by IMAMATEOFJOVSKY » 02 Jan 2009 10:15
02 Jan 2009 10:15by Hoop Blah » 02 Jan 2009 10:40
02 Jan 2009 10:40That would be a shame to see a very Reading type of player going elsewhere.IMAMATEOFJOVSKY wrote:Wolves are set to beat Portsmouth to the £2m signing of Bristol City midfielder Marvin Elliott according to the Daily Mirror.
by Deathy » 02 Jan 2009 10:50
02 Jan 2009 10:50by Hoop Blah » 02 Jan 2009 10:57
02 Jan 2009 10:57I wasn't thinking of him being of much worth in the deal, more a way of giving them a replacement capable at this level plus getting him off of our wage bill and making room in the squad.Deathy wrote:Gunnarsson, a free in 6 months, and old = worth very little in any swap deal, or any deal actually.
Maybe if we offered Lita plus £1.5m. But we wont spend that sort of money on one player at this level. Sorry Ian.
by Ian Royal » 02 Jan 2009 13:36
02 Jan 2009 13:36by IMAMATEOFJOVSKY » 02 Jan 2009 13:48
02 Jan 2009 13:48The fact that Coppell has openly said he doesnt even know his best midfield shows that there are questions to be asked there - yes we have the volume of midfielders but I dont think we have the quality there, certainly to compete in PremiershipIan Royal wrote:I see one huge reason not to give a toss about this.
We don't need a bloody midfielder!
by Franchise FC » 02 Jan 2009 13:54
02 Jan 2009 13:54The fact that Fabio Cappello hasn't decided the make up of his best midfield means he must still be looking for more players ......oh, wait a minute.IMAMATEOFJOVSKY wrote:The fact that Coppell has openly said he doesnt even know his best midfield shows that there are questions to be asked there - yes we have the volume of midfielders but I dont think we have the quality there, certainly to compete in PremiershipIan Royal wrote:I see one huge reason not to give a toss about this.
We don't need a bloody midfielder!
by Ian Royal » 02 Jan 2009 14:04
02 Jan 2009 14:04IMAMATEOFJOVSKY wrote:The fact that Coppell has openly said he doesnt even know his best midfield shows that there are questions to be asked there - yes we have the volume of midfielders but I dont think we have the quality there, certainly to compete in PremiershipIan Royal wrote:I see one huge reason not to give a toss about this.
We don't need a bloody midfielder!
by Hoop Blah » 02 Jan 2009 14:21
02 Jan 2009 14:21by Sun Tzu » 02 Jan 2009 14:45
02 Jan 2009 14:45by Victor Meldrew » 02 Jan 2009 15:00
02 Jan 2009 15:00Do you think Wolves "need" one?Ian Royal wrote:I see one huge reason not to give a toss about this.
We don't need a bloody midfielder!
by Hoop Blah » 02 Jan 2009 15:04
02 Jan 2009 15:04I took a look at one of the City forums a while back specifically to see how he was getting on. The concensus seemed to be that he's not been as good as last season and I think he's proven over the last few seasons that he's got something about him.Sun Tzu wrote:The way Elliot ran the midfield in our game at Ashton Gate really does make you think he'd be a worthwhile addition to the squad (*)
*OK, I know it's wrong to judge him on one game.....
by Ian Royal » 02 Jan 2009 15:48
02 Jan 2009 15:48That's a point, but Coppell has gone on record he realised he made a mistake in just getting in quantity of bodies rather than quality. We have much much more important places to progress and strengthern.Victor Meldrew wrote:Do you think Wolves "need" one?Ian Royal wrote:I see one huge reason not to give a toss about this.
We don't need a bloody midfielder!
It's all about progression surely and if a player becomes available at a fair price who is better than what we have got I would like to think we might be in for him whether he is another central midfielder or not.
We kept on buying centre-backs didn't we when on here people felt it unnecessary?
by Hoop Blah » 02 Jan 2009 15:53
02 Jan 2009 15:53I'd agree with the first bit of that. Cisse may prove me wrong and be able to handle it now he's had more time to adjust to British football but I just think he's revelling in the lower quality of the Championship and he'll still be too slow in the Prem.Ian Royal wrote: I think our only Prem quality midfielders are Matejovsky and Harper, who can't play together at least in a two. So we will need to strengthern, although Cisse or Karacan MAY just about be good enough to play with both Harps and Marek.
by juanpablo » 02 Jan 2009 16:15
02 Jan 2009 16:15by Hoop Blah » 02 Jan 2009 16:36
02 Jan 2009 16:36Would you say he's different though?juanpablo wrote:having seen him play 20 odd times he is no better than what we have imo
by IMAMATEOFJOVSKY » 02 Jan 2009 16:39
02 Jan 2009 16:39People on here will say he's not the same type as Harper - but he's a better player than Harper. They defend Harper saying that other players arent the same as Harper - just not sure what Harper is??...apart from ineffective most of the time - so we wouldnt want any other player to be the same!Hoop Blah wrote:Would you say he's different though?juanpablo wrote:having seen him play 20 odd times he is no better than what we have imo
As good as Harper or Mateovsky are at what they do?
by Gordons Cumming » 02 Jan 2009 19:52
02 Jan 2009 19:52by OLLIE KEARNS » 02 Jan 2009 20:20
02 Jan 2009 20:20Some fellow nobbers found my explanation of Harper's role helpful on a different post. It might help with the "just not sure what Harper is" bit.IMAMATEOFJOVSKY wrote:Hoop Blah wrote:Would you say he's different though?juanpablo wrote:having seen him play 20 odd times he is no better than what we have imo
As good as Harper or Mateovsky are at what they do?
People on here will say he's not the same type as Harper - but he's a better player than Harper. They defend Harper saying that other players arent the same as Harper - just not sure what Harper is??...apart from ineffective most of the time - so we wouldnt want any other player to be the same!
Change the record, you've moaned about Harper roughly 500 times in your 385 posts.IMAMATEOFJOVSKY wrote:People on here will say he's not the same type as Harper - but he's a better player than Harper. They defend Harper saying that other players arent the same as Harper - just not sure what Harper is??...apart from ineffective most of the time - so we wouldnt want any other player to be the same!Hoop Blah wrote:Would you say he's different though?juanpablo wrote:having seen him play 20 odd times he is no better than what we have imo
As good as Harper or Mateovsky are at what they do?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests