ROB-THE-BLUE Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 I would rather have Anthony Joshua. I'd rather have Wasilewski!
Itsthejoeker Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 We're lining up a £2.5m bid, it's not been accepted! They could ask for £10m
Wortho Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 I would imagine that £2.5M is to pay the one year left on his contract. It would be a great signing.
Babylon Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 Sounds more like Stoke pimping him out to the highest bidder to me.
queensguardfox Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 If i was stoke, i would deffo be demanding more. The big tv money kicks in at the end of the season so they know we need to survive. We see huth part of the answer, id pay 7-8mill for him easy. If we get him for 2.5mil good bussiness on our part.
BigMicky Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 If i was stoke, i would deffo be demanding more. The big tv money kicks in at the end of the season so they know we need to survive. We see huth part of the answer, id pay 7-8mill for him easy. If we get him for 2.5mil good bussiness on our part. Thank God you don't deal with our transfers, £7/8 million is ludicrous money. I imagine sterling is a bargain at £40 million as well.
Gerard Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 If i was stoke, i would deffo be demanding more. The big tv money kicks in at the end of the season so they know we need to survive. We see huth part of the answer, id pay 7-8mill for him easy. If we get him for 2.5mil good bussiness on our part. One year left on his contract and not in the first XI. Stoke will be happy just to get a transfer fee.
Bluearmyfox28 Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 One year left on his contract and not in the first XI. Stoke will be happy just to get a transfer fee. Not necessarily Stoke know he could walk into the majority of lower table premier league sides, yes he has a year left but I think they will try to recoup the 3.5million they spent on that centre half recently.
Bert Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 I know he was immense for us and he'd be a great signing but I've never understood why people get so worked up about something that not one person on this board have got any control over. It's obvious that we'll be doing whatever we can to sign him - believe it or not managers, DOF's, player have holidays. The positives we've got going for us is that we've gave him a chance to continue his top flight career after a tough time with injuries and still wanting him whilst we knew he was serving a ban. Stuff like that means things to players. He clearly enjoyed his time here and settled in very well, but what we've got to remember there's more than just us involved here.
LCCFox96 Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 £2.5mil is an absolute steal for a defender of Huth's quality. Will be overjoyed if we can get this deal done.
glenelgfox Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 I just want this deal done and also get Chester if we can and not at stupid $$$
MPH Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 I just want this deal done and also get Chester if we can and not at stupid $$$ Getting Huth AND chester would just be a dream for me.... we'd have a rock solid back 3 and with Chester, a bit of mobility too,,,
glenelgfox Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 And depth re defenders if these 2 arrived. Then onto ensuring Estaban stays and get some coverage in midfield re fact James is out for season.
SpacedX Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 I think Huth and Fuchs bring plenty of leadership skills. Can anyone explain why Nige will insist upon Morgan retaining the armband next season?
les-tah Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 Can anyone explain why Nige will insist upon Morgan retaining the armband next season? i feel like morgans first name on the team sheet every week
Babylon Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 Can anyone explain why Nige will insist upon Morgan retaining the armband next season? Because the others not having an armband, will not stop them from being leaders. Morgans role as captain is basically to choose head or tails. Giving the armband to someone else could actually bring you very little extra. Taking it from Morgan could demotivate him, make him think he's on his way out. So I'd only take it from him when I'm thinking of replacing him in the team completely.
SpacedX Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 Because the others not having an armband, will not stop them from being leaders. Morgans role as captain is basically to choose head or tails. Giving the armband to someone else could actually bring you very little extra. Taking it from Morgan could demotivate him, make him think he's on his way out. So I'd only take it from him when I'm thinking of replacing him in the team completely. Are you serious? Sorry, with all due respect, I completely disagree with every aspect of this.
Babylon Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 Are you serious? Sorry, with all due respect, I completely disagree with every aspect of this. Yes I'm serious. Have you not heard the ex pros on Sky regularly saying that the role of a captain is nothling like it used to be? Did Cambiasso not having the armband stop him talking to the ref, or from instructing players on the pitch? No of course it didn't. Did it stop Huth from organising the back line and pushing and pulling Morgan about? What you need on the pitch are leaders. Doesn't matter if they have a bit of material around their arm or not. People make way too much of the role of captain. It's not like rugby where he's making the decisions on the pitch and being the only man allowed to talk to the ref.
sylofox Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 Can anyone explain why Nige will insist upon Morgan retaining the armband next season? Yes we have a secret sponsor that distils RUM.
