dhermon Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/disp...tentPK=11709275
Fox in a Box Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Does this mean Matt Elliot is fit again? Its a shame cos he was a rock at Arse..... just didnt cut it here..... hope we get new blood in.
Craig Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Does this mean Matt Elliot is fit again?Its a shame cos he was a rock at Arse..... just didnt cut it here..... hope we get new blood in. 58723[/snapback] I reckon we should get rid of Shitos Crapizas first <_<
Steven Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Does this mean Matt Elliot is fit again?Its a shame cos he was a rock at Arse..... just didnt cut it here..... hope we get new blood in. 58723[/snapback] I reckon we should get rid of Shitos Crapizas first <_< 58724[/snapback]
Muz Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 I think CL is right to do this , it will free up wages to fund new arrivals. I think we may see Dion go to Coventry soon aswell , Come on Micky take him plllllllllllllllease
Louise Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Could also mean that Levein sees Stearman as more of a viable first team option and that we no longer need Keown…
Muz Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Could also mean that Levein sees Stearman as more of a viable first team option and that we no longer need Keown… 58735[/snapback] That my friend is good news
Stuliasz Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 I think its a good thing too despite him being our best defender, but its a different tune from when he was reportedly told he could go by Adams. Were you all not blasting Adams at that time?
Muz Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Yes we were , but seen as Stearmen has been given a chance under CL we know he wants a young youthful side whereas MA wanted him to go for no real reason
Ian Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Yes we were , but seen as Stearmen has been given a chance under CL we know he wants a young youthful side whereas MA wanted him to go for no real reason 58744[/snapback] To be honest Keown hasn't impressed me this year as i hoped he might. He is slow and his distribution is not stunning. Add that to the fact he's an old fossil and it has to be a sensible decision IMO. I dont agree with many peoples views on Dublin. I would like him to stay and play in central defense where he has done very well MOST of the time. We cant make to many sweeping changes to the team as we will lose any momentum we are building, this is exactly what Micky did too often when we were in the Prem, never settled on a starting 11! Encouraging signs from Levein.
Fox in a Box Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Keep Dublin as he is versatile, He can play central def: and forward and both in the same game if need be: Cash in on James Scowcroft about £500-600,000 would be excellent business. That would also free up wages and if need be dublin could act as a stand in replacement.
Guest Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 I think its a good thing too despite him being our best defender, but its a different tune from when he was reportedly told he could go by Adams. Were you all not blasting Adams at that time? 58738[/snapback] The thing is, when he signed Keown, Adams said he's brought him in for his wealth of experience, which he felt would benefit the rest of the squad, and to enable Keown to get his coaching badges. A few matches into the season, and Keown is slapped on the transfer list for apparently trying impart some of that knowledge to the then City boss. We don't know the real facts behind this story, but if true, then Adams went back on what he said were the reasons for bringing in Keown. If he didn't want anyone else to have an input into the team, he shouldn't have brought in players for that very reason. Seeing as he answered to a Director of Football, it all seems very strange and petty.
Steven Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Could also mean that Levein sees Stearman as more of a viable first team option and that we no longer need Keown… 58735[/snapback] Stearman was the MOTM last night.
stez Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 (hear we go ) i heard keown came here cos he thought adams was on his way out fairly soon and he thought he'd get the managers job, hence adams soon getting pissed off with him and bunging him on the list, since cl came in he's (keown) has been offering his advice on team selection etc obviously finally getting on cl's tits
Mark Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 I believe Keown will sign for Forest shortly. Does this mean Matt Elliot is fit again? Don't get your hopes up on that! He's far from fit and he'll never play for us again. Watch this space
Benji Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 I believe Keown will sign for Forest shortly.Does this mean Matt Elliot is fit again? Don't get your hopes up on that! He's far from fit and he'll never play for us again. Watch this space 58796[/snapback] elliott isnt even injured........inside info
breadandcheese Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 I still think Keown is one of our best defenders, still preferring him in our team to Dabizas, Dublin and Heath. So I think it's a mistake to get rid of him ahead of others. If we're making him available because we need to free up the cash and he is the only defender that interests other clubs, then that is different. In which case, fair enough.
BartonFox Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 It's only a mistake to get rid of him if we are unable to bring in a better younger option. Dabizas, Heath, Elliott and Dublin will all be here until June so don't get your hopes up on those guys leaving. Maybe we could swap him for Dawson at F*rest
MADLEVEIN Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 shitty drippyarse 58731[/snapback] nickos notveryfast
MADLEVEIN Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Out with the old in with the new 58866[/snapback] that was micky's plan but he went with out with the old in with the older.
Ash Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Out with the old in with the new 58866[/snapback] that was micky's plan but he went with out with the old in with the older. 58870[/snapback] But Levein ain't Micky
Ricey Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 I've neen impressed with Keown however he was another Micky Adams short term fix and no doubt his wages were massive. Good move.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.