Ian Dale Interviews Scott Duxbery

0 Kudo

Started By	Comment
SurfaceAgentX2Zero		#81	[-]
Posts: 5657 (30/06/09 12:31:10) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I have no idea about Jimenez, I had never heard of him until 3 weeks ago and I'll wager most on here hadn't. I have since heard him described as 'lazy'. Since I have actually heard of him, I assume Mancini has attitude problems. We shall see, mate. I hope you are right. I'm not one of those terrible people who would rather see their club bankrupted and relegated rather than lose an argument on an internet chat forum. Oh no!
SurfaceAgentX2Zero		#82	[-]
Posts: 5659 (30/06/09 13:53:55) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	http://www.westhamtillidie.com/ The latest part of this has Duxbury stating that GZ is happy to go with DA. CC and Savio (!?!?) up front, if necessary.
The Skerrit		#83	[-]
Posts: 4147 (30/06/09 14:01:50) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I don't go a lot anymore, but Savio didn't look very much like a striker to me? More of a sort of fast nuisance player with no real goal threat. Of course the other way to read that statement is "Strikers are fucking expensive and we won't be buying one"
GB		#84	[-]
Posts: 1025 (30/06/09 14:39:02) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I am really struggling here. It seems that to get Jiminez in on loan means he is the dregs but presumeably if we had brought him for whatever price Inter currently want, this would have somehow made him a better player? Let us presume his value has gone down from the circa £10m which I think they paid because he has been out of the first team. Let us assume Inter would only get £7m for him upfront now. If we have agreed to cover his wages, pay say a £1.5m loan fee with an option to buy next summer at say the £7m he is currently worth how is this bad business for Inter or indeed us? Both sides are taking a gamble, if he pays off then we buy and Inter get more money overall, if he fails then we do not buy but Inter only need to recoup £5.5m to getback his curent value. The upside for us is that before investing what are for us huge sums we have a chance to assess whether he is actually worth it. As for lazy well that never stopped the crowd loving Eyal Berkovic and PDC could certainly have his failing to track back days. As for Savio I like a lot of what I have seen about him, he seems to have an awareness of what is going on around him that a lot of players his age do not have. Good pace and excellent control, he will have to work on the physical side though as he did look a little lightweight albeit he was prepared to get stuck in. He does have the Joe Cole problem of what is his best position but hopefully Zola/Clarke will sort this somewhat more ably than HR managed with JC.
A Man of Constant Sorrow		#85	[-]
Posts: 6622 (30/06/09 14:44:03) Got his Mojo back Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Hang on just one fucking minute here. This member of the crowd (and most around me) fucking hated that lazy cunt Berkovic...
SurfaceAgentX2Zero		#86	[-]
Posts: 5660 (30/06/09 14:50:11) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	GB wrote: I am really struggling here. It seems that to get Jiminez in on loan means he is the dregs but presumeably if we had brought him for whatever price Inter currently want, this would have somehow made him a better player? I don't think anyone has said that. perhaps you need to re-read the whole thread. Let us presume his value has gone down from the circa £10m which I think they paid because he has been out of the first team. Let us assume Inter would only get £7m for him upfront now. If we have agreed to cover his wages, pay say a £1.5m loan fee with an option to buy next summer at say the £7m he is currently worth how is this bad business for Inter or indeed us? Well, there are a lot of assumptions there. But this loan fee you suggest we pay. is this the one we laughed out tits off about Real paying to us for our deadbeat? The downside of your argument, of course, is that Inter have £5.5 millions pounds of asset playing for another team. Not ideal at all. but, as I said, the least bad option for them. like Faubert to Madrid was for us. Both sides are taking a gamble, if he pays off then we buy and Inter get more money overall, if he fails then we do not buy but Inter only need to recoup £5.5m to getback his curent value. The upside for us is that before investing what are for us huge sums we have a chance to assess whether he is actually worth it. He will be a year further into his contract and a failure. If we send him back Inter will NOT get £5.5 million for him. Do you think we are going to get £4.5 million for Faubert? As for lazy well that never stopped the crowd loving Eyal Berkovic and PDC could certainly have his failing to track back days. I hated Berkovic. I'm not sure anyone has ever really heard of Jimenez, have they? he is an ex-Chile international who couldn't get in Inter's team. I don't see how you are able to compare him to PDC. Who I am ambivalent about. As for Savio I like a lot of what I have seen about him, he seems to have an awareness of what is going on around him that a lot of players his age do not have. Good pace and excellent control, he will have to work on the physical side though as he did look a little lightweight albeit he was prepared to get stuck in. He does have the Joe Cole problem of what is his best position but hopefully Zola/Clarke will sort this somewhat more ably than HR managed with JC. Very interesting and hopefully spot on, but Savio was not a loan with an option. Last Edited By: SurfaceAgentX2Zero 01/07/09 18:14:38. Edited 1 times.
The Skerrit		#87	[-]
Posts: 4149 (30/06/09 14:53:40) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Opinion was firmly divided on him. However, given that 1997/98 was a season where we won virtually every one of our home games and lost virtually every single one of our away games, often by absolute tonkings, then anyone who travelled away almost universally hated Berkovic. The lazy little cunt. I didn't really take to the miserable little fucker it has to be said, but I did thoroughly enjoy his home debut against Tottenham and thought that had we managed to get him to play more than about three games with Di Canio the following season, that they could have developed some kind of understanding. My over-riding memories of Berko though, would be away at places like Blackburn or Southampton and watching him hide and whimper for 85 minutes after he was cunted right in the bastard by someone like Jason Dodd or Colin Hendry early on..... And those adverts the silly little cunt did for 'Le Shark' clothing in Hammers News. And for getting booted in the face by Hartson. And for prentending not to speak English whenever I tried to speak to him for OLaS. Bitter? Not me..........
badbeat		#88	[-]
Posts: 69 (30/06/09 15:02:38) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	so what do we think he's going to say about Neill then?
HammerHeadShark		#89	[-]
Posts: 94 (30/06/09 15:05:33) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	What he said in the other interview I imagine. He's just finished a "Magnusson" contract and he wants another one. We're not giving him one so it's up to him if he wants to stay. I remember thinking when Hartson booted Berkovic in the face that there was a singular lack of sympathy for Eyal. It was almost like an entire fanbase just shrugged and went "Yeah, he is pretty annoying".
SurfaceAgentX2Zero		#90	[-]
Posts: 5663 (30/06/09 15:05:41) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Loyal servant, credit to club, love to have him back, offer on table, always welcome here, changing times, credit crunch, realism in contractual matters, take it or leave it.
badbeat		#91	[-]
Posts: 70 (30/06/09 15:10:10) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I think he's acting too much like the kid that wasn't in the cool group at school giving it the big talk to try and fit in. SD not Lucas that is. There's a difference between being open and indiscreet. I'm in Milan this weekend to..............yeah yeah yeah. Why don't you behave like a pro and keep it quiet till it's done.
GB		#92	[-]
Posts: 1026 (30/06/09 16:51:29) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Surface your own posts have used the phrases "subset of pondlife" and "what is left is the dregs" which is where I got the phrase from, I suggest you read the thread. You also suggest that the "best" players are the ones people are prepared to do an unconditional deal for which to my mind is a clear indication that a player who is purchased is by implication a better player than one who is loaned. Also the fact that Faubert has been a "deadbeat" - your phrase again - for us does not mean he will not go on to do a very good job elsewhere, many would have described the Uruguyan striker United had as a deadbeat for them but he has since gone on to get tons of goals in Spain same for the Serbian Villa had a few years back. Certain players do not adapt to football in certain countries, Jiminez may not adapt to English football but at least we will not have him on a long contract at significant wage having paid a lot for him - ie like the former mentioned "deadbeat".
