One other thing about Roeder's transfer policy which p*sses me off

[NUFC06]

Campbell was a huge risk and I suspect many on here are rewritting history.

 

I would think in normal circumstances we could agree on a couple of very obvious issues regarding Campbell.

 

1. He was a headcase last year and was not playing for Arsenal due to emotional/psychological reasons

2. He was on 100k a week

3. His agent approached Newcastle first with the idea of maintaining that very high wage and

4. Discounts were only discussed once Campbell and his agent were faced with Harry Redknapp

5. 'Arry is one of the greatest (if not THE) greatest bargainers in the Premiership

 

So with these pieces of information at hand it is not outlandinsh to envision a situation where Campbell signed for Newcastle but ended up not playing for whatever reason - so he would have joined Owen and Dyer with a combined weekley wage of around 270K a week (probably greater than that of Wigan's entire squad) resulting in the PLC and supporters calling for Roeder's head on a stick.

 

Not rewriting anything tbh.  Plenty people, myself included, thought that Campbell was a common sense move.  Roeder didn't, and he was wrong.  Redknapp took a calculated risk and it is paying off big style.

 

Agree with you 100%

If we have signed Campbell in the summer i think that right now we probably would have at least 5-6 points more at what we have now

Ramage and Titus mistakes have cost us many many points

[CaliMag]

 

You don't seriously think that Sol Campbell would have been expecting 100k/week to play for us now, do you?

 

 

Yes.

 

I don't claim to have any insider knowledge, but we are known for paying very high wages and at the time the Guardian reported that his agent approached us first to keep him at his very high wages.

 

Now if Campbell's agent said "Sol want to play for Newcastle and we'll settle for 50k a week" I would think Roeder would be tempted, but up until the time his agent spoke with Pompey he was talking about going to Spain or Italy and had delusions of granduer.

 

Campbell's form and appearances (due to his psychological breakdown or whatever) dropped last year and he is nearing the end of his career. That seems like the definition of risk and had he come here a very expnsive one IMO.

[BottledDog]

Campbell was a huge risk and I suspect many on here are rewritting history.

 

I would think in normal circumstances we could agree on a couple of very obvious issues regarding Campbell.

 

1. He was a headcase last year and was not playing for Arsenal due to emotional/psychological reasons

2. He was on 100k a week

3. His agent approached Newcastle first with the idea of maintaining that very high wage and

4. Discounts were only discussed once Campbell and his agent were faced with Harry Redknapp

5. 'Arry is one of the greatest (if not THE) greatest bargainers in the Premiership

 

So with these pieces of information at hand it is not outlandinsh to envision a situation where Campbell signed for Newcastle but ended up not playing for whatever reason - so he would have joined Owen and Dyer with a combined weekley wage of around 270K a week (probably greater than that of Wigan's entire squad) resulting in the PLC and supporters calling for Roeder's head on a stick.

 

So we couldn't bargain him down by offering him higher profile first team football on the same wages as the best offered elsewhere? Bollocks, of course we could if were interested.

 

Nope, Roeder had already given a very cromulent arguement that we were not interested because of the lack of football he had played. The same arguement he made for Woodgate it would seem, though not one used for his main target Huth obviously (who has since played considerably less games than either of them).

[CaliMag]

So we couldn't bargain him down by offering him higher profile first team football on the same wages as the best offered elsewhere? Bollocks, of course we could if were interested.

 

If the Guardian got it right and we were contacted first then the answer would be no. He would have been offered at his full wage and then when he got the no answer it would have been "Fine I'll play in Italy or Spain then." As stated before Campbell (and his agent) thought that he had many options before he eventually ended up at Pompey... which leads to another point: If he was such a "common sense option" why didn't he have more opportunities available? He was most likely seen as an expnsive risk by more managers than Roeder... some of them may have even been good ones.

 

 

Nope, Roeder had already given a very cromulent arguement that we were not interested because of the lack of football he had played. The same arguement he made for Woodgate it would seem, though not one used for his main target Huth obviously (who has since played considerably less games than either of them).

I can't believe I am in a position forced to defend Roeder (whom I was never very happy about) but here I am.

