|
|
Post by markscfc72 on Jun 21, 2010 11:02:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jacksscfc on Jun 21, 2010 11:11:14 GMT
I know he hasn't performed that well at Liverpool but IMHO he is still a very good player and in the right team playing week in week out could be a good signing.
|
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Jun 21, 2010 11:18:29 GMT
Where are you Tone, still on your hols?
|
|
|
|
Post by Carrot on Jun 21, 2010 11:42:41 GMT
To be fair, he hasn't really been given much of a crack of the whip on a regular basis at liverpool. He's a cracking player though imo and we'd do well to sign him up!! Go get him Tone!!  . |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jun 21, 2010 11:51:00 GMT
To be fair, he hasn't really been given much of a crack of the whip on a regular basis at liverpool. He's a cracking player though imo and we'd do well to sign him up!! Go get him Tone!! . Where would you play him Carrot? I can't see him playing either of the (very) specific striker roles in our system and when he hasn't played up front, he's played primarily on the left wing hasn't he? |
|
|
|
Post by Carrot on Jun 21, 2010 12:05:45 GMT
To be fair, he hasn't really been given much of a crack of the whip on a regular basis at liverpool. He's a cracking player though imo and we'd do well to sign him up!! Go get him Tone!! . Where would you play him Carrot? I can't see him playing either of the (very) specific striker roles in our system and when he hasn't played up front, he's played primarily on the left wing hasn't he? True yeah, from what I've seen he's been playing predominantly on the left wing when he's come off the bench but obviously with Etherington doing so well, there's no need to replace him. I'm pretty sure he's played and can play comfortably on the right wing though and he is right footed so having Etherington and Babel on each flank would be a huge threat. He'd be a decent back-up to the forward line as well imo, providing we get one or two quality forwards in. And if Birmingham are going after him then there's no reason why we shouldn't either imo. |
|
|
|
Post by Danstoke82 on Jun 21, 2010 12:07:44 GMT
Well that will mean that now Brum are in for him then they will be clear favourites for him and Stoke will just be nice and move to one side to allow them to do business.
Expect this deal to be done by tommorow.
|
|
|
|
Post by y_oh_y_delilah on Jun 21, 2010 12:22:49 GMT
Babel only really plays on the left. In that case, why would we want either him or Matty sitting on the bench every week, when we desperately need to strengthen at least 3 other positions?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr Oetcake on Jun 21, 2010 12:25:39 GMT
I would suggest the best way to tempt Babel would be to lay down a carpet of hemp and casters with a swimfeeder and then use a nice lump of luncheon meat over the top.... no hold on, thats barbel...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2010 12:28:34 GMT
He may have played predominately on the left in the past but if he isn’t any better than Delap on the right I’ll eat my own arse.
|
|
|
|
Post by ashbournepotter on Jun 21, 2010 12:30:29 GMT
why have babel when we can have benjani?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr Oetcake on Jun 21, 2010 12:40:21 GMT
Benjani will go to Wolves
|
|
|
|
Post by ashbournepotter on Jun 21, 2010 12:44:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jun 21, 2010 12:45:08 GMT
He may have played predominately on the left in the past but if he isn’t any better than Delap on the right I’ll eat my own arse. But surely if you're going to drop 8-10 mil on a player to play on the right flank then wouldn't you actually want to spend it on a player who plays predominately on, erm ... the right?  |
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Jun 21, 2010 12:45:57 GMT
It all sounds like conjecture to me. More guesswork by Sky Sports than factual.
|
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Jun 21, 2010 12:51:13 GMT
I've added a line of text to the Benjani profile hopefully TP will read it.
|
|
|
|
Post by GeneralFaye on Jun 21, 2010 13:00:20 GMT
Birmingham are in for another player, Never!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2010 15:53:33 GMT
He may have played predominately on the left in the past but if he isn’t any better than Delap on the right I’ll eat my own arse. But surely if you're going to drop 8-10 mil on a player to play on the right flank then wouldn't you actually want to spend it on a player who plays predominately on, erm ... the right? Unless it was a loan deal. |
|
|
|
Post by Irish Stokie on Jun 21, 2010 15:58:14 GMT
Unless hes still available on 31st August then he wont be our 1st signing
|
|
|
|
Post by pasa on Jun 21, 2010 16:09:05 GMT
wether we sign him or not, it proves to me if brum manage to get it done and dusted in just a couple of days we are very 'small time' in this department.
If Brum can run negotiations smoothly with a better standard of player, why can't we?
zigic, Babel, who next. ffs brum know the score don't they well we fuck around with premiership never has beens and never will be's.
|
|
|
|
Post by pasa on Jun 21, 2010 16:15:36 GMT
imo its McLeish 1-0 Pulis, soon to be 2-0 if Babel signs too. head to head, simalar stature of club, simalar style of play, simalar Calibre of current personnal, simalar budget. 2 Quality signings for Brum imo if this goes through. a good manager is judged by the players he brings to the club, because of the above reasons for me, BRum are our benchmark. I hope we have a few rabbits up our sleeve, it shall be intresting. very intresting. I have the feeling that after the trouble he's had with forwards this season TP will go for Workratre and attitude over quality. If that happens then TP imo has taken us as far as he can. Quality players have EGO's, TP is old school... chalk and cheese. |
|
|
|
Post by xxstokiestanxx on Jun 21, 2010 16:24:54 GMT
Thought babel was a striker liverpuddle prefer torres and kuyt though so stick him on the wing mostly ???
|
|
|
|
Post by burtonstokie on Jun 21, 2010 16:38:50 GMT
I know it'd would be difficult to bring a player like him to Stoke but why on earth are we not even showing interest in these players? I don't believe that we're just great at keeping secrets - we're just not doing anything. If Brum get him then I'll be angry as it's just letting our rivals steal a march by not competing to sign these players.
|
|
|
|
Post by hammerinpeace on Jun 22, 2010 6:44:19 GMT
If Brum can run negotiations smoothly with a better standard of player, why can't we? Because making Stoke look like an attractive proposition is akin to getting Attila the Hun to do charity work. Outside of this wonderful site Stoke are looked on as incredibly old fashioned and "small" despite your 2 seasons in the PL. Both Wolves and Birmingham though sh!t have a better ring to them than Stoke. It's just the way it is for players. Thems the horrible facts I'm afraid. |
|
|
|
Post by santy on Jun 22, 2010 7:40:31 GMT
Simple matter is, we're already over the limit of 25 players over the age of 21 that has been brought in this season. We haven't managed to offload any really as of yet; so we're still rumbling around with a lot of players we need to cutdown from our squad.
What good would it be, buying 4/5 players and being close to having 40 players over the age of 25 when we'd have to say to 15 players presumably on 10k a week on average - sorry not enough space you can't play?
So there isn't any horrible facts about Stoke, just a realisation that we need to move some of the deadwood on, which we're struggling to do. We had prepared before for incase of an injury crisis with a large squad and now because of these premiership rules its come back to bite us on the ass. If push comes to shove then yes I suspect we'll still add a couple and just try to loan them out again, but with squad limits players are less likely to get loaned by other premiership sides.
|
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on Jun 22, 2010 8:17:14 GMT
If Brum can run negotiations smoothly with a better standard of player, why can't we? Because making Stoke look like an attractive proposition is akin to getting Attila the Hun to do charity work. Outside of this wonderful site Stoke are looked on as incredibly old fashioned and "small" despite your 2 seasons in the PL. Both Wolves and Birmingham though sh!t have a better ring to them than Stoke. It's just the way it is for players. Thems the horrible facts I'm afraid. Anyone else getting a bit fucked off with these cheeky cockerneys invading our site?. Hammer in Peace Fuck off, no one on here is interested in your opinions!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by northstokie on Jun 22, 2010 8:41:30 GMT
Simple matter is, we're already over the limit of 25 players over the age of 21 that has been brought in this season. We haven't managed to offload any really as of yet; so we're still rumbling around with a lot of players we need to cutdown from our squad. What good would it be, buying 4/5 players and being close to having 40 players over the age of 25 when we'd have to say to 15 players presumably on 10k a week on average - sorry not enough space you can't play? So there isn't any horrible facts about Stoke, just a realisation that we need to move some of the deadwood on, which we're struggling to do. We had prepared before for incase of an injury crisis with a large squad and now because of these premiership rules its come back to bite us on the ass. If push comes to shove then yes I suspect we'll still add a couple and just try to loan them out again, but with squad limits players are less likely to get loaned by other premiership sides. Don't be bringing logic to the table santy, it's not allowed... You need to slag off the club a bit more and wish them into handing out unmanageable and damaging contracts to give players and agents what they want, but if the player is poor retain the right to criticise the choice of player or more likely the management team for not using them properly to complete the vicious little circle... |
|
.
