Jump to content

Scottish Football predictions 2007/2008


tirvaluk
 Share

Recommended Posts

^^^ And he should do exactly as he sees fit, good on him.

 

Keeping a player against their will is hardly good for moral is it? That is why it has become commonly accepted good practice to let players go. I gave two examples which were AGAINST the wishes of Rangers. Obviously where large sums of cash are involved, the clubs still have to come to a fair agreement.

 

I would expect a last minute deal to be done for Naismith, a slump in his form next season is no good for anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally don't believe it's good for the player's morale - but what is the club supposed to do?

Wait for the first derisory offer to come in from one of the Old Firm then bend over and offer the Vaseline?

By all accounts Rangers have made 4 offers for Naismith and STILL haven't met Kilmarnock's valuation.....says a lot about how they do business.

Now we've got the impartial (ha ha) BBC reporting how the poor wee laddie's health is suffering.

Sellik aren't that much better if you cast your mind back to Paul Hartley's transfer saga.

The two examples you quoted....do you really think Rangers wanted to keep them that much?

As for Naismith's form, unless he's playing for Hearts (now, that WOULD be a surprise :wink: ) I don't really mind if he has a slump....in fact if he does become a Hun I'd be delighted for him to have a slump in form :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got to disagree with Scott MacDonald and Chris Killen making [Celtic] stronger - I wouldn't want them at Aberdeen!

I officially redact this statement - We've just resigned Derek Young. :cry:

 

ha ha aberdeen would definitely want mcdonald and killen they were 2nd and 3rd top scorers in the league with 14 and 13 goals :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally don't believe it's good for the player's morale - but what is the club supposed to do?

 

The only thing that benefits all parties, with the exception of third parties: sell.

 

Wait for the first derisory offer to come in from one of the Old Firm then bend over and offer the Vaseline?

I'm sure hardened shafters like the Gers would use the more professional K-Y :shock: :wink:

 

By all accounts Rangers have made 4 offers for Naismith and STILL haven't met Kilmarnock's valuation.....says a lot about how they do business.

Number 1 rule of selling is to set the asking price higher than what you actually want to get. Number 1 rule of buying is to not pay the asking price. The chairmen are both old enough and ugly enough to know how to negotiate.

 

The two examples you quoted....do you really think Rangers wanted to keep them that much?

 

Boumsong was practically seen as a God, and while he might not have deserved that level of praise, he was still one of our best players at that time. Clement was one of our best players by far when he played last year, he manged that despite injuries, the fact he is only 20 (ish) and that it was his first year at the club. To try and (roughly) answer your question, I firmly believe that the over-ridding factor in deciding to sell the players was the fact that they wanted to leave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(*** mod edit - excess quoting removed ***)

I firmly believe that the over-ridding factor in deciding to sell the players was the fact that they wanted to leave

Nothing at all to do with the fact that Newcastle manager Graeme Souness(at the time until he was found out) offered £8 million for a player Rangers picked up for free....????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marooned, it's fairly commonly accepted that when a player wants away he should be let go. We had to do that recently with Clement, and, dare I say it, in the past with Boumsong. Commonly accepted outside Tyncastles "contractual chains" style regime that is.

 

Commonly accepted????

By whom??

Those whom it suits....like the Old Firm who have the media doing much of their tapping for them?

And have done for as long as I can remember.

If the player was happy enough to sign a 4-year contract then he should be aware enough to realise what that means.

 

 

 

like the Old Firm who have the media doing much of their tapping for them?
The day the Laptop Loyal, aka the Scottish media do Celtic any favours will be the day we see pink elephants floating past the window.

 

MiM, please don't use the media-inspired term "Old Firm" as a means of suggesting we're two sides of the same coin. We're not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I firmly believe that the over-ridding factor in deciding to sell the players was the fact that they wanted to leave

Nothing at all to do with the fact that Newcastle manager Graeme Souness(at the time until he was found out) offered £8 million for a player Rangers picked up for free....????

 

"over-ridding factor", selling your best players is never something you want to do, regardless of their value. You can't buy wins in the SPL.

 

With regards to "If the player was happy enough to sign a 4-year contract then he should be aware enough to realise what that means." I agree. Do you know what it means to dream of playing for Rangers? (You may wish to substitute another team, or entire dream, to get my point :wink: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Hearts should have just meekly accepted Sellik's £250k offer for Paul Hartley and let him join his bhoyhood heroes - as urged by the likes of Hugh Kheevins et al in one of their many big bad Vlad rants?

Or would you agree that it was good business by Romanov to keep Hartley, get a decent Cup semi-final out of him(right enough, he was pretty crap in the final) and CL qualification, then punt him to Sellik when his form was already on the wane for a considerably more substantial £1.2M?

I think you'll find there's more than enough Sellik-minded crap written in the press - after all....they've got their readership to pander to.

And as just one example of the Old Firm weakening Scottish opposition by tapping their players via the media, in this case to the extent that the club never received a ha'pny for developing his talent, I offer Derek Riordan - fantastic for a relatively poor Hibs side, virtually anonymous in Glasgow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^ I can only refer you to the comments I made earlier about age, uglyness and negotiation. Second rule of selling: don't accept the first offer :wink:

 

Regarding Derek Riordan, why is it Celtics fault he sits on the bench? He signed a contract, he knew what he was doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh please, junior, have some sense of reality.

The days of one-club players, playing for the club they've always supported are well and truly in the sepia-tinted past.

You surely don't believe all that tabloidesque pish about 'Oh, aye. Ah've aye dreamed o' playin' fer the Gers. An' tha', ken whit ah mean?' This is the SPL, not Hollywood.

 

As regards the 4-year contract - you can bet Naismith wouldn't have been in any hurry to break it if he'd suffered a career-ending injury a week after signing it. That's what pees me off so much about these contracts.

4 years is 4 years - UEFA have continually pandered to the bigger nations and bigger clubs to make sure they're happy and cojones to the rest of 'em.

 

I guess I can introduce the third rule of selling then....if the Old Firm come knocking you can guarantee the media will do all they can to unsettle the player and castigate the holding club, whoever it happens to be.

 

And for Derek Riordan - who else is to blame for him sitting on the bench? He can't pick himself - only the wee ginger Hobbit and, by implication, Sellik can do that.

My point, which appears to have eluded you, was that he was just one more example of the Old Firm taking a player who wasn't going to be a 1st team starter from a club where he was a regular, valued member of the side. I'm not all that bothered about the fact that he doesn't get a regular game as I believe he'd be a surefire hit for them.

But, hey, Strachan knows what he's doing, eh?

Hartley.... :lol: Pressley.... :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being a Dons fan I am not too preturbed by the signings that Rangers have made. Roy 'Butter Fingers' Carroll is not exactly going to strenghen the goalkeeping situation. I think I would rather have Jamie Langfield which is saying something! Furthermore, £2.5m for Lee McCulloch is an absolute joke when you consider Russell Anderson, a consistent performer, went to Sunderland for £1m.

 

Celtic, despite having good individuals, are not worrying me too much either. I think Strachan is suffering from Sounessitis by buying a bunch of randoms rather than bringing in players to form a team. I am perhaps biased, but with limited resources Jimmy Calderwood does a very good job at moulding a team with a shoestring budget.

 

Up the Dons!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...This is the SPL, not Hollywood.

 

I think to belittle another persons dreams is a bit harsh tbh. I personally, generally think very little of the people or products of Hollywood, but a dream to get there is as real as any. Who knows what I'd think if I grew up in Govan heights.

 

As regards the 4-year contract - you can bet Naismith wouldn't have been in any hurry to break it if he'd suffered a career-ending injury a week after signing it...

 

What does that have to do with it?

 

...4 years is 4 years...

 

So would you abolish all transfers where a player is mid-contract?

 

I guess I can introduce the third rule of selling then....if the Old Firm come knocking you can guarantee the media will do all they can to unsettle the player and castigate the holding club...

 

I'll take your word for it that, that is what happens. The solution to having a shucks press, is not reading their shucks.

 

And for Derek Riordan - who else is to blame for him sitting on the bench? He can't pick himself - only the wee ginger Hobbit and, by implication, Sellik can do that.

My point, which appears to have eluded you, was that he was just one more example of the Old Firm taking a player who wasn't going to be a 1st team starter from a club where he was a regular, valued member of the side...

 

The old firm (the big nasties that they are :roll:) will do what is best for them, and I think that is quite right, including if that means signing a player for the bench.

 

Regards him not getting a game, do you think that if he was good enough for the first team the manager would leave him out? That would be daft, it's up to him to play well enough. He also knew what contract he signed, and I'd be a bit :shock: if it had automatic selection written into it.

 

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...