I think you are being a tad unfair here. Campbell played fewer matches because of his psychological issues as stated before and Woodgate because he was injured. Huth, on the otherhand, was not playing first team football, but he was in fact still playing reserve football and was fit both physically and psychologically. I see a big difference in Woodgate v Huth v Campbell in the 05-06 season.

[BottledDog]

So we couldn't bargain him down by offering him higher profile first team football on the same wages as the best offered elsewhere? Bollocks, of course we could if were interested.

 

If the Guardian got it right and we were contacted first then the answer would be no. He would have been offered at his full wage and then when he got the no answer it would have been "Fine I'll play in Italy or Spain then." As stated before Campbell (and his agent) thought that he had many options before he eventually ended up at Pompey... which leads to another point: If he was such a "common sense option" why didn't he have more opportunities available? He was most likely seen as an expnsive risk by more managers than Roeder... some of them may have even been good ones.

 

 

Nope, Roeder had already given a very cromulent arguement that we were not interested because of the lack of football he had played. The same arguement he made for Woodgate it would seem, though not one used for his main target Huth obviously (who has since played considerably less games than either of them).

I can't believe I am in a position forced to defend Roeder (whom I was never very happy about) but here I am.

I think you are being a tad unfair here. Campbell played less matched because of his psychological issues as stated before and Woodgate because he was injured. Huth, on the otherhand, was not playing first team football, but he was in fact still playing reserve football and was fit both physically and psychologically. I see a big difference in Woodgate v Huth v Campbell in the 05-06 season.

 

All I am pointing out is that we were simply were not interested. In a summer where we were clearly lacking in targets, to dismiss Campbell completely because he asked us first and for high wages seems a tad over the top. Surely it would have been more sensible to say 'not a chance on those wages but if you cannot find a better deal we would be receptive to any further negotiations' but obviously we had no interest in him at all. As it turns out, that was a mistake, as was Shepherd and Roeders conflicting views on Woodgate and Huth and the resulting failure to sign any of them.

 

Hindsight? Yes. But that does not save him from the criticism which esentially boils down to his inability to strengthen the squad significantly.

[CaliMag]

All I am pointing out is that we were simply were not interested. In a summer where we were clearly lacking in targets, to dismiss Campbell completely because he asked us first and for high wages seems a tad over the top. Surely it would have been more sensible to say 'not a chance on those wages but if you cannot find a better deal we would be receptive to any further negotiations' but obviously we had no interest in him at all. As it turns out, that was a mistake, as was Shepherd and Roeders conflicting views on Woodgate and Huth and the resulting failure to sign any of them.

 

Hindsight? Yes. But that does not save him from the criticism which esentially boils down to his inability to strengthen the squad significantly.

 

That seems a fair assessment to me especially your last point.

[YankeeToon]

Nope, Roeder had already given a very cromulent arguement that we were not interested because of the lack of football he had played.

 

Maybe he didn't feel Campbell would sufficiently embiggen the squad... 

[Northern Monkey]

Again though its still all risk, he opted agianst Sol and yeah it turned out he has been great for Pompey but Roeder was not willing to risk it going bad for us if we had signed him, I can't slate him for that.

I was gutted over our lack of signings as much as eceryone else but Roeder is not the one that seals the deals!

 

But he IS the one who says what he wants. He FAILED to get the players we needed, and that is HIS fault.

 

Mind, if we had signed Campbell, he'd have been shit, because our manager is shite. He's better of with a decent (albiet bent-to-fuck) manager.

[BottledDog]

Nope, Roeder had already given a very cromulent arguement that we were not interested because of the lack of football he had played.

 

Maybe he didn't feel Campbell would sufficiently embiggen the squad... 

 

[kevin doyle]

Do Newcastle have exclusive rights to sign Gooch or can someone outbid them in the summer?

That's of course as long as Glen as seen enough of him to make a decision.

[Guest alex]

I'm sure Calimag has made virtually that exact post before and I disagreed then. I didn't see Campbell as a huge risk at the time and it would appear he wouldn't have been. Also, even if he was a huge risk I would say his points (which I assume are a defence of Roeder not going for Campbell) carry little weight in that regard when you consider our manager was trying to sign Woodgate and Huth - both of whom have had their injury problems, to put it mildly. I think people are pissed off with Roeder's transfer 'policy' because they aren't sure he has one, given the amount of times he's contradicted himself over it.