I haven't got too much of a problem with it as long as it's just a loan and it's not all we end up doing.
Quote from: Toronto Villa on January 13, 2014, 10:52:54 PMQuote from: pauliewalnuts on January 13, 2014, 10:35:52 PMQuote from: Toronto Villa on January 13, 2014, 10:29:16 PMI don't care either way about Holt. As long as it is on 18-24 month contract at the every most. When we could be arsed under Lambert he looked quite effective. the question is can he still be arsed?18-24 months?He's 33 in April. You must be joking.It's hardly outrageous paulie. He's 32, not 36. If gets a short term deal, and 18mths is, then as long as he doesn't get Heskey/Given money it's just not a big deal. And there's no point anyone getting worked up over a rumourEh? You must be kidding.He's 33 in April. A 2 year deal would mean we'd be paying Grant Holt until he is nudging 35. I can't believe anyone would think that wouldn't be too bad.It's not just a rumour, either, Lambert just confirmed it.
Quote from: pauliewalnuts on January 13, 2014, 10:35:52 PMQuote from: Toronto Villa on January 13, 2014, 10:29:16 PMI don't care either way about Holt. As long as it is on 18-24 month contract at the every most. When we could be arsed under Lambert he looked quite effective. the question is can he still be arsed?18-24 months?He's 33 in April. You must be joking.It's hardly outrageous paulie. He's 32, not 36. If gets a short term deal, and 18mths is, then as long as he doesn't get Heskey/Given money it's just not a big deal. And there's no point anyone getting worked up over a rumour
Quote from: Toronto Villa on January 13, 2014, 10:29:16 PMI don't care either way about Holt. As long as it is on 18-24 month contract at the every most. When we could be arsed under Lambert he looked quite effective. the question is can he still be arsed?18-24 months?He's 33 in April. You must be joking.
I don't care either way about Holt. As long as it is on 18-24 month contract at the every most. When we could be arsed under Lambert he looked quite effective. the question is can he still be arsed?
Quote from: pauliewalnuts on January 13, 2014, 10:55:09 PMQuote from: Toronto Villa on January 13, 2014, 10:52:54 PMQuote from: pauliewalnuts on January 13, 2014, 10:35:52 PMQuote from: Toronto Villa on January 13, 2014, 10:29:16 PMI don't care either way about Holt. As long as it is on 18-24 month contract at the every most. When we could be arsed under Lambert he looked quite effective. the question is can he still be arsed?18-24 months?He's 33 in April. You must be joking.It's hardly outrageous paulie. He's 32, not 36. If gets a short term deal, and 18mths is, then as long as he doesn't get Heskey/Given money it's just not a big deal. And there's no point anyone getting worked up over a rumourEh? You must be kidding.He's 33 in April. A 2 year deal would mean we'd be paying Grant Holt until he is nudging 35. I can't believe anyone would think that wouldn't be too bad.It's not just a rumour, either, Lambert just confirmed it.I have no idea where you learned to count. How does giving a 32yr old man a 2yr deal take him past his 35th birthday? He's not signing when turns 33 is he? And the whole age thing is irrelevant. Can he still do it? Does he have the required ability and desire. Gareth Barry is older than Holt and even at his age he is showing immense quality. That's where I have my doubts. But as cover for Kozak it simply isn't a deal to worked up over. He's cover and not the future and quite frankly he offers more than Weimann.
What's depressing is that, even if they had the means, you couldn't even imagine a tinpot outfit like the Noses making a move like this.