Guest alex Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Big gamble even on loan...! You'd like to think his luck would change at some point in his career. It would be great if it did with us, but I'm really not too sure on whether it's going to be worth the risk in wages.... .............AMEOBI.....MARTINS ZOGGY GRAVESEN....PARKER.... DUFF BRIDGE WOODGATE BRAMBLE...CARR ........................GIVEN SUBS: HARPER TAYLOR DYER BUTT NUGENT .........Would be nice ....but 185045[/snapback] No Emre? 185050[/snapback] I'm not really sure we need Graveson? Emre, Parker, Dyer (when fit), Butt, the Zog can all play central midfield. 5 players for 2 positions, not including academy & reserve. I'd rather we bought another centre back instead of a Centre Mid 185058[/snapback] We only have Emre, Butt & Parker in central midfield. Zoggy might be able to play there, but he's a lot more effective on the wing so there’s not real reason for him to be there. I'm not going to include Dyer for the same reason that he's lot more effective in a free role behind the front two or even on the right-wing, but never as a central midfielder. I do like Emre, he grafts well and creates in attack, but I just feel Gravesen can offer more as a central midfielder with his composer and strength on the ball especially for when we come up against tougher opposition. I would rather we bought another centre-back instead as it's more of a priority, but again I'd say the same towards bringing in another striker too. 185067[/snapback] I let you off the first time but it's composure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26100 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. 185069[/snapback] Well if we engineered the deal right we could return him to them once he breaks down. And it wouldn't be Woodgate missing out on the money, I thought the story was Real were prepared to pay a fair whack of his wages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zico martin 84 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. 185069[/snapback] Well if we engineered the deal right we could return him to them once he breaks down. And it wouldn't be Woodgate missing out on the money, I thought the story was Real were prepared to pay a fair whack of his wages? 185074[/snapback] yeah but thats a fair whack of his current wages ( 90K) i imagine, still would cost us too much tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie Boyo 23 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Big gamble even on loan...! You'd like to think his luck would change at some point in his career. It would be great if it did with us, but I'm really not too sure on whether it's going to be worth the risk in wages.... .............AMEOBI.....MARTINS ZOGGY GRAVESEN....PARKER.... DUFF BRIDGE WOODGATE BRAMBLE...CARR ........................GIVEN SUBS: HARPER TAYLOR DYER BUTT NUGENT .........Would be nice ....but 185045[/snapback] No Emre? 185050[/snapback] I'm not really sure we need Graveson? Emre, Parker, Dyer (when fit), Butt, the Zog can all play central midfield. 5 players for 2 positions, not including academy & reserve. I'd rather we bought another centre back instead of a Centre Mid 185058[/snapback] We only have Emre, Butt & Parker in central midfield. Zoggy might be able to play there, but he's a lot more effective on the wing so there’s not real reason for him to be there. I'm not going to include Dyer for the same reason that he's lot more effective in a free role behind the front two or even on the right-wing, but never as a central midfielder. I do like Emre, he grafts well and creates in attack, but I just feel Gravesen can offer more as a central midfielder with his composer and strength on the ball especially for when we come up against tougher opposition. I would rather we bought another centre-back instead as it's more of a priority, but again I'd say the same towards bringing in another striker too. 185067[/snapback] I let you off the first time but it's composure 185071[/snapback] Composer man! I think I need to slow down a little while typing away, I keep missing words out too...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Probably got Tchaikovsky's bones in his boot for inspiration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. 185069[/snapback] Well if we engineered the deal right we could return him to them once he breaks down. And it wouldn't be Woodgate missing out on the money, I thought the story was Real were prepared to pay a fair whack of his wages? 185074[/snapback] Maybe they are, sorry. The rest of your suggestion sounds a bit too good to be true so I still would be against getting him. I think getting him back would be a case of hearts ruling heads. He was class when he was here but he was only fit for about 1/3 of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34133 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. 185069[/snapback] Well if we engineered the deal right we could return him to them once he breaks down. And it wouldn't be Woodgate missing out on the money, I thought the story was Real were prepared to pay a fair whack of his wages? 185074[/snapback] Real are not gonna accept a deal where they have to take him back if he breaks down, or they may as well just keep him and save themselves the hassle. £35k pw is £1.8m p.a. Not worth it for a player who doesn't play. Let's wash our hands of Woodgate and let him go and collect his sick pay off someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26100 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 With someone as good as Woody its just the thought that he might, just might play 40 odd great games for Liverpool and we'd all be sick as parrots. Still thats about 1000-1 chance of happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zico martin 84 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 With someone as good as Woody its just the thought that he might, just might play 40 odd great games for Liverpool and we'd all be sick as parrots. Still thats about 1000-1 chance of happening. 185088[/snapback] if he signs for him you should check the odds the bookies will give, might help soften the blow like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggiespaws 0 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Big gamble even on loan...! You'd like to think his luck would change at some point in his career. It would be great if it did with us, but I'm really not too sure on whether it's going to be worth the risk in wages.... .............AMEOBI.....MARTINS ZOGGY GRAVESEN....PARKER.... DUFF BRIDGE WOODGATE BRAMBLE...CARR ........................GIVEN SUBS: HARPER TAYLOR DYER BUTT NUGENT .........Would be nice ....but 185045[/snapback] No Emre? 185050[/snapback] I'm not really sure we need Graveson? Emre, Parker, Dyer (when fit), Butt, the Zog can all play central midfield. 5 players for 2 positions, not including academy & reserve. I'd rather we bought another centre back instead of a Centre Mid 185058[/snapback] We only have Emre, Butt & Parker in central midfield. Zoggy might be able to play there, but he's a lot more effective on the wing so there’s not real reason for him to be there. I'm not going to include Dyer for the same reason that he's lot more effective in a free role behind the front two or even on the right-wing, but never as a central midfielder. I do like Emre, he grafts well and creates in attack, but I just feel Gravesen can offer more as a central midfielder with his composer and strength on the ball especially for when we come up against tougher opposition. I would rather we bought another centre-back instead as it's more of a priority, but again I'd say the same towards bringing in another striker too. 185067[/snapback] A fair point. If we'd already secured Bridge plus another def I'd maybe view this slightly different. Right now, I just see it as a luxury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papa Lazaru 0 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 The bloke is arguably the best centreback in football, he transforms your entire defence by his presence. It would be a big gamble but on loan i just couldn't turn down the chance of getting somebody that good who in addition is already proven and at home in the prem. Obviously there's the chance he ends up injured alot of the time, but i'd still take the risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 I can see both sides like. We're short of defensive cover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckypierre 0 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. 185069[/snapback] well the story is Real are prepared to pay 'a large slice' of his 70K a week. Doesnt that make it worth it then even if he would only play 15 games? A large slice says to me a fair bit more than half. So say 20K a week? If he plays half the games is it value for money? I think so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. 185069[/snapback] well the story is Real are prepared to pay 'a large slice' of his 70K a week. Doesnt that make it worth it then even if he would only play 15 games? A large slice says to me a fair bit more than half. So say 20K a week? If he plays half the games is it value for money? I think so 185110[/snapback] I need to know how much we'd be paying to make a proper judgement. I would have preferred Sol Campbell though. Are we even being linked with Woodgate btw? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26100 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. 185069[/snapback] well the story is Real are prepared to pay 'a large slice' of his 70K a week. Doesnt that make it worth it then even if he would only play 15 games? A large slice says to me a fair bit more than half. So say 20K a week? If he plays half the games is it value for money? I think so 185110[/snapback] Aye but at the same time our backline would have no consistency, its not gonna help changing our CB partnership every few games to accomodate his injury habit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34133 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. 