Page 3 of 5
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 29 Jun 2008 10:07
by Southbank Old Boy
brendywendy wrote:Smoking Kills Dancing Doe wrote:What I don't get about Kebe and never will.
How was a French lower league left winger, ever going to keep us up?
wenger has bought from lower french league before and found gems
and i think copps thought at the price he was worth a go regardless seeing as all other options were failing
Can you name one French lower league player that Wenger has bought over to come straight into his team to make any kind of positive impact?
I can't, and Wenger is the master of that market.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 29 Jun 2008 10:30
by Southbank Old Boy
brendywendy wrote:
i know you probably have one to hand, but i dont
so who were these great RW who were lining up to play for us?
Three names that were touted at the time, all of which I think would've been available, interested and an improvement on what we had, are Gera, Kightly and Routledge.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 29 Jun 2008 18:48
by Ian Royal
Southbank Old Boy wrote:brendywendy wrote:
i know you probably have one to hand, but i dont
so who were these great RW who were lining up to play for us?
Three names that were touted at the time, all of which I think would've been available, interested and an improvement on what we had, are Gera, Kightly and Routledge.
Weren't the only people touting Gera on here? As they do every season for the last 3 years. In which case I'll start touting Quersma every summer and January for a couple of years and then complain when something goes wrong that he was available, interested and an improvement on what we had.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 29 Jun 2008 19:17
by Southbank Old Boy
Ian Royal wrote:Southbank Old Boy wrote:brendywendy wrote:
i know you probably have one to hand, but i dont
so who were these great RW who were lining up to play for us?
Three names that were touted at the time, all of which I think would've been available, interested and an improvement on what we had, are Gera, Kightly and Routledge.
Weren't the only people touting Gera on here? As they do every season for the last 3 years. In which case I'll start touting Quersma every summer and January for a couple of years and then complain when something goes wrong that he was available, interested and an improvement on what we had.
Ah, very clever, what a wag you are.
The question was basically who was available, not who were we interested in and on the verge of signing. We might not've been interested in him, but the fact he's since gone to Fulham even when West Brom have gone up shows that he probably would've been interested in moving to a Premiership side in January.
If you want an answer to who were we interested in to fill the massive void we had on the rigth side of midfield you'll have to go and ask Coppell.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 29 Jun 2008 19:22
by Smoking Kills Dancing Doe
Ian Royal wrote:Southbank Old Boy wrote:brendywendy wrote:
i know you probably have one to hand, but i dont
so who were these great RW who were lining up to play for us?
Three names that were touted at the time, all of which I think would've been available, interested and an improvement on what we had, are Gera, Kightly and Routledge.
Weren't the only people touting Gera on here? As they do every season for the last 3 years. In which case I'll start touting Quersma every summer and January for a couple of years and
then complain when something goes wrong that he was available, interested and an improvement on what we had.
Like getting relegated, mainly cause we created nothing down the wing due to not having one Premiership quality right winger in the club?
If you're telling me Kebe was the best we were looking at, what the fcuk were we looking at. He says himself he's played on the left most the time.
I still cannot believe we went down last season, with seemingly such little fight. That's what gets me. The fcukin make do attitude.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 29 Jun 2008 21:47
by Ian Royal
If Kebe was the best we were looking at I'd eat my hat.
Then I'd find Coppell and punch him in the face for being a moron. But seeing as we'll never know and I think that idea is ridiculous I'll leave him alone.
I'm just saying that the only people touting Gera as available and a good buy as far as I can tell were on here.
Brom to Fulham seems a strange choice to me.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 30 Jun 2008 09:52
by brendywendy
Southbank Old Boy wrote:brendywendy wrote:
i know you probably have one to hand, but i dont
so who were these great RW who were lining up to play for us?
Three names that were touted at the time, all of which I think would've been available, interested and an improvement on what we had, are Gera, Kightly and Routledge.
that opinion not fact
even if im in agreement.
and we have no idea if we were in anyway attractive to those players
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 30 Jun 2008 10:06
by SpaceCruiser
Smoking Kills Dancing Doe wrote:What I don't get about Kebe and never will.
How was a French lower league left winger, ever going to keep us up?
Typical dick comment from you.
You of course ignore the fact that he was
on-loan to a club in the French lower league when we bought him.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 30 Jun 2008 10:48
by Hoop Blah
brendywendy wrote:Southbank Old Boy wrote:brendywendy wrote:
i know you probably have one to hand, but i dont
so who were these great RW who were lining up to play for us?
Three names that were touted at the time, all of which I think would've been available, interested and an improvement on what we had, are Gera, Kightly and Routledge.
that opinion not fact
even if im in agreement.
and we have no idea if we were in anyway attractive to those players
No idea we'd have been attractive? We were in the Premiership!!!!! Where have you been the last few years....players are drawn to the bright lights of the Premiership like flies round shit.
Considering Gera went from a promoted club to another club who were in the same relegation fight as us, who are based just down the road and have a recent history of being in and around the relegation zone, I think it's a fair conclusion that he'd have been willing to come to Reading....wages permitting of course.
