Quote from: Dave on August 22, 2010, 10:23:41 PMQuote from: hilts_coolerking on August 22, 2010, 10:21:33 PMQuote from: pauliewalnuts on August 22, 2010, 10:20:15 PMI wonder whether the main question with Curtis isn't if he's not being played to save money, but why we spent 9.5m on him in the first place.At various times I've thought "yes, I can see something in him, there's a good player there", but far more frequently I've found myself thinking that he got it spot on himself, and he really is a pub player.Christ was it really that much? I must have blocked that out. I seem to remember it was £8m.Still more than we should have paid considering what we got.May have been 8, then, but as you say, 8 or 9.5 isn't the main issue, we should have got a lot more for 8m
Quote from: hilts_coolerking on August 22, 2010, 10:21:33 PMQuote from: pauliewalnuts on August 22, 2010, 10:20:15 PMI wonder whether the main question with Curtis isn't if he's not being played to save money, but why we spent 9.5m on him in the first place.At various times I've thought "yes, I can see something in him, there's a good player there", but far more frequently I've found myself thinking that he got it spot on himself, and he really is a pub player.Christ was it really that much? I must have blocked that out. I seem to remember it was £8m.Still more than we should have paid considering what we got.
Quote from: pauliewalnuts on August 22, 2010, 10:20:15 PMI wonder whether the main question with Curtis isn't if he's not being played to save money, but why we spent 9.5m on him in the first place.At various times I've thought "yes, I can see something in him, there's a good player there", but far more frequently I've found myself thinking that he got it spot on himself, and he really is a pub player.Christ was it really that much? I must have blocked that out.
I wonder whether the main question with Curtis isn't if he's not being played to save money, but why we spent 9.5m on him in the first place.At various times I've thought "yes, I can see something in him, there's a good player there", but far more frequently I've found myself thinking that he got it spot on himself, and he really is a pub player.
Lets be honest, he's shit. He wouldn't have mad a blind bit of difference today.
How is Davies shit? What makes him 'shit'? He is our most athletic defender with the best pyshical attributes. I think we've got a good bunch of central defenders who we can rely on equally.
Quote from: pauliewalnuts on August 22, 2010, 10:26:44 PMQuote from: Dave on August 22, 2010, 10:23:41 PMQuote from: hilts_coolerking on August 22, 2010, 10:21:33 PMQuote from: pauliewalnuts on August 22, 2010, 10:20:15 PMI wonder whether the main question with Curtis isn't if he's not being played to save money, but why we spent 9.5m on him in the first place.At various times I've thought "yes, I can see something in him, there's a good player there", but far more frequently I've found myself thinking that he got it spot on himself, and he really is a pub player.Christ was it really that much? I must have blocked that out. I seem to remember it was £8m.Still more than we should have paid considering what we got.May have been 8, then, but as you say, 8 or 9.5 isn't the main issue, we should have got a lot more for 8mI thought it was £8million transfer fee, but we paid £2million to loan him for the season before hand too?
Quote from: The Situation on August 22, 2010, 11:08:44 PMHow is Davies shit? What makes him 'shit'? He is our most athletic defender with the best pyshical attributes. I think we've got a good bunch of central defenders who we can rely on equally.- He is unbelievably clumsy and ungainly with the ball.- He gets beaten in the air very easily.- He gets sucked out of position.- He drops a ricket in the majority of gamesI could go on.
Quote from: boboonthecorner on August 22, 2010, 10:17:35 PMQuote from: bob on August 22, 2010, 09:26:24 PMQuote from: Oscar Arce on August 22, 2010, 09:20:44 PMWith all due respect what the fuck do you know from Toronto Canada ? I have seen some shite over the last 45 years but i have'nt seen chairmen pick teams to save money and here in Birmingham, England i am really hurting right now so if it's correct as some are implying that Lerner has told the manager not to pick Curtis Davies, clearly a better player for today's situation that Clark, it's a disgrace.You're a disgrace.I agree with you Oscar, don't listen to them. Davies has been stuck on 49 games for far too long now. Something is clearly not quite right.He started a game on Thursday, so I don't see how he's been stuck on 49 games for very long.Am I missing something (genuine question)?
Quote from: bob on August 22, 2010, 09:26:24 PMQuote from: Oscar Arce on August 22, 2010, 09:20:44 PMWith all due respect what the fuck do you know from Toronto Canada ? I have seen some shite over the last 45 years but i have'nt seen chairmen pick teams to save money and here in Birmingham, England i am really hurting right now so if it's correct as some are implying that Lerner has told the manager not to pick Curtis Davies, clearly a better player for today's situation that Clark, it's a disgrace.You're a disgrace.I agree with you Oscar, don't listen to them. Davies has been stuck on 49 games for far too long now. Something is clearly not quite right.
Quote from: Oscar Arce on August 22, 2010, 09:20:44 PMWith all due respect what the fuck do you know from Toronto Canada ? I have seen some shite over the last 45 years but i have'nt seen chairmen pick teams to save money and here in Birmingham, England i am really hurting right now so if it's correct as some are implying that Lerner has told the manager not to pick Curtis Davies, clearly a better player for today's situation that Clark, it's a disgrace.You're a disgrace.
With all due respect what the fuck do you know from Toronto Canada ? I have seen some shite over the last 45 years but i have'nt seen chairmen pick teams to save money and here in Birmingham, England i am really hurting right now so if it's correct as some are implying that Lerner has told the manager not to pick Curtis Davies, clearly a better player for today's situation that Clark, it's a disgrace.
Quote from: TheSandman on August 22, 2010, 11:11:14 PMQuote from: The Situation on August 22, 2010, 11:08:44 PMHow is Davies shit? What makes him 'shit'? He is our most athletic defender with the best pyshical attributes. I think we've got a good bunch of central defenders who we can rely on equally.- He is unbelievably clumsy and ungainly with the ball.- He gets beaten in the air very easily.- He gets sucked out of position.- He drops a ricket in the majority of gamesI could go on.It annoys me when people make up things saying how bad a player is only because they don't like him.1. Davies on the ball is great... I have no idea what you're saying here.2. Last time he played for us (Vienna away) he was heading everything and covering a lot for Clark's mistakes. 3. What defender doesn't get sucked out of position from time-to-time? You see it every week whether it be Terry or Bramble.4. I can't remember his last 'ricket'. I can name more 'rickets' Dunne has dropped... significant 'rickets' too. CC Final anyone?Point is, Davies has been in and out with injuries... when he is healthy and playing again, you'll see the best of him just like when he had a formidable partnership with Laursen. Funny how no-one called him 'shit' then...