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
Utter bobbins
Well-Known Member
FantasyIreland
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Oct 2008
- Messages
- 64,698
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
- 15,187
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
Millennium
Well-Known Member
waspish said: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!
He is new to PL, give him a time to settle down and you will see his true talent.
It took Silva months to show his true abilities
Manchester1894
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2007
- Messages
- 6,515
It's a bit arrogant of some people to assume "we could have got him if we wanted" about players that sign for the opposition.
We have been beaten to other players in the past and it will happen in the future a lot. What we must do is make sure we make the correct decisions that win trophies. Chelsea's back line and United's midfield are significantly weaker than ours. That was why we won the league. That's why by the end of next week, we'll be favourites again.
We have been beaten to other players in the past and it will happen in the future a lot. What we must do is make sure we make the correct decisions that win trophies. Chelsea's back line and United's midfield are significantly weaker than ours. That was why we won the league. That's why by the end of next week, we'll be favourites again.
Tevez City
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 May 2010
- Messages
- 15,187
waspish said: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!
I am not sure if this was the reason.
Manchester1894 said:It's a bit arrogant of some people to assume "we could have got him if we wanted" about players that sign for the opposition.
We have been beaten to other players in the past and it will happen in the future a lot. What we must do is make sure we make the correct decisions that win trophies. Chelsea's back line and United's midfield are significantly weaker than ours. That was why we won the league. That's why by the end of next week, we'll be favourites again.
Not without reinforcement, but I like your optimism though!
Tevez City said:waspish said:Tevez City said: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!
I am not sure if this was the reason.
Well it was so Ner
MSP said:CityCTID said:MSP said: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
If we don't renew contracts and pay the going rate, then we'll find ourselves in the same boat as Arsenal with players being able to call the shots.
Doesn't always work out the way we'd like it.
moomba said:MSP said:CityCTID said: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
If we don't renew contracts and pay the going rate, then we'll find ourselves in the same boat as Arsenal with players being able to call the shots.
Doesn't always work out the way we'd like it.
that assumes that you want to renew the contract
sometimes the brave decision is not to bow to player power
Chorleyblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 11 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 77
Silt fail at it again
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2193642/Roberto-Mancini-quit-Manchester-City-lack-signings.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... nings.html</a>
And coming on talk sport now
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2193642/Roberto-Mancini-quit-Manchester-City-lack-signings.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... nings.html</a>
And coming on talk sport now
Blue Haze
Well-Known Member
Chorleyblue said:Silt fail at it again
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2193642/Roberto-Mancini-quit-Manchester-City-lack-signings.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... nings.html</a>
And coming on talk sport now
Was expecting this.
Watch out if PSG stumble. Not saying that Daily Mail is ITK, but it's not exactly inconceivable after what happened at Inter, not to mention his problems with Marwood.
Chorleyblue said:Silt fail at it again
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2193642/Roberto-Mancini-quit-Manchester-City-lack-signings.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... nings.html</a>
And coming on talk sport now
talk shite!! must be true then lol