Bettsj2 Posted 15 June 2015 Author Posted 15 June 2015 Yes I'm serious. Have you not heard the ex pros on Sky regularly saying that the role of a captain is nothling like it used to be? Did Cambiasso not having the armband stop him talking to the ref, or from instructing players on the pitch? No of course it didn't. Did it stop Huth from organising the back line and pushing and pulling Morgan about? What you need on the pitch are leaders. Doesn't matter if they have a bit of material around their arm or not. People make way too much of the role of captain. It's not like rugby where he's making the decisions on the pitch and being the only man allowed to talk to the ref. Agree with all of this apart from the first paragraph. Please dont use anything Jamie Redknapp or Jamie Carragher say to back you up!
Babylon Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 Agree with all of this apart from the first paragraph. Please dont use anything Jamie Redknapp or Jamie Carragher say to back you up! There are more ex pros than those idiots and Merson.
Bert Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 Because the others not having an armband, will not stop them from being leaders. Morgans role as captain is basically to choose head or tails. Giving the armband to someone else could actually bring you very little extra. Taking it from Morgan could demotivate him, make him think he's on his way out. So I'd only take it from him when I'm thinking of replacing him in the team completely.As well as possibly damaging squad morale and upsetting other players. No one knows what Wes is like in the changing room, and what else he does for the team off the pitch. A thing people don't realise when it comes to a captain. There's a lot more to a captain than screaming and shouting on the pitch. (I'm fully aware you know this, just a bit of elaboration).
SpacedX Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 Yes I'm serious. Have you not heard the ex pros on Sky regularly saying that the role of a captain is nothling like it used to be? Did Cambiasso not having the armband stop him talking to the ref, or from instructing players on the pitch? No of course it didn't. Did it stop Huth from organising the back line and pushing and pulling Morgan about? What you need on the pitch are leaders. Doesn't matter if they have a bit of material around their arm or not. People make way too much of the role of captain. It's not like rugby where he's making the decisions on the pitch and being the only man allowed to talk to the ref. No indeed it didn't - I agree, and that's my point. Wes's Captaincy approaches the realms of the farcical. There are few pundits on the planet that would agree with you that a Captains role is merely to choose 'heads or tails' although, you are entirely correct in your assessment that Wes does little more. As marginalised as the Captains role may have become in the modern game their remit is to provide direction and channel leadership. Although I would not question the respect that Wes commands or his ability to raise morale, in terms of Captaincy, which far from your suggestion as being merely symbolic, his designation as Captain has been entirely superfluous given the presence of Cambiasso and Huth - and if they stay, either will be far better suited for the role. Look no further than Gerrard or (as reviled as he may be) John Terry as testament to the potential potency of the role. Jose Mourinho would be the first to dismiss every aspect of your post or the pundits that you parrot.
Babylon Posted 15 June 2015 Posted 15 June 2015 No indeed it didn't - I agree, and that's my point. Wes's Captaincy approaches the realms of the farcical. There are few pundits on the planet that would agree with you that a Captains role is merely to choose 'heads or tails' although, you are entirely correct in your assessment that Wes does little more. As marginalised as the Captains role may have become in the modern game their remit is to provide direction and channel leadership. Although I would not question the respect that Wes commands or his ability to raise morale, in terms of Captaincy, which far from your suggestion as being merely symbolic, his designation as Captain has been entirely superfluous given the presence of Cambiasso and Huth - and if they stay, either will be far better suited for the role. Look no further than Gerrard or (as reviled as he may be) John Terry as testament to the potential potency of the role. Jose Mourinho would be the first to dismiss every aspect of your post or the pundits that you parrot. But you have just agreed that not having the armband doesn't stop other players from being leaders. If Terry or Gerrard didn't have the armband they would still be leaders, they would still be players others look up to. Me saying it comes down a flip of a coin was being somewhat flippant. But the impact of someone wearing a bit of material on the pitch is limited. They are either a leader on the pitch or they are not. Cambiasso will be Cambiasso with the armband or without it. It's not going to add to his game or detract from it. There are other things off the field that the captain does, and those roles in this day and age probably have more impact that his influence on the pitch. He's often the link between players and management, the ultimate pro that sets the tone for how the others are. You don't know what he's like off the pitch, or what his influence is like with the other players. What's it going to add to Cambiasso's game to be given the armband. If he's not going to do anything different, they why change something that quite frankly has obviously been working well for the club. What's important is having a Terry, a Gerrard a Cambiasso... not whether they get a band on their arm. If you don't agree, that's fine. It's my opinion. Oh and just so you're aware. I'm very capable of coming to my own conclusions on things and don't need to "Parrot" people. Although I do think it's funny you go on about that and then tell me what Jose would say about it.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.