January Transfer Speculation (or lack of) Thread

[ozzjim]

He is not here to sit on the bench for the cost though is he?

So where is he going to play? Up with Bent and drop Ireland? Out left and drop Gabby? Just not sure where he fit, especially where we are struggling to get Gabby and Bent playing well in the same side.

[tarzansbrother]

He is not here to sit on the bench for the cost though is he?

So where is he going to play? Up with Bent and drop Ireland? Out left and drop Gabby? Just not sure where he fit, especially where we are struggling to get Gabby and Bent playing well in the same side.

This is my fear. Otherwise we are paying big money for some kind of morale booster in the dressing room. No doubt he will be arranging a piss up in Ireland like he did at Spurs.

[hawkeye]

I think peope are upset by the Robbie Keane deal is because it smacks of amuterism. We dont need a past it centre forward who failed at the PL level for 2 years before going for the soft  money option (where he has not exactly been pulling up trees except when he is counting) , but the people running the club probably believe that this deal will somehow apppease the fans. Lack of real investment and ambition = Robbie Keane on loan.

For two months. Why anyone can get so worked up about it is beyond me.

You said the same about Pires, its about the message the club are sending out "let them eat cake" its just papering over the cracks, we have the keystone cops playing at the back, if they really wanted or understood how to make the current team more competitive, they would address this problem, but no we get Robbie Keane on loan- Brilliant

[pauliewalnuts]

I'm not worked out or overly bothered about the fact it is Robbie Keane.

It is what it says about our mid-long term ambitions that worries me.

[dave.woodhall]

I think peope are upset by the Robbie Keane deal is because it smacks of amuterism. We dont need a past it centre forward who failed at the PL level for 2 years before going for the soft  money option (where he has not exactly been pulling up trees except when he is counting) , but the people running the club probably believe that this deal will somehow apppease the fans. Lack of real investment and ambition = Robbie Keane on loan.

For two months. Why anyone can get so worked up about it is beyond me.

You said the same about Pires, its about the message the club are sending out "let them eat cake" its just papering over the cracks, we have the keystone cops playing at the back, if they really wanted or understood how to make the current team more competitive, they would address this problem, but no we get Robbie Keane on loan- Brilliant

I said the same about Pires, although the situation was different. We were desperate for bodies at the time and he was just about the only one available. He came, he left. Nothing to get worked up about.

[JUAN PABLO]

I think peope are upset by the Robbie Keane deal is because it smacks of amuterism. We dont need a past it centre forward who failed at the PL level for 2 years before going for the soft  money option (where he has not exactly been pulling up trees except when he is counting) , but the people running the club probably believe that this deal will somehow apppease the fans. Lack of real investment and ambition = Robbie Keane on loan.

bit like Scholes really

[hawkeye]

I'm not worked out or overly bothered about the fact it is Robbie Keane.

It is what it says about our mid-long term ambitions that worries me.

Same here mate, it does not make any sense

[hawkeye]

I think peope are upset by the Robbie Keane deal is because it smacks of amuterism. We dont need a past it centre forward who failed at the PL level for 2 years before going for the soft  money option (where he has not exactly been pulling up trees except when he is counting) , but the people running the club probably believe that this deal will somehow apppease the fans. Lack of real investment and ambition = Robbie Keane on loan.

bit like Scholes really

not really, Scholes has continued to train at Carrington, he is an ex player who has signed for the rest of the season, no comparison

[Eigentor]

If we're confident that we won't go down, and Big Eck's job is to introduce the youngsters to the first team, then there is little point in bringing in Robbie Keane; he's only impact would be to block the younger players from getting first team action.

[ozzjim]

I agree with the last post. I would sooner see us play 1 up with Bannan and Gardner playing in behind to get them time on the pitch and experience.

[olaftab]

Again no point in making any signings in Jan for 3 reasons:
1. You pay too much  for mediocre
2. Eck needs to get the best out of current crop so that we can trust  him to spend money wisely
3. Give our youth a chance

[hawkeye]

I think peope are upset by the Robbie Keane deal is because it smacks of amuterism. We dont need a past it centre forward who failed at the PL level for 2 years before going for the soft  money option (where he has not exactly been pulling up trees except when he is counting) , but the people running the club probably believe that this deal will somehow apppease the fans. Lack of real investment and ambition = Robbie Keane on loan.

For two months. Why anyone can get so worked up about it is beyond me.

You said the same about Pires, its about the message the club are sending out "let them eat cake" its just papering over the cracks, we have the keystone cops playing at the back, if they really wanted or understood how to make the current team more competitive, they would address this problem, but no we get Robbie Keane on loan- Brilliant

I said the same about Pires, although the situation was different. We were desperate for bodies at the time and he was just about the only one available. He came, he left. Nothing to get worked up about.

except as with Pires the Manager felt duty bound to play him, he came on against Wolves and lost us the game and was an embaressment when he did play.

[PeterWithesShin]

My problem with Keane is the cost. Assuming the figures talked about are correct, why, when we seem to have so little money are we spending on a player who will be here for 2 months? Put the money towards a longterm signing, even if it means not spending until the summer.

[dave.woodhall]

I think peope are upset by the Robbie Keane deal is because it smacks of amuterism. We dont need a past it centre forward who failed at the PL level for 2 years before going for the soft  money option (where he has not exactly been pulling up trees except when he is counting) , but the people running the club probably believe that this deal will somehow apppease the fans. Lack of real investment and ambition = Robbie Keane on loan.

For two months. Why anyone can get so worked up about it is beyond me.

You said the same about Pires, its about the message the club are sending out "let them eat cake" its just papering over the cracks, we have the keystone cops playing at the back, if they really wanted or understood how to make the current team more competitive, they would address this problem, but no we get Robbie Keane on loan- Brilliant

I said the same about Pires, although the situation was different. We were desperate for bodies at the time and he was just about the only one available. He came, he left. Nothing to get worked up about.

except as with Pires the Manager felt duty bound to play him, he came on against Wolves and lost us the game and was an embaressment when he did play.

Of course he was. On for half an hour in a match we were already losing. I fail to see how that 'lost us the game'

[Risso]

Again no point in making any signings in Jan for 3 reasons:
1. You pay too much  for mediocre
2. Eck needs to get the best out of current crop so that we can trust  him to spend money wisely
3. Give our youth a chance

We haven't really got any youth who can play left back though have we?