|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 10:08:20 GMT
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 10:08:20 GMT
It would appear from reading the French sporting press that we were duped when we signed Imbula. It appears that he has been manipulated by a dodgy agency with which his father has close links. Apparently he was ordered by his father to sign for Porto against his wishes, for an inflated fee, with a promise to sell him on again quickly at a profit. Allegedly a loan was arranged for Porto to enable them to buy him. They never intended to retain him, but to get their money back quickly plus a profit! He never wanted to come to England either, but came as part of the master plan for financial reasons. That is apparently why he has conducted himself in such a way as to guarantee a loan back to French or other continental club as quickly as possible, whilst drawing premier league wages Anyone who doubts this could try this link to French press coverage and google translate. It certainly seems to throw interesting light on the Imbula.mystery. Incidentally this Porto information was available in the French press before we signed him. Who was responsible for our due diligence before we went ahead for £18M? If Stoke City had bothered to read this could they have saved themselves from a disastrous signing? www.ledauphine.com/sport/2016/12/20/les-dessous-rocambolesques-du-transfert-d-imbula-de-l-om-a-portoMaybe the Pizza boys should be sent on a multilanguage course also, all with full pay of course. That aside, the one thing that doesn't fit this theory - factbased theory - is why Imbula then played so well for the first few months he was here.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 10:10:32 GMT
Post by GeneralFaye on Aug 30, 2018 10:10:32 GMT
Just because the club doesn't announce publicly that players go on English learning courses you assume it doesn't happen?... I've heard it all now
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 10:11:05 GMT
Post by mrcoke on Aug 30, 2018 10:11:05 GMT
I was informed that the club tried to put Imbulla on an English course but he refused. Contrast this with Bojan and Muniesa who both threw themselves into learning the language. Sadly Imbulla demonstrates a consistent pattern whether it's towards playing football or learning a new language....he can't be arsed. It would appear from reading the French sporting press that we were duped when we signed Imbula. It appears that he has been manipulated by a dodgy agency with which his father has close links. Apparently he was ordered by his father to sign for Porto against his wishes, for an inflated fee, with a promise to sell him on again quickly at a profit. Allegedly a loan was arranged for Porto to enable them to buy him. They never intended to retain him, but to get their money back quickly plus a profit! He never wanted to come to England either, but came as part of the master plan for financial reasons. That is apparently why he has conducted himself in such a way as to guarantee a loan back to French or other continental club as quickly as possible, whilst drawing premier league wages Anyone who doubts this could try this link to French press coverage and google translate. It certainly seems to throw interesting light on the Imbula.mystery. Incidentally this Porto information was available in the French press before we signed him. Who was responsible for our due diligence before we went ahead for £18M? If Stoke City had bothered to read this could they have saved themselves from a disastrous signing? www.ledauphine.com/sport/2016/12/20/les-dessous-rocambolesques-du-transfert-d-imbula-de-l-om-a-portoMakes you wonder whether Stoke have any due diligence process when they invest millions in a new player.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 10:14:54 GMT
How do you know they did? If they did whoever did it did a bad job. Even a Belgian-cum-Frenchman can learn a few words... I've never heard any of our foreign players talk about doing language courses, so it seems natural to assume they haven't been on one. Our Danish boys don't need one, with their standard of school, where English is taught early on, they probably speak better English than some that have managed the club recently. I recall Bojan took English courses when he first joined Stoke. I reckon Bojan passed those courses with flying colours. He speaks the language very well and in interviews he comes across as being able to express himself eloquently, perhaps a little slowly at times, but that could just as easily be because he carefully considers what he wants to say. So in comparison Bojan has been the model professional.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 10:26:39 GMT
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 30, 2018 10:26:39 GMT
And you are running out of excuses for the man. I haven't used a single excuse so far, so there you are! Really? It's the club's fault he hasn't learned English It's the other players' fault he holds onto the ball too long None of his bad performances should be taken into consideration but his handful of good ones should Vallecano is 'the wrong move for him' Being young and rich meant it was all too much for him You haven't attributed any responsibility to him whatsoever...
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 10:27:20 GMT
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 10:27:20 GMT
I was informed that the club tried to put Imbulla on an English course but he refused. Contrast this with Bojan and Muniesa who both threw themselves into learning the language. Sadly Imbulla demonstrates a consistent pattern whether it's towards playing football or learning a new language....he can't be arsed. Should put it in contract of future signings. If you can't communicate with your work colleagues your performance will suffer. It's not a situation that happened in Stoke alona. I really don't know what goes on at other clubs, and not much about goes on here either, but it was reported after the Citeh nexflix program that Aguero, who's been in this country for 7 years now, has an English vocabulary of less than 50 words. Moreover I don't know that English players go on language courses when they play abroad. They're just lucky that nearly everybody speaks their language. And, what happened to "Football is a simple game with an international language"? That said, if Imbula did actively refuse linguistic help, then he's a fool. Still potentially a great player, but a fool.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 10:36:45 GMT
Post by dadofsam on Aug 30, 2018 10:36:45 GMT
More damming information about our transfer team and a strong smell of dodgy dealings - something is very wrong.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 10:49:06 GMT
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 10:49:06 GMT
I haven't used a single excuse so far, so there you are! Really? It's the club's fault he hasn't learned English It's the other players' fault he holds onto the ball too long None of his bad performances should be taken into consideration but his handful of good ones should Vallecano is 'the wrong move for him' Being young and rich meant it was all too much for him You haven't attributed any responsibility to him whatsoever... Those are all logical arguments - you may disagree, I may be wrong - but they're not excuses. And your quotation skills need a little brushing up too! Where have I for instance said "None of his bad performances should be taken into consideration but his handful of good ones should." What I've said is that we need to draw a line in the sand sometimes in order to concentrate on the present and look to the future. I certainly have never described him as "young and rich", you might have done it and then projected it unto me. I do believe Vallecano is the wrong move for him and for Stoke too. He'll be playing in a newly promoted yo yo team. They'll be struggling and he'll be struggling, they'll be playing ultradefensive, and we know he is not a defensive player. And it's bad for us, because we are just prolonging the problem that he is to us until he comes back next summer, still with 2-3 years on his contract, not having developed further The better move would have been to sell him for a nominal fee (enough for us to somewhat save face and little enough that some club could afford him), so we could move on, and he would have a chance to rebuild his career the way he sees fit. As for responsibility I do believe it's a characteristic of the modern day footballer and probably also a lot of other people, one of them POTUS, that it's always someone else's fault. But I never said that it's his team mates' "fault" that he held on too long. I've said they failed to understand his game and didn't make any runs into the pockets of space that he created for them for them to exploit. It's a pretty common problem in football elsewhere too. I think our line of poor communication has just about run its time.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 10:53:06 GMT
via mobile
Post by rawli on Aug 30, 2018 10:53:06 GMT
Should put it in contract of future signings. If you can't communicate with your work colleagues your performance will suffer. It's not a situation that happened in Stoke alona. I really don't know what goes on at other clubs, and not much about goes on here either, but it was reported after the Citeh nexflix program that Aguero, who's been in this country for 7 years now, has an English vocabulary of less than 50 words. Moreover I don't know that English players go on language courses when they play abroad. They're just lucky that nearly everybody speaks their language. And, what happened to "Football is a simple game with an international language"? That said, if Imbula did actively refuse linguistic help, then he's a fool. Still potentially a great player, but a fool. There are always exceptions. It stands to reason though that in order to get the most out of living and working in another country if you can communicate with your colleagues you have a greater chance of success. Compare Ian 'It was like living in a foreign country' Rush's year at Juventus with Gary Linekar's time at Barcelona. Arguably Rush was the better player but was a failure abroad.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 10:55:39 GMT
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 10:55:39 GMT
Absolutely just don’t believe we would have allowed him to travel without broad agreement? I bet there was an agreement - or we had good reason to think there was. This sounds to me like a late attempt to move the goal posts by the new club - probably because if they divulged from the outset the full extent of their problems off the pitch, they would never have got as far with the deal as they have done. Hopefully another club who have been interested in him this summer step in to seal the deal or force the pace of the current negotiations. What happened was their roof fell off (or whatever it was, something's probably lost in translation). This means, as well we should know, that money's going to be very, very tight for an already poor club. So will Rayo be able to pay even heavily reduced wages, not just to Imbula, but their own players? It's unfortunate. There were reportedly two other clubs interested, but they hadn't really followed up on their interest, but of course a lot could happen in the next few hours.
|
|
|
Post by lifelong on Aug 30, 2018 10:56:18 GMT
he is either very clever or very stupid - either way he's a lazy waste of space earning mega bucks and made for life.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 10:57:48 GMT
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 30, 2018 10:57:48 GMT
Really? It's the club's fault he hasn't learned English It's the other players' fault he holds onto the ball too long None of his bad performances should be taken into consideration but his handful of good ones should Vallecano is 'the wrong move for him' Being young and rich meant it was all too much for him You haven't attributed any responsibility to him whatsoever... Those are all logical arguments - you may disagree, I may be wrong - but they're not excuses. And your quotation skills need a little brushing up too! Where have I for instance said "None of his bad performances should be taken into consideration but his handful of good ones should." What I've said is that we need to draw a line in the sand sometimes in order to concentrate on the present and look to the future. I certainly have never described him as "young and rich", you might have done it and then projected it unto me. I do believe Vallecano is the wrong move for him and for Stoke too. He'll be playing in a newly promoted yo yo team. They'll be struggling and he'll be struggling, they'll be playing ultradefensive, and we know he is not a defensive player. And it's bad for us, because we are just prolonging the problem that he is to us until he comes back next summer, still with 2-3 years on his contract, not having developed further The better move would have been to sell him for a nominal fee (enough for us to somewhat save face and little enough that some club could afford him), so we could move on, and he would have a chance to rebuild his career the way he sees fit. As for responsibility I do believe it's a characteristic of the modern day footballer and probably also a lot of other people, one of them POTUS, that it's always someone else's fault. But I never said that it's his team mates' "fault" that he held on too long. I've said they failed to understand his game and didn't make any runs into the pockets of space that he created for them for them to exploit. It's a pretty common problem in football elsewhere too. I think our line of poor communication has just about run its time. Sorry, when you don't attribute any responsibility to the player for his situation and come up with a number of dubious mitigations for him, that is the very definition of excuse-making. They're not 'logical' - you don't know one way or the other if the club has tried to help him yet have assumed with no grounds to do so whatsoever that they haven't, and haven't suggested he might try and find a course himself. You went on about how he was only 22 and about his wages and how that was part of the issue. That's the 'young and rich' bit for you. If you're saying the other players weren't on the same wavelength as him and it wasn't down to him that he was holding onto the ball too long, you are blaming them, again, by definition. Again, you don't know anything about how Rayo Vallecano set up and are making assumptions. And again, no onus on him to adapt and to at least try to develop some defensive instincts.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 30, 2018 11:04:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by neddy on Aug 30, 2018 11:07:16 GMT
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 11:16:04 GMT
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 11:16:04 GMT
Those are all logical arguments - you may disagree, I may be wrong - but they're not excuses. And your quotation skills need a little brushing up too! Where have I for instance said "None of his bad performances should be taken into consideration but his handful of good ones should." What I've said is that we need to draw a line in the sand sometimes in order to concentrate on the present and look to the future. I certainly have never described him as "young and rich", you might have done it and then projected it unto me. I do believe Vallecano is the wrong move for him and for Stoke too. He'll be playing in a newly promoted yo yo team. They'll be struggling and he'll be struggling, they'll be playing ultradefensive, and we know he is not a defensive player. And it's bad for us, because we are just prolonging the problem that he is to us until he comes back next summer, still with 2-3 years on his contract, not having developed further The better move would have been to sell him for a nominal fee (enough for us to somewhat save face and little enough that some club could afford him), so we could move on, and he would have a chance to rebuild his career the way he sees fit. As for responsibility I do believe it's a characteristic of the modern day footballer and probably also a lot of other people, one of them POTUS, that it's always someone else's fault. But I never said that it's his team mates' "fault" that he held on too long. I've said they failed to understand his game and didn't make any runs into the pockets of space that he created for them for them to exploit. It's a pretty common problem in football elsewhere too. I think our line of poor communication has just about run its time. Sorry, when you don't attribute any responsibility to the player for his situation and come up with a number of dubious mitigations for him, that is the very definition of excuse-making. They're not 'logical' - you don't know one way or the other if the club has tried to help him yet have assumed with no grounds to do so whatsoever that they haven't, and haven't suggested he might try and find a course himself. You went on about how he was only 22 and about his wages and how that was part of the issue. That's the 'young and rich' bit for you. If you're saying the other players weren't on the same wavelength as him and it wasn't down to him that he was holding onto the ball too long, you are blaming them, again, by definition. Again, you don't know anything about how Rayo Vallecano set up and are making assumptions. And again, no onus on him to adapt and to at least try to develop some defensive instincts. I'm a follower of Spanish football. I know they are the poor relations in Madrid. Some players are meant to defend and others aren't. Ronaldo never tracked back in Madrid and he was frequently jeered by Real's fans for not doing it. The whistles bothered him, but he was not able to change his game (It's one of the reasons he left for Turin, by no means the most important, but he really could never understand why not everybody loved him as much as he did himself, but that's another story). It might have helped Imbula if he had tried to become SJW, but by the same token, if he had become a headless chicken, he would no longer be Imbula. I actually said he was 21 but I never said he was "young and rich", so don't pin your poor communication skills on me! No, I'm not blaming other players. I'm explaning what happened, or the way I saw it happen. I'd like to criticise MB and MH for not training the team enough to play to Imbula's strengths, but that's something else. It's not my job to attribute blame to Imbula or anyone else. That's your way of thinking, but it's not mine. There was a moment the other day when I thought we might be speaking to each other on a sound level, but I don't like the way you twist my words nor the lies you attribute to me. I'm not going to reply to your next contribution nor am I going to enter discussions with you on any future subject.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 11:17:50 GMT
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 11:17:50 GMT
Amazing that the transfer succeeded, but as I've said in another post it doesn't solve the problem.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Aug 30, 2018 11:20:26 GMT
3 more years on the useless cunts contract😡Mark Hughes you utter wanker
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 11:30:05 GMT
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 11:32:26 GMT
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 11:32:26 GMT
3 more years on the useless cunts contract😡Mark Hughes you utter wanker I believe there are 2 more years on Imbula's contract. There may or may not be an option for an extra year in the contract, the details of which, obviously, none of us knows. If there is that option, would Imbula insist on spending another year in our colours? Logic says no, but if it's a matter of where his next euro's coming from, then the Imbula we all know and love would probably look for his excessive wages to continue for another year. I personally believe that Imbula's career could end when his contract runs out here. He's just made himself impossible to manage, so it's gonna take a lot of good performances before another club is willing to give him another five year contract. He's a pay rebel, but he's not really a bad boy, like Balotelli to compare with one (nor is he anywhere near as good). There have been no stories of disciplinary problems that I recall. Just a huge divide in how he understands his job and how most everybody else does.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 11:33:46 GMT
via mobile
Post by crouchpotato1 on Aug 30, 2018 11:33:46 GMT
3 more years on the useless cunts contract😡Mark Hughes you utter wanker I believe there are 2 more years on Imbula's contract. There may or may not be an option for an extra year in the contract, the details of which, obviously, none of us knows. If there is that option, would Imbula insist on spending another year in our colours? Logic says no, but if it's a matter of where his next euro's coming from, then the Imbula we all know and love would probably look for his excessive wages to continue for another year. I personally believe that Imbula's career could end when his contract runs out here. He's just made himself impossible to manage, so it's gonna take a lot of good performances before another club is willing to give him another five year contract. He's a pay rebel, but he's not really a bad boy, like Balotelli to compare with one (nor is he anywhere near as good). There have been no stories of disciplinary problems that I recall. Just a huge divide in how he understands his job and how most everybody else does.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 11:36:24 GMT
