|
Post by knowingeye on Apr 9, 2008 10:48:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 9, 2008 10:56:58 GMT
£750,000 on a full back In August and he has first good game in April. He must be some player.
|
|
|
Post by y_oh_y_delilah on Apr 9, 2008 11:01:02 GMT
Put quite simply (so that EVERYBODY! understands) Carl Hoefkens is the best full back in the Championship and Pulis was totally wrong to sell him. At the end of the day, having Carl in your side could well mean the difference between Premiership and Championship football next season.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 9, 2008 11:01:53 GMT
Carl Hoefkens is the best full back in the Championship . I've just messed my trousers. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Titan Uranus on Apr 9, 2008 11:06:47 GMT
Totally agree
|
|
|
Post by ManderBeast on Apr 9, 2008 11:09:18 GMT
Him in place of Griffin would be a fucking pipe dream!
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 9, 2008 11:10:57 GMT
2 good games in 8 months now constitutes being the best full back in the division. Don't be so fucking stupid. I'll start you off with one. The full back in the same side on the other flank is vastly superior to Carl. Feel free to add the many, many others.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 9, 2008 11:13:45 GMT
£750,000 on a full back In August and he has first good game in April. He must be some player. Not arguing with that Sheikhy but we've replaced him with a player who, when you factor in wages, is probably a downgrade and will end up costing us more! I don't think there can be any serious argument that Griff isn't on substantially better wages than Hoofers was.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 9, 2008 11:17:35 GMT
I'd imagine they're on similar wages now Smudge if the rumours of Carl's contract are to be believed and I've already admittted he would and should piss in to our current defence but let's have some balance here.
The fee we recieved for him was in my view fair, the fact Pulis has made a dogs breakfast of replacing him is a different matter but lets not make him in to something he isn't and never was.
|
|
|
Post by plattamusii on Apr 9, 2008 11:20:14 GMT
I still think that Griff is out of position at Right Back.
He's twice the Player on the left, Wilko is possibly/probably a better right back and Dicko's coming on a treat.
I'd drop Griffo just now.(he has had a couple of stinkers lately)
|
|
|
Post by knowles on Apr 9, 2008 11:21:04 GMT
"great result....that was never a pen....i'd be fuming if i was blackpool...changed the game....well happy with that "
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 9, 2008 11:27:45 GMT
I'd imagine they're on similar wages now Smudge if the rumours of Carl's contract are to be believed and I've already admittted he would and should piss in to our current defence but let's have some balance here. The fee we recieved for him was in my view fair, the fact Pulis has made a dogs breakfast of replacing him is a different matter but lets not make him in to something he isn't and never was. Sheikhy, I'm in a position to know what Carl's wages were and, when you think about it, it's not too difficult to understand why we're paying more now for Griff. Hoofers came from Belgian football (just look at average crowds for even the top teams) and so even a 'decent' contract at Stoke was a huge improvement on what he had eben getting. Griff came from a Premier League club and there's no way he would have taken a serious pay-cut to come to Stoke. On a broader point, I agree that we got a very fair price for him and I'm not hankering for his return. I just think it's a bit annoying that, given where TP has chosen to position Griff we're probably paying more (overall) for what amounts to, at best, parity only in the right back position. Put Griff to left-back and Wilko to right-back and I'd be a lot happier about the whole situation.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Apr 9, 2008 11:35:01 GMT
We were probably paying Stephen Wright more than Hoefkens, and look what we go in return for that.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Apr 9, 2008 11:35:56 GMT
We were probably paying Stephen Wright more than Hoefkens, and look what we go in return for that. Didn't Coatesy confirm we were actually paying him more? And that donkey was the chosen replacement, Griffin only came back as an afterthought.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 9, 2008 11:36:53 GMT
Fair do's but we wouldn't have been able to continue to pay Carl at such reasonable rates particularly when Brazil turned his head would we?
|
|
|
Post by Titan Uranus on Apr 9, 2008 11:38:11 GMT
Hoefkens lives in Norton so he can't be on that much money
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Apr 9, 2008 11:40:53 GMT
Fair do's but we wouldn't have been able to continue to pay Carl at such reasonable rates particularly when Brazil turned his head would we? Well if we'd offered him a new contract in January 07 instead of trying to sell him back to Belgium in a cut-price deal we might have been able to actually.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 9, 2008 11:42:49 GMT
But this is based on the same ridiculous premise that Carl is not only the best full back to ever draw breath but he and his agent are the nations leading philanthropists.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Apr 9, 2008 11:54:54 GMT
But this is based on the same ridiculous premise that Carl is not only the best full back to ever draw breath but he and his agent are the nations leading philanthropists. or accepting the premise that Pulis was ever remotely interested in keeping him at the club. he was the best right back at the club, he is better than any of the right-backs pulis has tried to replace him with and he is one of the better full backs in the championship.
|
|
|
Post by dadofsam on Apr 9, 2008 12:04:57 GMT
But I thought Pulis was supposed to be master of the transfer market, specialist subject defenders.
He certainly can't spot a fullback
|
|
|
Post by thepremierbanksy on Apr 9, 2008 12:06:44 GMT
I'm not sure i buy this Griffin is a better left than right back. Yes we have seen that his form at left back has been consistently good for stoke (first spell, and last season) and that he is cack at right back at the moment, but i am fairly unsure that moving him to left back would significantly improve his performances at the moment.
Saying that i'd move him there in a second if it meant getting wilkinson into the side.
|
|
|
Post by knowingeye on Apr 9, 2008 12:11:51 GMT
As I've said on here before, Carl's problem was Boskamp.
|
|
|
Post by mikeyb99 on Apr 9, 2008 12:21:07 GMT
Here we go again Sheikh, the fantasy that Hoefkens was 'tapped-up' or that money was the reason he left Stoke.
He was forced out of the club by a manager who hated him. Just look at the amount of money Ameobi will be taking home from Peter Coates and tell me again just why money will have been the defining factor in him leaving.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 9, 2008 12:31:14 GMT
'who hated him'
That's just not correct is it. they couldn't get their tongues from down each others throats by the end.
|
|
|
Post by mikeyb99 on Apr 9, 2008 12:35:08 GMT
'they couldn't get their tongues from down each others throats by the end.'
Absolute fantasy. The constant waterbottle-throwing, the blind refusal ever to even refer to Carl in a press conference, let alone praise him.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 9, 2008 12:39:05 GMT
I prefer to read newspapers and direct quotes rather than spending a game looking at the reaction of a manager so I can make some Pulis hating capital out of it, mikey.
|
|
|
Post by knowingeye on Apr 9, 2008 12:44:00 GMT
I prefer to read newspapers and direct quotes rather than spending a game looking at the reaction of a manager so I can make some Pulis hating capital out of it, mikey. And you'd rather believe what you read in a paper?
|
|
|
Post by Marc01 on Apr 9, 2008 12:45:58 GMT
As I've said on here before, Carl's problem was Boskamp. What do you mean K E?
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 9, 2008 12:46:38 GMT
These were direct quotes, now I know Pulis hating Protocol is to stuick your fingers in your ears when something that contradicts your brianwashed views come to light or are you calling Carl a liar?
|
|
|
Post by knowingeye on Apr 9, 2008 12:48:09 GMT
As I've said on here before, Carl's problem was Boskamp. What do you mean K E? Boskamp signed Carl, hence his exit under Pulis was almost inevitable. That's why his attempt to exit him at discount price in the January sales was so obvious and Carl stuck to his guns at the time, as he didn't want to be part-exchanged for a previously used item from last year's sales. Football's about opinions and money. Not necessarily in that order!
|
|