Roll On City
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 883
cos he's garbage<br /><br />-- Sat Aug 25, 2012 5:05 pm --<br /><br />waspish said:
hopefullyBlue Haze said:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
This transfer window/Marwood
- Thread starter larderland
- Start date
grim up north
Well-Known Member
FantasyIreland
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Oct 2008
- Messages
- 64,708
Roll On City said:FCUK OFF Marwood
Your contribution to this forum is abysmal.
You know nothing of the work that goes on behind the scenes,it would be best if you just kept quiet.
FantasyIreland said:Roll On City said:FCUK OFF Marwood
Your contribution to this forum is abysmal.
You know nothing of the work that goes on behind the scenes,it would be best if you just kept quiet.
A voice of reason from FantasyIreland
.....Why do some people think they know enough to slag off the chosen employees of Sheik Mansour??? To all those on here that continually post such obscenities as FO Marwood......DO ONE ........because I believe our Chairman and our owner know just a little bit more about running a business/football club - indeed about ANYTHING than you lot
Roll On City said:cos he's garbagewaspish said:Roll On City said:FCUK OFF Marwood
Why
-- Sat Aug 25, 2012 5:05 pm --
hopefullyBlue Haze said:Roll On City said:FCUK OFF Marwood
At some point, you would think Soriano starts replacing Cook's men with his own.
It seems you have an IQ problem..
So I won't respond to that answer because you'd have to answer it with more than 3 words.....
Millennium
Well-Known Member
I know, no use of crying, but i am disappointed for not signing Eden Hazard.
Why we let him sign for Chelsea?
We wanted to not succumb to his agent greed, and I think we could have handled the matter in a better way to satisfy all parties, I think we lost a great player that could have put us at a higher level , at the same time contributed to the strengthening of a strong opponent
Why we let him sign for Chelsea?
We wanted to not succumb to his agent greed, and I think we could have handled the matter in a better way to satisfy all parties, I think we lost a great player that could have put us at a higher level , at the same time contributed to the strengthening of a strong opponent
Tevez City
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 May 2010
- Messages
- 13,341
Millennium said:I know, no use of crying, but i am disappointed for not signing Eden Hazard.
Why we let him sign for Chelsea?
We wanted to not succumb to his agent greed, and I think we could have handled the matter in a better way to satisfy all parties, I think we lost a great player that could have put us at a higher level , at the same time contributed to the strengthening of a strong opponent
The strange thing is that his choice was between Chelsea & United as he mentioned after he signed for Chelsea !
think this guy will crash and burn tbh- they,ve played wigan,reading and newcastle- hardly the most testing games- let,s see what happens when he plays a decent side- did nowt against us in charity shield - except a norman wisdom tribute trip up!!!!
Tevez City said:Millennium said:I know, no use of crying, but i am disappointed for not signing Eden Hazard.
Why we let him sign for Chelsea?
We wanted to not succumb to his agent greed, and I think we could have handled the matter in a better way to satisfy all parties, I think we lost a great player that could have put us at a higher level , at the same time contributed to the strengthening of a strong opponent
The strange thing is that his choice was between Chelsea & United as he mentioned after he signed for Chelsea !
Yep and reason was he thought he wouldn't get game time!
MSP
Well-Known Member
CityCTID said:MSP said:larderland said:so we sold him for 10mil when we bought him for 7 from the championship and fletcher,a striker who got relegated was bought for 14mil
genius is that marwood
joke
One more time - Fletcher was on peanuts at Wolves and will be on little bit more than peanuts at Sunderland. That gives Sunderland the space to pay bigger transfer fee.
Johsnon was on reportedly 80k wage, I've heard no Real Madrid or Barcelona were after him so City does not have a space to sell him for big transfer fee as Sunderland is not rich enough team to meet that kind of wages.
Why0s that so hard to configure.. it's not only about fees when transfers are being made, wages are as much (if not more) important.
Adebayor would be gone like 2 years ago for 15-20 millions if he was not on huge wages. Same with Bridge, same with RSC. It's not easy to offload City players if big clubs are not after them.
Adam Johnson: Also was on peanuts Only signed a new five-year lucrative contract (signed by Marwood btw) in January! Why? of course we will struggle to find a buyer and decent fee due to his high wage (approved by Marwood) ....... good job? Right!
that was crap thing to do, I agree