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 30, 2018 11:36:24 GMT
Sorry, when you don't attribute any responsibility to the player for his situation and come up with a number of dubious mitigations for him, that is the very definition of excuse-making. They're not 'logical' - you don't know one way or the other if the club has tried to help him yet have assumed with no grounds to do so whatsoever that they haven't, and haven't suggested he might try and find a course himself. You went on about how he was only 22 and about his wages and how that was part of the issue. That's the 'young and rich' bit for you. If you're saying the other players weren't on the same wavelength as him and it wasn't down to him that he was holding onto the ball too long, you are blaming them, again, by definition. Again, you don't know anything about how Rayo Vallecano set up and are making assumptions. And again, no onus on him to adapt and to at least try to develop some defensive instincts. I'm a follower of Spanish football. I know they are the poor relations in Madrid. Some players are meant to defend and others aren't. Ronaldo never tracked back in Madrid and he was frequently jeered by Real's fans for not doing it. The whistles bothered him, but he was not able to change his game (It's one of the reasons he left for Turin, by no means the most important, but he really could never understand why not everybody loved him as much as he did himself, but that's another story). It might have helped Imbula if he had tried to become SJW, but by the same token, if he had become a headless chicken, he would no longer be Imbula. I actually said he was 21 but I never said he was "young and rich", so don't pin your poor communication skills on me! No, I'm not blaming other players. I'm explaning what happened, or the way I saw it happen. I'd like to criticise MB and MH for not training the team enough to play to Imbula's strengths, but that's something else. It's not my job to attribute blame to Imbula or anyone else. That's your way of thinking, but it's not mine. There was a moment the other day when I thought we might be speaking to each other on a sound level, but I don't like the way you twist my words nor the lies you attribute to me. I'm not going to reply to your next contribution nor am I going to enter discussions with you on any future subject. Being 'the poor relations' doesn't make them necessarily negative in terms of style. Last season in the Segunda only one team scored more goals than them and only five conceded more. Ronaldo wasn't a deep lying central midfielder. He was an attacking player making a significant contribution to the team's forward play. Was Imbula doing this? I haven't twisted a single thing you've said, nor have I lied. I can show you the very posts to which I'm referring if you like? It isn't my fault you can't untangle yourself from your own contradictions.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 11:37:17 GMT
via mobile
Post by pb1863 on Aug 30, 2018 11:37:17 GMT
Whoever upstairs signed him needs loaning out for at least a year
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 11:42:17 GMT
I believe there are 2 more years on Imbula's contract. There may or may not be an option for an extra year in the contract, the details of which, obviously, none of us knows. If there is that option, would Imbula insist on spending another year in our colours? Logic says no, but if it's a matter of where his next euro's coming from, then the Imbula we all know and love would probably look for his excessive wages to continue for another year. I personally believe that Imbula's career could end when his contract runs out here. He's just made himself impossible to manage, so it's gonna take a lot of good performances before another club is willing to give him another five year contract. He's a pay rebel, but he's not really a bad boy, like Balotelli to compare with one (nor is he anywhere near as good). There have been no stories of disciplinary problems that I recall. Just a huge divide in how he understands his job and how most everybody else does. I stand corrected.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 11:44:27 GMT
via mobile
Post by crouchpotato1 on Aug 30, 2018 11:44:27 GMT
No problem mate I’d only just read it myself
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 11:45:58 GMT
via mobile
Post by musik on Aug 30, 2018 11:45:58 GMT
One of the greatest talents Stoke have got for decades. Unfortunately he only showed it in a couple of matches or so ...
Hopefully he succeeds in Rayo Vallecano.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 11:54:48 GMT
I wonder who we will loan him out to next season?
