collapse collapse

Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.

Follow us on...

Author Topic: Libor Kozak  (Read 237502 times)

Offline saunders_heroes

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15660
  • GM : 28.02.2026
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1140 on: January 04, 2017, 06:56:31 PM »
Massive donkey, another terrible Lambert signing.

Not a terrible player at the time, but do think he was a terrible signing because of the other squad weaknesses and lack of money.

Scored a few goals but other than that I thought his all round play was abysmal. Another dreadful signing who won't be missed.

Online Steve67

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 13847
  • Location: Down south now. Born in Aston.
  • GM : 08.12.2025
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1141 on: January 04, 2017, 08:04:12 PM »
Seven million pounds. Utter shite but hey, Lambert still thinks that he was given little money to spend.

Offline brian green

  • Member
  • Posts: 18357
  • Age: 87
  • Location: Nice France
  • GM : 19.06.2020
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1142 on: January 04, 2017, 08:05:14 PM »
Even ten years ago his leg break was so bad that he would never have played again.  He is a credit to his doctors and himself to even be trying to rebuild his career.  He is now a very limited player but I wish him well whatever his future holds.

Offline oswald funkletrumpet

  • Member
  • Posts: 2157
  • Location: Hayley Green
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1143 on: January 04, 2017, 08:09:54 PM »
Seems like he is going to Opava for a six month loan. We've supposedly denied it but he's been pictured there and confirmed it.


https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/aston-villa-transfer-news-libor

Malandro

  • Guest
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1144 on: January 04, 2017, 08:11:29 PM »
Seven million pounds. Utter shite but hey, Lambert still thinks that he was given little money to spend.

That transfer window period was important in our doom. We were crying out for a Robert Huth/Dann centre back and he bought another forward.

Offline paul_e

  • Member
  • Posts: 37254
  • Age: 45
  • GM : July, 2013
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1145 on: January 04, 2017, 08:23:22 PM »
Even ten years ago his leg break was so bad that he would never have played again.  He is a credit to his doctors and himself to even be trying to rebuild his career.  He is now a very limited player but I wish him well whatever his future holds.

It was, apparently, a very similar break to one that ended Nilis' career.

Offline paul_e

  • Member
  • Posts: 37254
  • Age: 45
  • GM : July, 2013
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1146 on: January 04, 2017, 08:33:05 PM »
Seven million pounds. Utter shite but hey, Lambert still thinks that he was given little money to spend.

That transfer window period was important in our doom. We were crying out for a Robert Huth/Dann centre back and he bought another forward.

I disagree, we really needed a winger or 2 , the 433 with gabby and weimann either side of the beast worked but was limited by the inconsistency of those 2.  No idea who was or wasn't available but some to do the job that Mahrez did for Leicester or Payet did for West Ham last year.

Malandro

  • Guest
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1147 on: January 05, 2017, 01:06:48 AM »
A Christmas hoax by Kozak! Supposedly a Czech tradition.
Still training with us.

Offline aj2k77

  • Member
  • Posts: 11740
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1148 on: January 05, 2017, 10:12:48 AM »
A Christmas hoax on the 4th January? His timing is as poor as his first touch.

Online eamonn

  • Member
  • Posts: 33775
  • Location: Stay in sight of the mainland
  • GM : 26.07.2020
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1149 on: January 05, 2017, 10:44:13 AM »
How long is left on his contract?

Offline aj2k77

  • Member
  • Posts: 11740
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1150 on: January 05, 2017, 10:47:54 AM »
6 months.

Offline chrisw1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10083
  • GM : 21.08.2026
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1151 on: January 05, 2017, 10:51:43 AM »
I don't know why we get worked up about this.  He won't play for us again and really is just a fixed cost to the club that we can't do anything about.  Of course it would be nice to use his wages elsewhere, but really they just need to be written off and we should move on.

Offline PeterWithe

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10781
  • Location: Birmingham.
  • GM : 05.03.2026
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1152 on: January 05, 2017, 11:00:42 AM »
A strange player, he seemed a natural finisher but his all round game was pretty poor and he always looked physically weak. Showed what he was capable of with some fine goals in a game against the Tatters but other than that pretty much forgettable.

Offline OzVilla

  • Member
  • Posts: 7987
  • Location: Sunshine Coast, Australia
  • GM : 16.08.2023
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1153 on: January 05, 2017, 11:17:00 AM »
Seven million pounds. Utter shite but hey, Lambert still thinks that he was given little money to spend.

That transfer window period was important in our doom.

A while back someone listed all of the players Lambert bought that Summer, Kozak, Bennett, El Ahmedi, Bowery etc.  It just showed what a complete chancer he was,  just one shit signing after another.  Idiot!

Offline passitsideways

  • Member
  • Posts: 1243
  • Location: Sydney
Re: Libor Kozak
« Reply #1154 on: January 05, 2017, 11:20:50 AM »
From a monetary and forward-thinking standpoint, I think his signing made sense - we were expecting to get only one more season from Benteke anyway, so spending 6.5 million euros on a replacement capable of scoring somewhere between 10 to 15 league goals in a season as the first-choice was fine (I mean, I'm pretty sure Steven Fletcher went for double that amount after managing a 12 goal season for Wolves), and letting him settle into English football without the added pressure of replacing Benteke was sensible.

The problem was at the time we also desperately needed a forward with real quality who could either play off Benteke or provide goalscoring from out wide, because even back then everyone pretty much agreed that neither Gabby nor Weimann were trustworthy just yet, and so they subsequently proved.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal