are available and Duff was available." So because Duff was available, we HAD to sign him, despite having one good first team left winger and several good attacking players capable of filling in in that position, whilst also having severe weaknesses in various other positions on the pitch?

 

And of course you can only sign players who are available. Sorin, a solid international fullback, was available and considered going to Bolton, turning them down because he wanted 35k per week, but were we interested? No, we were too busy snapping up Duff and scouting Kuyt in pre-seaon friendlies. Weve badly needed a decent left back, and weve suffered without one. But hey, all those leaked goals and terrible performances down the left flank mean nowt, because weve signed Duff.

 

Benni McCarthy could have been signed for 4-5 mill. Hes scored 10 in the Prem, 15 overall so far, and will most likely hit 20, possibly 25, by the season is finished. Weve had to put up with dross like Sibierski, Duff and Rossi up front, so could really have done with a decent goalscorer like McCarthy. Who cares about that though, weve got Duff.

 

Plenty of good players were available, players who would have been major improvements for us simply because they played in positions that we desperately needed reinforcements for, but our board/manager went for the easy big name crowd pleaser because its easy to throw money at a big name like Duff, and at the same time our directors and managers lack the foresight or footballing knowledge to do what is hard - scouting, planning, strategy, etc. You know, the same lot who thought Graeme Souness would be a spankingly good idea, when everyone else with an ounce of footballing knowledge either laughed their tits off at that decision (non-toon fans), or threw up (toon fans).

 

This accusation of the manager and board being shite on the basis they don't sign players YOU want them to sign is laughable. It seems this arrogance is spreading around the forum.

 

See the bit in bold: To which I'll keep saying that in fact we didn't have anyone capable of filling the left side other than Zog. That both Zog and Duff have been injured is enough to prove the point.

[stozo]

Exactly Zog is our only other capable left sided midfielder.

 

Nobby can't play 90 mins on the wing anymore, Milner is needed on the right, Emre drifts in too far, Pattison and O'Brien are not up to it.

 

Duff has been given 6 games on the left wing when we are playing 2 strikers and  in one of them he scored. He needs far more games to be judged.

[tmonkey]

See the bit in bold: To which I'll keep saying that in fact we didn't have anyone capable of filling the left side other than Zog. That both Zog and Duff have been injured is enough to prove the point.

 

Thats your opinion, youre most likely only saying that in an effort to justify the Duff signing.

 

Dyer can fill in there, hes proved a few times hes capapble of playing left wing, certainly remember him coming on against WBA and tearing them apart down that flank. Milner has played there plenty of times too, and this season the few times hes played there hes been decent - scored that cracker against ManU. But I guess because you say so, he hasnt played there at all. Nice one 

 

Anyway, I think youre supporting the wrong club. This is Newcastle United, not Chelsea. We dont have a sugar daddy to finance 2 good players in every position, which IS what youre arguing. Its absolutely daft for us to sign ANOTHER left winger for 5mill and 70k per week in case the current one, who was our best player last season, gets injured. Especially when you have a squad littered with shiite defenders and injured/shiite forwards.

 

But then, "daft" is what has to be expected from the same people who thought Souness would be a great idea.

[Delima]

Thats your opinion, youre most likely only saying that in an effort to justify the Duff signing.

 

Dyer can fill in there, hes proved a few times hes capapble of playing left wing, certainly remember him coming on against WBA and tearing them apart down that flank. Milner has played there plenty of times too, and this season the few times hes played there hes been decent - scored that cracker against ManU. But I guess because you say so, he hasnt played there at all. Nice one 

 

Anyway, I think youre supporting the wrong club. This is Newcastle United, not Chelsea. We dont have a sugar daddy to finance 2 good players in every position, which IS what youre arguing. Its absolutely daft for us to sign ANOTHER left winger for 5mill and 70k per week in case the current one, who was our best player last season, gets injured. Especially when you have a squad littered with shiite defenders and injured/shiite forwards.

 

But then, "daft" is what has to be expected from the same people who thought Souness would be a great idea.

 

Excellent post TMonkey 

[Cajun]

Yep completely agree with tmonkey, really can't see how anyone can argue that a left winger was a bigger priority than sorting out the defence or attack.

[Dinho lad]

Tmonkey always thrashes HTL.

[madras]

Yep completely agree with tmonkey, really can't see how anyone can argue that a left winger was a bigger priority than sorting out the defence or attack.

with that thinking we'd never have bought andy cole cos we had kelly and peacock and quinn,we'd never have bought ginola as we had sellars etc

[Cajun]

Yep completely agree with tmonkey, really can't see how anyone can argue that a left winger was a bigger priority than sorting out the defence or attack.

with that thinking we'd never have bought andy cole cos we had kelly and peacock and quinn,we'd never have bought ginola as we had sellars etc

 

Well at the moment we only really have Milner as a right winger with Solano moved to RB and Dyer always stating he is a central player so should we say fuck the defence again and get SWP in for £10m?

[Baggio]

Yep completely agree with tmonkey, really can't see how anyone can argue that a left winger was a bigger priority than sorting out the defence or attack.

with that thinking we'd never have bought andy cole cos we had kelly and peacock and quinn,we'd never have bought ginola as we had sellars etc

 

The difference between signing Duff and the players you've mentioned is that he isn't better than the left winger we already had, where as Cole and Ginola were a step up in class.

[madras]

Yep completely agree with tmonkey, really can't see how anyone can argue that a left winger was a bigger priority than sorting out the defence or attack.

with that thinking we'd never have bought andy cole cos we had kelly and peacock and quinn,we'd never have bought ginola as we had sellars etc

 

The difference between signing Duff and the players you've mentioned is that he isn't better than the left winger we already had, where as Cole and Ginola were a step up in class.

after watching duff for chelsea and blackburn there was more reason for seeing him as an improvment than the relativly unknown cole when we already had the best strike partnership and back up in the league and sellars was playing very well before ginola,who most had only heard of for getting the blame for france not qualifying for a major tournament,came in........aye hindsight is a wonderful thing.

[Guest SwissMagpie]

even i,a Swiss from Zurich knows what will be tomorrows main article on the Evening Roni,

Anal:

"And the talking of the US defender - "Gooch" and Fabricio Coloccini are Wide of the mark,as i understand a top International defender is on the way to St James' Park.

"we are getting closer and closer to sign a Defender,i just need to watch him one more time before i will make a decision"said Roeder

[Delima]

Very good biography for Coloccini. If the rumoured 2.7 millions £ were to be true, it would be silly not to get him. He fits into Roeder's player profile quite nicely - young, proven, potential, decent ability, an (vast) improvement of the squad.

 

Deportivo-La-Caruna.com

 

FABRICIO COLOCCINI

 

Squad Number 06/07: 5

Date of Birth: 22 January 1982

Nationality: Argentina

Contract: 2005 (January) - 2011

Transfer: €3 million (2005, from AC Milan)

Previous Clubs: Deportivo (2005), AC Milan (2004-2005), Villarreal (2003-2004, loan), Atlético de Madrid (2002-2003, loan), Alavés (2001-2002, loan), San Lorenzo (2000-2001, loan), Boca Juniors (1999-2000, loan), AC Milan (2000-2005), Boca Juniors (1998-2000), San Lorenzo

Buy-out Clause: ?

Height: 183 cm

Weight: 78 kg

Position: Defender/Midfielder (central/right)

Argentinean defender COLOCCINI had just turned twenty-three when his move to Deportivo finally was realized at the end of January 2005. The player had been related to the Galicians since his excellent performances at Alavés (2001/2002) but finally was released by AC Milan after having experienced several loan deals. From then on the Galicians had a full Argentinean national player in their squad who played at the 2006 World Cup.

 

In March 2000, five years before his move to Deportivo, by then 18-year old Coloccini signed at Italian giants AC Milan in a transfer that was cloaked in controversy. Milan were alleged to have agreed the transfer with Coloccini's father rather than Boca. Coloccini senior later used his parental right to remove his child from Argentina and, after a protracted legal fight, FIFA ordered Milan to pay Boca compensation.

 

Considered an enormous talent, aged barely sixteen he made his debut at Boca Juniors in the highest Argentinean division and that same year he won the Torneo Apertura. His move was only on the paper though as Coloccini (quick, strong in the air and good with the ball at his feet) was loaned back to Boca Juniors and later to San Lorenzo, where he won the Torneo Clausura 2001.

 

In that same year the teenager made his debut in the Primera División at his first of what would become four Spanish clubs: Deportivo Alavés. The Basques had months earlier lost a dramatic UEFA Cup final against Liverpool (4-5 aet by an own goal) and were looking for ways to stay at the top places in Spain. AC Milan had taken Javi Moreno and Contra from the successful 2000/2001 team and the Basques for their part achieved a loan deal with the player who had just won the FIFA World Youth Championship with the Argenintean U-20 team.

 

Aged nineteen, blond Coloccini played thirty-three matches for Alavés, scored six goals and was considered one of the biggest talents in Spanish football. Coloccini himself experienced a big shock when his mother died in May 2001. The player admires her and needed therapy from an Argentinean psychologist to overcome this setback. When On 21 October 2001, el Día de la Madre in Argentina, he scored two goals against Valladolid, raised his shirt and showed the tatoo dedicated to his mother. His first goal in Spain he had scored on 22 September of that year against… Deportivo.

 

Ondarru, the second man after Mané at Alavés back then, in 2005 said that "Coloccini was an introvert player but a very nice guy when he played at Alavés. He's very clever on the pitch and he gives all. Besides, he's quick, good in the air and very competitive. His move to Deportivo will do him well because he'll have more options to play compared to his time at Milan". This was exactly what he lacked at the Italians: playing matches. When he returned to Italy in 2002 he was immediately sent back to Spain to gain even more experience, this time at Atlético de Madrid (2002/2003) in a season when he made his debut in the national team of Argentina. One year later he played at Villarreal (2003/2004).

 

After a total of ninety-one Liga matches (seven goals) at three different Spanish clubs, and having finished at places seven, eight and twelve in Spain, he returned to Milan aged twenty-two. In 2004 he played for the Argentinean national team at the 2004 Copa America (Argentina lost against Brazil in the final after penalties) and was a key defensive player in Argentina’s successful bid for gold at the 2004 Olympic Football Tournament in Athens. In a squad containing players like Ayala, Mascherano, Heintze, Saviola, Tévez and D’Alessandro, the Albicelestes stood firm to win their first-ever Olympic Football Tournament gold medal, having twice fallen at the final hurdle (in 1928 and 1996). Marcelo Bielsa's side imperiously swept all obstacles from its path. Scoring 17 times in 6 matches without conceding a single goal, Argentina quite simply gave their opponents no chance.

 

That same summer of 2004 Moroccan player Naybet left Deportivo after eight years of service. The veteran was allowed to leave to Tottenham Hotspur but, despite Irureta's wishes, a replacement didn't arrive. Deportivo lacked money and president Lendoiro wanted to build on the success of the previous season (final four in Europe) and to save some money. But two years of seeing only Pedro Munitis arriving (on a free transfer) and players like Donato, Makaay, Naybet and Djalminha leaving caused difficulties and the season 2004/2005 evolved in a terrible way. Deportivo didn't score a single goal in the Champions League, suffered a shocking Copa exit at little Elche and were mid-table when the transfermarket reopened in the winter months

 

Still there were no signs of additions as Lendoiro kept on explaining money was saved to be spent that summer of building a Deportivo for their centenario year (2006/2007). Weeks went by without movement and the position of Irureta was seriously questioned. After a 1-1 home draw with Numancia the Spanish sportspapers even claimed the Basque coach would be sacked if the next home match (against Espanyol) would end up in another disaster.

 

It became a moving week as Walter Pandiani made some provoking remarks towards his coach and on Thursday news reports appeared about the supposed interest of Deportivo in signing Coloccini. One week later his agent met Lendoiro in La Coruña and in between a deal was struck with Milan. At first the Italians only had been willing to agree on another loan deal. But Coloccini, nicknamed Colocho, rejected this option and requested the Italian club to let him go on a permanent basis for him to get his career going. Despite the Italians received more (economically) important offers for the Argentinean international player, he only had one wish: to play at Deportivo. His compatriots Lionel Scaloni and Aldo Duscher recommended his signing and Coloccini was desperate to come. “Deportivo are a big club. Me and my family experienced good years in Spain and I am sure it'll be the same in La Coruña,” he said.

 

On Monday 31 January, 2005 all was done and that same night he was presented as new player of Deportivo. Aged twenty-three he thanked Milan for their cooperation. "I have a lot of gratitude towards Milan, but I wasn't satisfied with my role there. Out of that situation I started to search for an opportunity at another club. At Deportivo I will fight in order to find a place in the team." With Coloccini the Galicians seem to have made a smart deal. He only cost the club €3 million and the Argentinean player is attached to the club until 2011. Argentinean national coach José Pekerman admires his style, picked him for the 2005 Confederations Cup and 2006 World Cup. Coloccini has played in all Argentinean youth ranks.

 

His time at Deportivo hasn’t been all positive though. Coloccini cuts a dashing figure charging out of defence with long curly locks flowing but is prone to reckless defending that often leads to bookings. In one-and-a half season at Deportivo he played 41 matches, received 9 yellow cards and was sent off three times (twice against Zaragoza and once against Celta). His total numbers in Spain between 2001 and 2006 are 132 matches, 36 yellow cards, 5 red cards and 8 goals. As a player Coloccini now must stand up and lead Deportivo towards renewed success in Spain and possibly in Europe. Coloccini is still only 24 by now but his achievements, especially the international aspect, are of a calibre many elder Deportivo players never will achieve.

 

 

Reload Add to favorites Make us your home page Contact us

21:28:35  Sunday 28th January 2007

© 2007 Deportivo-La-Coruna.com

[gray]

glenn'll need to see him a fair few times first like. 

[buzza]

Coloccini is a solid defender and is highly thought of in Spain...

I wouldn't think they will drop the price, but it's a good deal at 2.7 million especially when you look at the defenders in the premier league and how much they go for.

Go on Glenn, dip yer wick!!