Routledge was desperate to get out of Spurs. He went to Villa probably knowing that he'd be lucky to get in the side. Again, we probably wouldn't have been able to match Villa on wages if it came to a bidding war but he wouldn't have been on extortionate wages at Spurs (I seem to remember Carrick was only on about 13-15k before his move to Utd) so I reckon we could've been competitive.
Kightly would surely have had his head turned by the chance to establish himself as the first choice winger at a Premiership club considering he was playing non-league not so long ago. Wages wouldn't have been a problem, we'd have just had to stump up enough cash to prise him away from Wolves.
I agree we don't know if we were interested in these players, but it seems likely that IF, and thats a big if, we were interested in them we would've had a decent chance of signing them. The arguement that there was nobody around to bring in just doesn't stand up. The 'fact of the matter' is that we decided not to, apart from some left winger with no touch from the French lower leagues.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 01 Jul 2008 09:26
by Agent Balti
Which if you extrapolate out a bit beyong left wingers, just what kind of players are RFC looking at? What is the criteria that they wish to fulfill, as I'll be buggered if I can work it out these days. The selling policy is simple - "show us the money or beat it", but buying I just can't fathom. It's neither optimistic and bold nor is it a fabulous endictment of our *ahem* scouting system.
Queue Brendy...
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 01 Jul 2008 09:44
by Roger the Rabbit
The selling policy is simple - "show us the money or beat it"
------
We haven'd sold many in recent years have we ?
Halford (very good deal !), but beyond that how many meaningful sales have we had ?
Currently we have no idea what 'policy' we'll have as we have nothing beyond tabloid tales to go on.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 01 Jul 2008 09:59
by Alan Partridge
SpaceCruiser wrote:Smoking Kills Dancing Doe wrote:What I don't get about Kebe and never will.
How was a French lower league left winger, ever going to keep us up?
Typical dick comment from you.
You of course ignore the fact that he was
on-loan to a club in the French lower league when we bought him.
Of which he never played a single minutes football for.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 01 Jul 2008 10:00
by Agent Balti
I suppose there's a difference between selling and letting go, which is what we're supremely good at also.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 01 Jul 2008 19:10
by Ian Royal
Roger the Rabbit wrote:The selling policy is simple - "show us the money or beat it"
------
We haven'd sold many in recent years have we ?
Halford (very good deal !), but beyond that how many meaningful sales have we had ?
Currently we have no idea what 'policy' we'll have as we have nothing beyond tabloid tales to go on.
Hughes and Seol.
Both very good bits of business (bar the leaving us with only a white line on the right wing).
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 01 Jul 2008 20:45
by Roger the Rabbit
Ian Royal wrote:Roger the Rabbit wrote:The selling policy is simple - "show us the money or beat it"
------
We haven'd sold many in recent years have we ?
Halford (very good deal !), but beyond that how many meaningful sales have we had ?
Currently we have no idea what 'policy' we'll have as we have nothing beyond tabloid tales to go on.
Hughes and Seol.
Both very good bits of business (bar the leaving us with only a white line on the right wing).
We didn't sell Seol, we exchanged him meaning there was no 'showing of the money'
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 01 Jul 2008 22:31
by Ian Royal
Roger the Rabbit wrote:Ian Royal wrote:Roger the Rabbit wrote:The selling policy is simple - "show us the money or beat it"
------
We haven'd sold many in recent years have we ?
Halford (very good deal !), but beyond that how many meaningful sales have we had ?
Currently we have no idea what 'policy' we'll have as we have nothing beyond tabloid tales to go on.
Hughes and Seol.
Both very good bits of business (bar the leaving us with only a white line on the right wing).
We didn't sell Seol, we exchanged him meaning there was no 'showing of the money'
pedant. We didn't release him or let his contract run out. We gave him to someone else in a trade for something of value. Better value IMO.
They had to "show us the value" of the player coming the other way. If it wasn't good enough, we'd have said get bent.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 02 Jul 2008 10:03
by Badger Finger
The OS Wrote in Jan wrote:Strictly speaking, Liam and Seol wasn't actually a swap deal, both transfers were separate and independent of each other. But the key thing was that neither club was going to sell the other player without the other going in the opposite direction.
Cheer up guys, we'll be alright!
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 16 Jul 2008 16:34
by Wycombe Royal
Another rumour that can be closed - he has joined Norwich for £450k plus add-ons.
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 16 Jul 2008 16:39
by brendywendy
Agent Balti wrote:Which if you extrapolate out a bit beyong left wingers, just what kind of players are RFC looking at? What is the criteria that they wish to fulfill, as I'll be buggered if I can work it out these days. The selling policy is simple - "show us the money or beat it", but buying I just can't fathom. It's neither optimistic and bold nor is it a fabulous endictment of our *ahem* scouting system.
Queue Brendy...
you want me to queue?
Re: RUMOUR - David Bell
Posted: 16 Jul 2008 17:59
by Norfolk Royal
Wycombe Royal wrote:Another rumour that can be closed - he has joined Norwich for £450k plus add-ons.
Are you sure? There's nothing running on the Norwich message boards.