Ford Super Sunday Posted 7 January 2010 Posted 7 January 2010 Quite liked him at Arsenal.Interesting to see how he handles it back here in a different scenario. I can see it being a squeeze in midfield to be fair, with De Jong, Barry, Ireland, Kompany, where he'll go is anyons guess. And as Nigel Winterburn said, he hasn't been an Inter Milan regular under Jose, and might not be too sharp straight away. It will be also interesting to see how he handles the increased pace in the Premier League, especially as he's older than he used to be. That said, Mancini has managed him before, and he'll know his strengths and weaknesses, so I can't think of a better manager (other than Wenger) to be signing Vieira at this moment.
StanSP Posted 7 January 2010 Posted 7 January 2010 I can see it being a squeeze in midfield to be fair, with De Jong, Barry, Ireland, Kompany, where he'll go is anyons guess.And as Nigel Winterburn said, he hasn't been an Inter Milan regular under Jose, and might not be too sharp straight away. It will be also interesting to see how he handles the increased pace in the Premier League, especially as he's older than he used to be. That said, Mancini has managed him before, and he'll know his strengths and weaknesses, so I can't think of a better manager (other than Wenger) to be signing Vieira at this moment. I think Vieira's only main competition out of that lot listed above are Barry and Ireland. But we'll see how Mancini slots him in (if he does sign) because as you say he knows him best!
dandannieldanok Posted 7 January 2010 Posted 7 January 2010 Vieira was actually quality. Love to see him back in the Prem. You're right he was quality, but definite emphasis on the 'was'. To me it's a strange signing but I suppose Man City can afford it, even if he turns out to be a flop.
lildave3 Posted 7 January 2010 Posted 7 January 2010 Is he even any good now? Don't think i've watched him since he left Arsenal, so i'm looking to you Nathko.
Ford Super Sunday Posted 7 January 2010 Posted 7 January 2010 Reported £140k a week as well But the money means nothing, he's going for the opportunity and his burning ambition to achieve before he retires
BoneDog Posted 8 January 2010 Posted 8 January 2010 I'm shocked about the Vieira signing. I haven't seen him play for at least a year and would of thought he's nearly at the end of his best times on the pitch Unless of course he is super dooper fit. He is one of the Premier Leagues finest ever players in my opinion but I'm not sure if he can still do what he used to do. Has anyone seen him play much in recent times? And if so, has he still got it?
Uncle Albert Posted 8 January 2010 Posted 8 January 2010 Maxi Rodriguez apparently heading to Liverpool today to sign an 18 month contract.
Guest ttfn Posted 8 January 2010 Posted 8 January 2010 Why would Hull say that the game was pretty much definitely on and then call it off less than 2 hours later?
AjcW Posted 9 January 2010 Posted 9 January 2010 Would be nice of sky to broadcast the arsenal game. Far to much wishful thinking on my part there. Suppose soccer Saturday will be featuring a couple of the remaining championship games then?
lildave3 Posted 9 January 2010 Posted 9 January 2010 Would be nice of sky to broadcast the arsenal game. Far to much wishful thinking on my part there. Suppose soccer Saturday will be featuring a couple of the remaining championship games then? They can't, they can't show 3pm kick offs. And they can't change a kick off time now...
lildave3 Posted 9 January 2010 Posted 9 January 2010 West Ham v Wolves is off now. Crazy, only 7 games in England today. Just 2 in the Premiership, one at 3 o'clock.
AjcW Posted 9 January 2010 Posted 9 January 2010 They can't, they can't show 3pm kick offs. And they can't change a kick off time now... ahh right thats a shame. Ill watch it online instead.
Super_horns Posted 9 January 2010 Posted 9 January 2010 West Ham v Wolves is off now.Crazy, only 7 games in England today. Just 2 in the Premiership, one at 3 o'clock. Must be an all time record!
lildave3 Posted 9 January 2010 Posted 9 January 2010 Must be an all time record! They were just showing on SSN previous 'Big Freezes', at one point the same match got postponed 15 times
MC Prussian Posted 9 January 2010 Author Posted 9 January 2010 This is a little football weekend rant. Calling games off because of bad weather conditions? I've read somewhere the main reason was that the Premiership clubs didn't want to put their fans into unnecessary danger. What danger? If you're on your way to a game, no club can be held responsible for what happens during the actual journey. And once you're in the stadium, what could possibly fall into the category "fans' safety"? Nothing. It's just like any other gameweek, where accidents can happen. Snow is but a cheap excuse. In the end, it's all just a matter of money. I've just watched the interview with a Tigers representative on BBC Sports and they were making sure the game was actually taking place. Of course, this costs a bit more - clearing the pitch, transporting the removed snow, finding an appropriate depot. And all of this may have to be done twice, or three times in order to have the ground match-ready. Why are they making such efforts? Because the Tigers-Wasps game is a sell-out and re-scheduling this fixture would not only result in a bad reputation, but also come with less match-generated cash, because of the danger of less people wanting to watch the replay on another weekend. Pro football clubs don't care about fans, they care about the dough (aka "spending wisely"). That's nothing spectacularly new. But I'd like to see a spokesperson once being bold enough to actually admit that snow's got nothing to do with games being cancelled in the first place. And what are the actual costs of clearing a pitch compared to players' salaries? Some clubs go player shopping for millions of £, yet fail to come up with enough funds to clear snow off a bloody football pitch. What a farce. In essence, I'm glad our Sunday kick-off has not (yet ) been postponed.
davieG Posted 9 January 2010 Posted 9 January 2010 This is a little football weekend rant.Calling games off because of bad weather conditions? I've read somewhere the main reason was that the Premiership clubs didn't want to put their fans into unnecessary danger. What danger? If you're on your way to a game, no club can be held responsible for what happens during the actual journey. And once you're in the stadium, what could possibly fall into the category "fans' safety"? Nothing. It's just like any other gameweek, where accidents can happen. Snow is but a cheap excuse. In the end, it's all just a matter of money. I've just watched the interview with a Tigers representative on BBC Sports and they were making sure the game was actually taking place. Of course, this costs a bit more - clearing the pitch, transporting the removed snow, finding an appropriate depot. And all of this may have to be done twice, or three times in order to have the ground match-ready. Why are they making such efforts? Because the Tigers-Wasps game is a sell-out and re-scheduling this fixture would not only result in a bad reputation, but also come with less match-generated cash, because of the danger of less people wanting to watch the replay on another weekend. Pro football clubs don't care about fans, they care about the dough (aka "spending wisely"). That's nothing spectacularly new. But I'd like to see a spokesperson once being bold enough to actually admit that snow's got nothing to do with games being cancelled in the first place. And what are the actual costs of clearing a pitch compared to players' salaries? Some clubs go player shopping for millions of £, yet fail to come up with enough funds to clear snow off a bloody football pitch. What a farce. In essence, I'm glad our Sunday kick-off has not (yet ) been postponed. It's on Sky as well, although that hasn't kept the football on.
Super_horns Posted 9 January 2010 Posted 9 January 2010 For some lower league clubs it will be a lost cause but your right about the Premiership sides...could be because they don't want the risk of getting sued or into trouble if somebody falls over...
Ford Super Sunday Posted 9 January 2010 Posted 9 January 2010 This is a little football weekend rant.Calling games off because of bad weather conditions? I've read somewhere the main reason was that the Premiership clubs didn't want to put their fans into unnecessary danger. What danger? If you're on your way to a game, no club can be held responsible for what happens during the actual journey. And once you're in the stadium, what could possibly fall into the category "fans' safety"? Nothing. It's just like any other gameweek, where accidents can happen. Snow is but a cheap excuse. In the end, it's all just a matter of money. I've just watched the interview with a Tigers representative on BBC Sports and they were making sure the game was actually taking place. Of course, this costs a bit more - clearing the pitch, transporting the removed snow, finding an appropriate depot. And all of this may have to be done twice, or three times in order to have the ground match-ready. Why are they making such efforts? Because the Tigers-Wasps game is a sell-out and re-scheduling this fixture would not only result in a bad reputation, but also come with less match-generated cash, because of the danger of less people wanting to watch the replay on another weekend. Pro football clubs don't care about fans, they care about the dough (aka "spending wisely"). That's nothing spectacularly new. But I'd like to see a spokesperson once being bold enough to actually admit that snow's got nothing to do with games being cancelled in the first place. And what are the actual costs of clearing a pitch compared to players' salaries? Some clubs go player shopping for millions of £, yet fail to come up with enough funds to clear snow off a bloody football pitch. What a farce. In essence, I'm glad our Sunday kick-off has not (yet ) been postponed. NFL games are NEVER called off sue to the weather, NEVER EVER, and when you think of the weather they get (yes they might be better prepared) but still... Just to say, watching the Arsenal-Everton game live, and there's loads of empty seats, weird to see the Emirates so sparse for a Premier League game
john_lcfc Posted 9 January 2010 Posted 9 January 2010 This is a little football weekend rant.Calling games off because of bad weather conditions? I've read somewhere the main reason was that the Premiership clubs didn't want to put their fans into unnecessary danger. What danger? If you're on your way to a game, no club can be held responsible for what happens during the actual journey. And once you're in the stadium, what could possibly fall into the category "fans' safety"? Nothing. It's just like any other gameweek, where accidents can happen. Snow is but a cheap excuse. In the end, it's all just a matter of money. I've just watched the interview with a Tigers representative on BBC Sports and they were making sure the game was actually taking place. Of course, this costs a bit more - clearing the pitch, transporting the removed snow, finding an appropriate depot. And all of this may have to be done twice, or three times in order to have the ground match-ready. Why are they making such efforts? Because the Tigers-Wasps game is a sell-out and re-scheduling this fixture would not only result in a bad reputation, but also come with less match-generated cash, because of the danger of less people wanting to watch the replay on another weekend. Pro football clubs don't care about fans, they care about the dough (aka "spending wisely"). That's nothing spectacularly new. But I'd like to see a spokesperson once being bold enough to actually admit that snow's got nothing to do with games being cancelled in the first place. And what are the actual costs of clearing a pitch compared to players' salaries? Some clubs go player shopping for millions of £, yet fail to come up with enough funds to clear snow off a bloody football pitch. What a farce. In essence, I'm glad our Sunday kick-off has not (yet ) been postponed. Liverpools game is on sky and a sell out so explain why they requested their game to be postponed??
MC Prussian Posted 9 January 2010 Author Posted 9 January 2010 Liverpools game is on sky and a sell out so explain why they requested their game to be postponed?? HSE-Phobia. Fear of lawsuits. Fear of compensations due. Or maybe they're just tight as they can be.
Super_horns Posted 9 January 2010 Posted 9 January 2010 HSE-Phobia. Fear of lawsuits. Fear of compensations due.Or maybe they're just tight as they can be. Local council ran out of grit.. I can only presume you guys in the midlands have it all! TBH Our ground is on a main road and I am sure with more effort we could've played Sheff U (actually with the lack of team for now its a good job we did call off) Oh well...probably be raining when the game gets re-arranged. Arsenal had a game called off in the week so guess they didn't want ANOTHER game put back as we all know how much Mr Wenger hates fixture pile-ups.
Ford Super Sunday Posted 9 January 2010 Posted 9 January 2010 Stephen Pienarr has been playing too much FIFA 10
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.