SurfaceAgentX2Zero		#93	[-]
Posts: 5665 (30/06/09 17:12:56) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	GB wrote: Surface your own posts have used the phrases "subset of pondlife" and "what is left is the dregs" which is where I got the phrase from, Yes. I suggest you read the thread. Careful, you haven't made any point yet. You also suggest that the "best" players are the ones people are prepared to do an unconditional deal for Yes. which to my mind is a clear indication that a player who is purchased is by implication a better player than one who is loaned. Well, that's what you think. And you are not thinking clearly. That is, of course, a ridiculous conclusion. As I said, there may well be a gem or two hidden amongst the rest of the pond life. But the chances are slim. Also the fact that Faubert has been a "deadbeat" - your phrase again - for us does not mean he will not go on to do a very good job elsewhere, Of course. What is your point? He will though command no kind of transfer fee until he has proved himself. many would have described the Uruguyan striker United had as a deadbeat for them but he has since gone on to get tons of goals in Spain same for the Serbian Villa had a few years back. Certain players do not adapt to football in certain countries, Of course, what is your point. Jiminez may not adapt to English football but at least we will not have him on a long contract at significant wage having paid a lot for him - ie like the former mentioned "deadbeat". Absolutely. As I have said all along, the loan with option to buy is a great deal for the buyer. That's why most of the players available on this basis are unsellable in the normal way. They are, in fact, the pond life. Last Edited By: SurfaceAgentX2Zero 01/07/09 18:16:59. Edited 1 times.
GB		#94	[-]
Posts: 1027 (01/07/09 11:44:26) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Surface you asked where I got the phrase "dregs" from - as I was showing it was from you. As far as I am concerned the method of gettting the player into the club, loan or transfer is largely irrelevant what matters is what they do when they arrive and are they wanted by the manager - it is after all his judgment that is being tested. Loans are a far more common vehicle on the continent than they are here. I read somewhere that Aquafresca the Italian U21 striker has just gone to Genoa from Inter as a makeweight in a deal then immeadiately been loaned by Genoa to Atalanta. The option to buy is a total red hearing as it is dependant on the price of the option. If it is the current market value of the player (or maybe even above that value) then potentially it becomes a good deal as well for the selling club as they get the loan fee in addition. We do not now the details on Jiminez and therfore everything else over and above the fact Zola wants him is pure speculation. Hypothetical example : Club A had paid £10m for a player and want to get at least £7.5m back. Due to injury change of manager or whatever player has not played in the first team and no-one is willing to pay more than £5m to buy him so Club A does not want to sell and is under no financial pressure to do so. Club B however will agree to take on loan for £1.5m with an option to buy at £6m at end of period. Both are taking a gamble, Club A hopes the player will work out and they recover the sum they want, they risk a potentially more diminished asset if he does not, Club B hope he works out in which case they may get player who may actually be worth more than they have paid but if he does not that they have wasted the loan fee and wages. Why is that such a bad deal for either parrty?
SurfaceAgentX2Zero		#95	[-]
Posts: 5672 (01/07/09 16:54:09) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	GB wrote: Surface you asked where I got the phrase "dregs" from - as I was showing it was from you. No, I didn't ask that. You really do need to read all the posts carefully. The rest of your post continues to miss the point. Is a loan with an option to buy the ideal transaction for a selling club? The answer to this is no. Therefore, those players who are available on this type of deal are not highly regarded enough to elicit a satisfactory bid for a permanent sale. Therefore, they are what is left over. Or the dregs. That is all. Sorry Skerrit, old lad. Last Edited By: SurfaceAgentX2Zero 01/07/09 18:09:44. Edited 1 times.
The Skerrit		#96	[-]
Posts: 4162 (01/07/09 17:22:48) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Surface, I'm loving the Claret and Blue quotage. Good work fella.... Last Edited By: The Skerrit 01/07/09 18:18:29. Edited 1 times.
Father Fred		#97	[-]
Posts: 656 (01/07/09 19:01:33) Can't Recognise A Footballer Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: GB wrote: Surface you asked where I got the phrase "dregs" from - as I was showing it was from you. No, I didn't ask that. You really do need to read all the posts carefully. The rest of your post continues to miss the point. Is a loan with an option to buy the ideal transaction for a selling club? The answer to this is no. Therefore, those players who are available on this type of deal are not highly regarded enough to elicit a satisfactory bid for a permanent sale. Therefore, they are what is left over. Or the dregs. That is all. Sorry Skerrit, old lad. I'm never massively impressed by people whose argument starts with "You really do need to read all the posts carefully" - it suggests pedanticism above right and wrong. Anyways, loan players being the dregs. A player being loaned with a option to sell, not sold indicates one thing - that they have not received an offer high enough to pursuade them to part with him permanently now. The new club gets a try before you buy (a good thing), the selling club gets him off the wage bill, maybe a loan fee, and a reasonable minimum price should the new club want him. By your logic we should have bid £255k for Paul Anderson and got him in instead. By you logic a shitty flat in Manor Park that sells for £100k is better than a penthouse overlooking Hyde park that is let at £10k per week.
Paul in Philly		#98	[-]
Posts: 760 (01/07/09 19:07:48) Buys lots of toilet paper Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Father Fred wrote: SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: GB wrote: Surface you asked where I got the phrase "dregs" from - as I was showing it was from you. No, I didn't ask that. You really do need to read all the posts carefully. The rest of your post continues to miss the point. Is a loan with an option to buy the ideal transaction for a selling club? The answer to this is no. Therefore, those players who are available on this type of deal are not highly regarded enough to elicit a satisfactory bid for a permanent sale. Therefore, they are what is left over. Or the dregs. That is all. Sorry Skerrit, old lad. I'm never massively impressed by people whose argument starts with "You really do need to read all the posts carefully" - it suggests pedanticism above right and wrong. Anyways, loan players being the dregs. A player being loaned with a option to sell, not sold indicates one thing - that they have not received an offer high enough to pursuade them to part with him permanently now. The new club gets a try before you buy (a good thing), the selling club gets him off the wage bill, maybe a loan fee, and a reasonable minimum price should the new club want him. By your logic we should have bid £255k for Paul Anderson and got him in instead. By you logic a shitty flat in Manor Park that sells for £100k is better than a penthouse overlooking Hyde park that is let at £10k per week. Hmmm... looks to me like you're postulating Glass Steagal II...
A Man of Constant Sorrow		#99	[-]
Posts: 6644 (01/07/09 19:15:31) Got his Mojo back Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Father Fred wrote: SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: GB wrote: Surface you asked where I got the phrase "dregs" from - as I was showing it was from you. No, I didn't ask that. You really do need to read all the posts carefully. The rest of your post continues to miss the point. Is a loan with an option to buy the ideal transaction for a selling club? The answer to this is no. Therefore, those players who are available on this type of deal are not highly regarded enough to elicit a satisfactory bid for a permanent sale. Therefore, they are what is left over. Or the dregs. That is all. Sorry Skerrit, old lad. I'm never massively impressed by people whose argument starts with "You really do need to read all the posts carefully" - it suggests pedanticism above right and wrong. Anyways, loan players being the dregs. A player being loaned with a option to sell, not sold indicates one thing - that they have not received an offer high enough to pursuade them to part with him permanently now. The new club gets a try before you buy (a good thing), the selling club gets him off the wage bill, maybe a loan fee, and a reasonable minimum price should the new club want him. By your logic we should have bid £255k for Paul Anderson and got him in instead. By you logic a shitty flat in Manor Park that sells for £100k is better than a penthouse overlooking Hyde park that is let at £10k per week. Your analogy is wrong. What Surface is talking about is the difference between buying a case of the best bottles in the cellar in the knowledge it's top vintage or having a taste of some of the bottles of plonk with a possibility of buying the case. I still maintain it to be the football equivalent of PFI - and we all know how that buy now, pay later scheme is going to end up don't we? The legitimation is the same too - to get the figures off the books...
Father Fred		#100	[-]
Posts: 657 (01/07/09 19:32:19) Can't Recognise A Footballer Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	But surely selling or loaning clubs want the player off the books. The difference is that the loaning club doesn't get a better offer to buy than the offer they get to loan and therefore loans, whereas the selling club does get an acceptable selling price therefore sells not loans. Whether a player gets sold or loaned has as much to do with the current clubs price expectations for a particular player as it does the relative qualities of the player compared to others who are transferred. Analagy... the seller wants a vintage price but you don't know whether the case is plonk, decent or vintage. You try one bottle with an option to buy the case. You might be happy with any, but you want to pay the right price so you try first. If the market is agreed on the quality of the wine then the seller sells whether the case was plonk, decent or vintage.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

Ian Dale Interviews Scott Duxbery

Quick Reply