Terry bid snubbed

[pudge]

Re: terry

Its going to be in tomorrows paper

 

[Kinky by name]

Re: terry

tomorrow's papers are generally written the day before ;P

 

[Daz_Blue]

Re: terry

It's most likely absolute bollocks. However, if true, then what the fuck are we doing? What's the point in bidding for players who we've got zero chance of signing? Chelsea are NEVER going to sell Terry, and even if they did consider it Terry is NEVER going to leave Chelsea. A waste of everyone's time.

My understanding from a colleague is that a marquee signing for every position Hughes identified as in need of strengthening was being lined-up as part of some two-tier approach, for example, if Hughes wanted Given, then he could bid for Given but the owners would also sanction a move (perhaps through GC) for another world-class keeper, hence all the talk regarding Buffon. Perhaps, if 100 per cent kosher, it was to ensure a win-win situation and it means the Arabs never come out of a deal without someone in place. If you have the money it seems to me to be an eminently sensible tactic to employ. Hughes gets the players he needs in the positions he wants and, if the big names bite, he still gets that and the club gets the big publicity and the fans go into a frenzy. I was not a fly on the wall at any meeting but I trust my contact enough on this one.

If City signed Buffon and Given could not envisage either of them settling for the bench and Joe Hart being the number 3 keeper ..... signing Given will end all talk of Buffon IMO

 

[Kinky by name]

Re: terry

If City signed Buffon and Given could not envisage either of them settling for the bench and Joe Hart being the number 3 keeper ..... signing Given will end all talk of Buffon IMO

true; but my point was that Buffon (or another) was identified and sounded out to see if there was any chance of it being a goer and if it had have been, then the pursuit of Given would have (probably) made way

 

[goat boy]

Re: terry

It's most likely absolute bollocks. However, if true, then what the fuck are we doing? What's the point in bidding for players who we've got zero chance of signing? Chelsea are NEVER going to sell Terry, and even if they did consider it Terry is NEVER going to leave Chelsea. A waste of everyone's time.

My understanding from a colleague is that a marquee signing for every position Hughes identified as in need of strengthening was being lined-up as part of some two-tier approach, for example, if Hughes wanted Given, then he could bid for Given but the owners would also sanction a move (perhaps through GC) for another world-class keeper, hence all the talk regarding Buffon. Perhaps, if 100 per cent kosher, it was to ensure a win-win situation and it means the Arabs never come out of a deal without someone in place. If you have the money it seems to me to be an eminently sensible tactic to employ. Hughes gets the players he needs in the positions he wants and, if the big names bite, he still gets that and the club gets the big publicity and the fans go into a frenzy. I was not a fly on the wall at any meeting but I trust my contact enough on this one.

I wonder who the 'Hughes equivalent' to Kaka is? Roque? Not really a like for like, imo, and besides the marquee striker was surely Villa... so who?

What I'm getting at (addressing all here, not just you KBN) is... is there another attacking central midfielder deal flying under the radar?

 

[Ducado]

Re: terry

If City signed Buffon and Given could not envisage either of them settling for the bench and Joe Hart being the number 3 keeper ..... signing Given will end all talk of Buffon IMO

I think he meant it was one or the other, back up plans, as I read it they had their target areas and scouted the world for the best players, and made enquiries

 

[nickson71]

Re: terry

It's most likely absolute bollocks. However, if true, then what the fuck are we doing? What's the point in bidding for players who we've got zero chance of signing? Chelsea are NEVER going to sell Terry, and even if they did consider it Terry is NEVER going to leave Chelsea. A waste of everyone's time.

My understanding from a colleague is that a marquee signing for every position Hughes identified as in need of strengthening was being lined-up as part of some two-tier approach, for example, if Hughes wanted Given, then he could bid for Given but the owners would also sanction a move (perhaps through GC) for another world-class keeper, hence all the talk regarding Buffon. Perhaps, if 100 per cent kosher, it was to ensure a win-win situation and it means the Arabs never come out of a deal without someone in place. If you have the money it seems to me to be an eminently sensible tactic to employ. Hughes gets the players he needs in the positions he wants and, if the big names bite, he still gets that and the club gets the big publicity and the fans go into a frenzy. I was not a fly on the wall at any meeting but I trust my contact enough on this one.

I wonder who the 'Hughes equivalent' to Kaka is? Roque? Not really a like for like, imo, and besides the marquee striker was surely Villa... so who?

What I'm getting at (addressing all here, not just you KBN) is... is there another attacking central midfielder deal flying under the radar?

Kaka I guess was separate from this formula and Milan was approached as he's one of the TOP players in the world.

 

[kidblue]

Re: terry

Would be an exciting signing, him, toure and roque would be nice, just hope richards doesnt move to villa

 

[Project Rain]

It's on football latest, I think this could have some truth in it.

 

[Cityisland]

I am confused. I am sure that I posted a thread with the same title as this, before this one. Yet mine has disappeared. I could be wrong. Not having a go. Just wondering what thats about?