Scott Sinclair (continued)

Status
Not open for further replies.
As a forward yes, but he'd effectively just be competing in a 100m race with Micah every game as opposed to actually contributing anything down the wing.
 
I would wager that the deal has been done and all the Swansea Chairman is doing is putting up a front for the fans, it happens sometimes plus if you were a Swansea fan would you be happy about losing your best players?
 
Marvin said:
Walcott?

Michael Duell
‏@michaelduell
from a very very very top source, City want Walcott and the deal is very likely to happen
Click to expand...

I expected better from you Marv, quoting a twatter who's a student....

Unbelievable.
 
Ducado said:
I would wager that the deal has been done and all the Swansea Chairman is doing is putting up a front for the fans, it happens sometimes plus if you were a Swansea fan would you be happy about losing your best players?
Click to expand...

True Ducado in one sense but their fans don't seem all that bothered. They are more than happy with Dyer and Routledge. They might change their tune if one of them lose form or gets injured and they still have Sinclair on their books.
 
Rammy Blue said:
Marvin said:
Walcott?

Michael Duell
‏@michaelduell
from a very very very top source, City want Walcott and the deal is very likely to happen
Click to expand...

I expected better from you Marv, quoting a twatter who's a student....

Unbelievable.
Click to expand...
I'm just putting it out there on a Transfer Forum. Leave it to others to judge how true it is.

If you were looking for a right sided winger to replace AJ, and you knew Walcott was in the last 12 months of your contract, I'm sure you'd consider it. I know that's entirely different to bidding

Motivation for posting this are the silly comments above that City have put themselves in a stupid position by selling AJ before buying Sinclair
 
Marvin said:
Walcott?

Michael Duell
‏@michaelduell
from a very very very top source, City want Walcott and the deal is very likely to happen
Click to expand...


tumblr_lfie6j1Nma1qarc0k.gif
 
Rammy Blue said:
Marvin said:
Walcott?

Michael Duell
‏@michaelduell
from a very very very top source, City want Walcott and the deal is very likely to happen
Click to expand...

I expected better from you Marv, quoting a twatter who's a student....

Unbelievable.
Click to expand...

Is this Michael Duell related to Marwood by any chance?
 
Whether we are interested in Walcott or not I wouldn't be surprised if a few rumours start to appear about alternative targets.

Mr Jenkins won't be able to get to his phone quick enough.
 
Marvin said:
Rammy Blue said:
Marvin said:
Walcott?

Michael Duell
‏@michaelduell
from a very very very top source, City want Walcott and the deal is very likely to happen
Click to expand...

I expected better from you Marv, quoting a twatter who's a student....

Unbelievable.
Click to expand...
I'm just putting it out there on a Transfer Forum. Leave it to others to judge how true it is.

If you were looking for a right sided winger to replace AJ, and you knew Walcott was in the last 12 months of your contract, I'm sure you'd consider it. I know that's entirely different to bidding

Motivation for posting this are the silly comments above that City have put themselves in a stupid position by selling AJ before buying Sinclair
Click to expand...

City had to sell before we buy, anyone who can't get their head round that isn't worth chatting to.

Doesn't excuse, imo, posting some random nonsense from a student, sorry mate but that's just not good karma.
 
Only City could get held to ransom over a player who has refused to sign a contract, has a year left on his current one and has openly talked about leaving.
 
mike channon´s windmill said:
Lancet Fluke said:
I hate to say this but there seems to be a terrible lack of clarity of thought going on in this transfer window. Everyone knew that Sinclair was going to be a direct replacement for AJ so why leave ourselves so vulnerable by selling first. Can we now afford to play hardball over the price? I think we have gifted Swansea the initiative in the negotiations when a week ago we didn't need to buy (because we had AJ who still had years left on his contract), they had a player with less than 12 months left on his contract and they were in a weak position. Also, every time you switch targets this late in the window there is every chance it's going to be a false economy as you end up panic buying a player you never really wanted and get held to ransom as the selling club recognises you are desperate.
Click to expand...
There have been quotes today that the fee "had been agreed" which leads me to think that the fee was agreed before the AJ sale and that the trumped up little fookin wannabees have gone back on their word and are acting like utter cockwombles
Make the coonts sweat - we will have other targets
Click to expand...

thats it.... they had LFC pants down with Allen and now trying it with City
 
RandomJ said:
Only City could get held to ransom over a player who has refused to sign a contract, has a year left on his current one and has openly talked about leaving.
Click to expand...


We want more money. City reply fuck off
 
RandomJ said:
Only City could get held to ransom over a player who has refused to sign a contract, has a year left on his current one and has openly talked about leaving.
Click to expand...

I don't think we are being held to ransom, this is how buisiness is carried out, if you think the seller is trying to fleece you, you walk away, if the seller really wants to do the deal he will come chasing you up the street, and that is the way it should be, although I happen to think the deal is done and dusted and this is just a show for the Swansea fans
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top