185069[/snapback] well the story is Real are prepared to pay 'a large slice' of his 70K a week. Doesnt that make it worth it then even if he would only play 15 games? A large slice says to me a fair bit more than half. So say 20K a week? If he plays half the games is it value for money? I think so 185110[/snapback] If I offered you a large slice of pie, are you seriously suggesting you would expect to get more than half of it, you greedy pig? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 I'd pay him whatever Boumsong was on (he was in the 30K's wasn't he?) A half fit Woody is far better than a fully fit Boum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. 185069[/snapback] well the story is Real are prepared to pay 'a large slice' of his 70K a week. Doesnt that make it worth it then even if he would only play 15 games? A large slice says to me a fair bit more than half. So say 20K a week? If he plays half the games is it value for money? I think so 185110[/snapback] Aye but at the same time our backline would have no consistency, its not gonna help changing our CB partnership every few games to accomodate his injury habit. 185118[/snapback] Do you want him here or not? I'm not sure either in truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26100 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. 185069[/snapback] well the story is Real are prepared to pay 'a large slice' of his 70K a week. Doesnt that make it worth it then even if he would only play 15 games? A large slice says to me a fair bit more than half. So say 20K a week? If he plays half the games is it value for money? I think so 185110[/snapback] Aye but at the same time our backline would have no consistency, its not gonna help changing our CB partnership every few games to accomodate his injury habit. 185118[/snapback] Do you want him here or not? I'm not sure either in truth 185126[/snapback] I'll moan about it either way, its what I do best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckypierre 0 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. 185069[/snapback] well the story is Real are prepared to pay 'a large slice' of his 70K a week. Doesnt that make it worth it then even if he would only play 15 games? A large slice says to me a fair bit more than half. So say 20K a week? If he plays half the games is it value for money? I think so 185110[/snapback] I need to know how much we'd be paying to make a proper judgement. I would have preferred Sol Campbell though. Are we even being linked with Woodgate btw? 185117[/snapback] me too. Actually reading it back fuck knows what large slice means... in Rentons house its probably more than half but who knows I think the interesting thing is Freddies only interested in pay as you play. Although that would be perfect what value would you put on Woodgate even if you know he's going to miss half your games? The story also says its to prove his fitness rather than a loan towards a definite move Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34133 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 LISTEN DICKHEADS! He is shite man! He never plays! Real are letting him go on loan because they know he's a crock but they know they can't sell him because everyone else knows he's a crock. Some of you are as bad as Shepherd with your Woodgate obsession. He never plays, therefore he's utterly useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckypierre 0 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 (edited) £35k pw would be a good deal. However I have my doubts whether Real would even let us have him on loan given his and our clubs injury record and the way we dealt with him before. The last thing they want is their player getting crocked and out for another year. 185066[/snapback] Not if he's always injured and why would he accept about a thrid of what he is reported to be on? Better spent elsewhere. 185069[/snapback] well the story is Real are prepared to pay 'a large slice' of his 70K a week. Doesnt that make it worth it then even if he would only play 15 games? A large slice says to me a fair bit more than half. So say 20K a week? If he plays half the games is it value for money? I think so 185110[/snapback] If I offered you a large slice of pie, are you seriously suggesting you would expect to get more than half of it, you greedy pig? 185121[/snapback] if the other slice was for you? hell no Edited August 25, 2006 by luckypierre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 LISTEN DICKHEADS! He is shite man! He never plays! Real are letting him go on loan because they know he's a crock but they know they can't sell him because everyone else knows he's a crock. Some of you are as bad as Shepherd with your Woodgate obsession. He never plays, therefore he's utterly useless. 185131[/snapback] Best ever defender to play for us though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 I need to know how much we'd be paying to make a proper judgement. I would have preferred Sol Campbell though. Are we even being linked with Woodgate btw? 185117[/snapback] Looked a bit ropey mid-week after doing well in the opening game. Link to comment 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