Mawsley
Well-Known Member
This is taking a while to complete.
It's as long and as ugly as Spion's playlist.
This is taking a while to complete.
It's as long and as ugly as Spion's playlist.
One day my music tastes will be appreciated for what they are
:icon_lol:They're already appreciated for what they are.
They're already appreciated for what they are.
Await the official interview when I've no doubt Beckford will make a couple of thinly veiled remarks at the clubs expense.
Who cares, city gave him a contract and then refused to play him because of the terms of that contract, if he wants to call city a bunch of c**ts for that he is well within his rights.
Really?
For the sake of a few thousand pounds the owners were willing to jeopardise possible promotion through his goals?
Personally, I can't see it.
Could have been a few thousand, could have been a dozen boxes of monster munch. Who the feck knows?Was it just a few thousand then? Maybe it would have extended his contract on a higher wage. It could easily have been millions. If we'd got promoted it could possibly have been worth it if he contributed to that, but at a time when we are tightening our belts, extending the contracts of two of our highest earners who aren't deemed good enough seems stupid.
Wasn't there a clause in the transfer from Everton that would have inflated the fee massively if he'd played again?Could have been a few thousand, could have been a dozen boxes of monster munch. Who the feck knows?
My point is, after spending millions to try and achieve promotion why would anybody jeopardise
this for a relatively paltry sum to be paid out if a player played one more game.
All sounds bollox to me
Wasn't there a clause in the transfer from Everton that would have inflated the fee massively if he'd played again?
This seems rather obvious to me. He had three or four games before the fee went up, so he was given a chance to see if he really was going to turn his form around. He played like a complete donkey so Nige pulled the plug to save a big chunk of cash. This is why he was then immediately loaned out, as the decision had been made that he wasn't going to play for us again as he couldn't prove he was worth the extra investment.If that is the case, why did he start at the beginning of last season, and then "dropped", why not get rid before the season started.
It all seems rather speculative. As I said, who the feck knows?
This seems rather obvious to me. He had three or four games before the fee went up, so he was given a chance to see if he really was going to turn his form around.
He only turned up in occassional games the season before last, can't judge on pre season, so give him 4 games of a brand new season when it can take a team 8 - 10 games to settle in.
Doesn't wash for me, so no, it's not obvious.
Since someone brought up Yakubu.
****ing hell he was good wasn't he? Best striker we've had in a decade.
Les Ferdinand for me but Yakubu was definitely a higher class than the rest at the time - that goal away at Derby was fantastic!
P | Pld | Pts | |
1 | Liverpool | 11 | 28 |
2 | Manchester C | 11 | 23 |
3 | Chelsea | 11 | 19 |
4 | Arsenal | 11 | 19 |
5 | Nottm F | 11 | 19 |
6 | Brighton | 11 | 19 |
7 | Fulham | 11 | 18 |
8 | Newcastle | 11 | 18 |
9 | Aston Villa | 11 | 18 |
10 | Tottenham | 11 | 16 |
11 | Brentford | 11 | 16 |
12 | Bournemouth | 11 | 15 |
13 | Manchester U | 11 | 15 |
14 | West Ham | 11 | 12 |
15 | Leicester | 11 | 10 |
16 | Everton | 11 | 10 |
17 | Ipswich | 11 | 8 |
18 | Palace | 11 | 7 |
19 | Wolves | 11 | 6 |
20 | Southampton | 11 | 4 |