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 12:40:45 GMT
via mobile
Post by terryconroysmagic on Aug 30, 2018 12:40:45 GMT
Really? It's the club's fault he hasn't learned English It's the other players' fault he holds onto the ball too long None of his bad performances should be taken into consideration but his handful of good ones should Vallecano is 'the wrong move for him' Being young and rich meant it was all too much for him You haven't attributed any responsibility to him whatsoever... Those are all logical arguments - you may disagree, I may be wrong - but they're not excuses. And your quotation skills need a little brushing up too! Where have I for instance said "None of his bad performances should be taken into consideration but his handful of good ones should." What I've said is that we need to draw a line in the sand sometimes in order to concentrate on the present and look to the future. I certainly have never described him as "young and rich", you might have done it and then projected it unto me. I do believe Vallecano is the wrong move for him and for Stoke too. He'll be playing in a newly promoted yo yo team. They'll be struggling and he'll be struggling, they'll be playing ultradefensive, and we know he is not a defensive player. And it's bad for us, because we are just prolonging the problem that he is to us until he comes back next summer, still with 2-3 years on his contract, not having developed further The better move would have been to sell him for a nominal fee (enough for us to somewhat save face and little enough that some club could afford him), so we could move on, and he would have a chance to rebuild his career the way he sees fit. As for responsibility I do believe it's a characteristic of the modern day footballer and probably also a lot of other people, one of them POTUS, that it's always someone else's fault. But I never said that it's his team mates' "fault" that he held on too long. I've said they failed to understand his game and didn't make any runs into the pockets of space that he created for them for them to exploit. It's a pretty common problem in football elsewhere too. I think our line of poor communication has just about run its time. Sorry but how do you arrive that "those are all logical arguments...", they are subjective opinion, supposition and hypothesis. In France on loan he was equally poor, was language a factor there, did the players not run into pockets etc. He's an avaricious waster, fact 😉
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 12:51:58 GMT
via mobile
Post by jonnybravo on Aug 30, 2018 12:51:58 GMT
Wonder how much Rayo are paying towards his wages considering their stadium has been closed on safety grounds till October and they only averaged crowds of 8 thousand last season.
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 13:59:06 GMT
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 13:59:06 GMT
Those are all logical arguments - you may disagree, I may be wrong - but they're not excuses. And your quotation skills need a little brushing up too! Where have I for instance said "None of his bad performances should be taken into consideration but his handful of good ones should." What I've said is that we need to draw a line in the sand sometimes in order to concentrate on the present and look to the future. I certainly have never described him as "young and rich", you might have done it and then projected it unto me. I do believe Vallecano is the wrong move for him and for Stoke too. He'll be playing in a newly promoted yo yo team. They'll be struggling and he'll be struggling, they'll be playing ultradefensive, and we know he is not a defensive player. And it's bad for us, because we are just prolonging the problem that he is to us until he comes back next summer, still with 2-3 years on his contract, not having developed further The better move would have been to sell him for a nominal fee (enough for us to somewhat save face and little enough that some club could afford him), so we could move on, and he would have a chance to rebuild his career the way he sees fit. As for responsibility I do believe it's a characteristic of the modern day footballer and probably also a lot of other people, one of them POTUS, that it's always someone else's fault. But I never said that it's his team mates' "fault" that he held on too long. I've said they failed to understand his game and didn't make any runs into the pockets of space that he created for them for them to exploit. It's a pretty common problem in football elsewhere too. I think our line of poor communication has just about run its time. Sorry but how do you arrive that "those are all logical arguments...", they are subjective opinion, supposition and hypothesis. In France on loan he was equally poor, was language a factor there, did the players not run into pockets etc. He's an avaricious waster, fact 😉 Of course everything here is subjective opinion. We are not a press agency with journos employed. Although I did stumble across one or two Toulouse games on satelite, I really don't know much about them. All I can see is that they've struggled for the last few seasons. Struggling teams like ourselves, Rayo, Toulouse, and many others can't really afford to use players whose ability to contribute in the struggle is limited. They're a luxury a struggling team can't afford, because they need to have at least ten men behind the ball (and the one in front is the lone striker), as already stated Imbula is no SJW. Whereas when we signed Imbula we were on the up, and with much going in our favour, it seemed logical that we should continue, and with a number of skill players (also with limited fighting ability) there seemed to be a place for a playmaker in the Hudson mould. No one could know for sure whether it would work out - which makes the outlay highly risky, not to mention not well thought through - but it is safe to say that Imbula did not fit in with the team, in a number of ways, for a number of reasons. There are more reasons than just one man. That is hugely regrettable, but the owner and the management believed in what they saw, and they are the decisionmakers. You're entitled to your opinion, but it is not "fact". And that's a fact!
|
|
|
Imbula
Aug 30, 2018 14:01:34 GMT
via mobile
Post by mattythestokie on Aug 30, 2018 14:01:34 GMT
3 more years on the useless cunts contract😡Mark Hughes you utter wanker Mark Hughes? He will not be the one giving these contracts out
|
|