The9 Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 Jim Solbakken, Forren's representative directly quoted mentioning that he and Forren were told by the club that he was signed for next season, as we've heard a few times from various sources previously. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/10472392._/? Of course, it could just be the agent saving face, but then we'll know that if he isn't in the team in August anyway. It's an interesting policy though...
Saint Charlie Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 Agent has already said so before and it makes sense considering his lack of competitive action and the standard of the Prem. Big pre season for him.
brmbrm Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 "Solbakken revealed that, because Norway’s top division had finished its season in November last year, it was agreed at the time of Forren’s arrival that he was being signed with a view to next season, rather than the one just finished." Ughhhh??? November, and he can't play before May because he's 'going on holiday' or something?
SuperSAINT Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 begs the question why not blood him in the last game? Indeed. We will soon find out if this all true or not.
Olallana Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 begs the question why not blood him in the last game? Not that I think he would´ve played anyway but he did pick up a smaller injury during last weeks training before that game.
Matthew Le God Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 begs the question why not blood him in the last game? The £5m game?
Sour Mash Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 The £5m game? How was it anymore of a "£5m" game than many others this season and next? Why was this policy never announced when he signed? Why did he say in all his interviews when he signed that he was fit, ready to play and looking forward to it. How does it suit a player not playing a competitive game for 9 months?
Appy Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 The £5m game? What a dreadful response, the whole season had a bearing on us finishing where we did, not a single game.
Matthew Le God Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 begs the question why not blood him in the last game? The £5m game? How was it anymore of a "£5m" game than many others this season and next? What a dreadful response, the whole season had a bearing on us finishing where we did, not a single game. My point was that even though it was the last game of season it still had something significant riding on it. Not that it was the only game we played with something significant riding on it.
Avenue Saint Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 What a dreadful response, the whole season had a bearing on us finishing where we did, not a single game. Yet the outcome of one game presented the opportunity of a swing of £5m potentially!
Whitey Grandad Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 What a dreadful response, the whole season had a bearing on us finishing where we did, not a single game. Not that dreadful. After the previous 37 games had been played, winning the last one could have been worth a lot of money.
Appy Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 Not that dreadful. After the previous 37 games had been played, winning the last one could have been worth a lot of money. I meant the manner of his post, not the point he was trying to make, as we all knew it.
Whitey Grandad Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 I meant the manner of his post, not the point he was trying to make, as we all knew it. Fair enough, but I think it's a valid point.
Monk Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 As pointed out before, Forren was not to be played as MP has a partner lined up.
aintforever Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 That excuse is just b*ll****, it doesn't take that long to get fit. He hasn't played because he is not good enough to get in the side - it's as simple as that.
Hedgehog Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 That excuse is just b*ll****, it doesn't take that long to get fit. He hasn't played because he is not good enough to get in the side - it's as simple as that. Whilst I tend to agree with you, but we don't know what his injury was and how long such an injury takes to heal. Broken leg 6 months plus? But then again if he had such an injury that he couldn't recover from until next season why did we buy him? Was he such a bargain, and although we looked the gift horse in the mouth, we thought his problem was just a filling required, and not an extraction from the club!
aintforever Posted 8 June, 2013 Posted 8 June, 2013 Whilst I tend to agree with you, but we don't know what his injury was and how long such an injury takes to heal. Broken leg 6 months plus? But then again if he had such an injury that he couldn't recover from until next season why did we buy him? Was he such a bargain, and although we looked the gift horse in the mouth, we thought his problem was just a filling required, and not an extraction from the club! I'm not sure he was ever injured. If he was that is fair enough but the idea that it takes 5 months to get over a holiday is bizarre. No club fighting relegation would spend £3.5mill on a player just to use the next season.
The9 Posted 9 June, 2013 Author Posted 9 June, 2013 How was it anymore of a "£5m" game than many others this season and next? Why was this policy never announced when he signed? Why did he say in all his interviews when he signed that he was fit, ready to play and looking forward to it. How does it suit a player not playing a competitive game for 9 months? He didn't, he said in a couple of interviews that he wasn't expecting to play...
The Kraken Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 Makes sense. If you're tracking a player and someone else looks set to sign him, surely it's good to secure him even if you don't think he'll be ready for a few months. Glad the club thinks about the next few years rather than the next few months like many fans. Yes Adrian. It definitely "makes sense". There's no other reason for signing an international player for £3.5M and deeming him not good enough to play instead of Calamity Hooiveld. The signing without any doubt definitely "makes sense". Thankfully the club takes a similar long term planning policy as an up-your-own-backside-thinking-individual such as yourself, and cannot see any fault with it. Like you say, it totally "makes sense" to sign an international player of 25 years age, and not play him. Not even for one minute of the season. It makes sense to do that. Of course it does. A 25 year old WANTS to be on the bench. I'm glad the club thinks that, and hopefully for the next few years, and not the next few months like most fans. What do they know, eh?? Ha ha ha. Count me in with you, Aids. It makes sense.
Batman Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 Yes Adrian. It definitely "makes sense". There's no other reason for signing an international player for £3.5M and deeming him not good enough to play instead of Calamity Hooiveld. The signing without any doubt definitely "makes sense". Thankfully the club takes a similar long term planning policy as an up-your-own-backside-thinking-individual such as yourself, and cannot see any fault with it. Like you say, it totally "makes sense" to sign an international player of 25 years age, and not play him. Not even for one minute of the season. It makes sense to do that. Of course it does. A 25 year old WANTS to be on the bench. I'm glad the club thinks that, and hopefully for the next few years, and not the next few months like most fans. What do they know, eh?? Ha ha ha. Count me in with you, Aids. It makes sense. Quite sarcy, not like you at all
david in sweden Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 Jim Solbakken, Forren's representative directly quoted mentioning that he and Forren were told by the club that he was signed for next season, as we've heard a few times from various sources previously. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/10472392._/? Of course, it could just be the agent saving face, but then we'll know that if he isn't in the team in August anyway. It's an interesting policy though... there is a LOT of difference between the standards of the Norwegian League and The Prem...even if he was a top player ..there was no way he was going to walk into our first team. So maybe not so surprising then, whatever happened to the phrase ..." one for the future ?"
david in sweden Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 That excuse is just b*ll****, it doesn't take that long to get fit. He hasn't played because he is not good enough to get in the side - it's as simple as that. I agree with that part...but he did pick up a knock in training sometime in the Spring, if I recall correctly(?) but was selected for the bench on 7 occasions... however, we did enough to win points in 5 of those 7 games... ......the two games we lost were Spurs away (when we conceded in the 86th minute)......and WBA ..when, to be fair ...half the team could have been subbed. - and we still wouldn't have won ! . perhaps it's just down to the fact that MP didn't feel he needed to use him?
Gingeletiss Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 there is a LOT of difference between the standards of the Norwegian League and The Prem...even if he was a top player ..there was no way he was going to walk into our first team. So maybe not so surprising then, whatever happened to the phrase ..." one for the future ?" Yet they trounced our under 21's........................
CB Fry Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 Makes sense. If you're tracking a player and someone else looks set to sign him, surely it's good to secure him even if you don't think he'll be ready for a few months. Glad the club thinks about the next few years rather than the next few months like many fans. Say we spend £30m on five new players this summer and not one of them plays a single minute of a single match until February. Would that still "make sense" to you?
david in sweden Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 Yet they trounced our under 21's........................ ...Are you're suggesting that our U21 side is a good squad ? Clyne has played more Prem.games than most of them put together....... (joke of the week, surely ?)
Gingeletiss Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 ...Are you're suggesting that our U21 side is a good squad ? Clyne has played more Prem.games than most of them put together....... (joke of the week, surely ?) No, we were sh1te, as we could all see, but that was down more to the manager, than the players. Of course the standards of English premiership football is better than that of Norway, but let's not be fooled into thinking that is down to 'English' players! there have been many good Norwegian players...note I say good, not world class, but then again, the same could be said of English players at the mo.
Turkish Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 there is a LOT of difference between the standards of the Norwegian League and The Prem...even if he was a top player ..there was no way he was going to walk into our first team. So maybe not so surprising then, whatever happened to the phrase ..." one for the future ?" He's 25 and a full international, if that isn't 'one for the present' then please explain what is.
pap Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 He's 25 and a full international, if that isn't 'one for the present' then please explain what is. 27/28 and playing for a country that has more people to choose from? Norway has got the same population as the Republic of Ireland ( probs a bit less ). Why are the likes of Everton signing up people like Seamus Coleman ( 24, full international with ROI ) for five and a half years?
CB Fry Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 27/28 and playing for a country that has more people to choose from? Norway has got the same population as the Republic of Ireland ( probs a bit less ). Why are the likes of Everton signing up people like Seamus Coleman ( 24, full international with ROI ) for five and a half years? Signed by Everton at 21, and now the same age as Forren but has played pretty regularly for Everton for a couple of seasons now? Not sure there is any similarity whatsoever. But then you are a mentalist.
pap Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 Signed by Everton at 21, and now the same age as Forren but has played pretty regularly for Everton for a couple of seasons now? Not sure there is any similarity whatsoever. But then you are a mentalist. Signed up for 5 1/2 year extension jan 2012. Hasn't really featured for Everton since 2010 - been playing his football for Blackpool. Fact check, CB?
Turkish Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 Signed up for 5 1/2 year extension jan 2012. Hasn't really featured for Everton since 2010 - been playing his football for Blackpool. Fact check, CB? Are you sure pappy? He was on loan At Blackpool in 2009 and played 9 timea and has played 88 games for Everton since.
Sour Mash Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 He didn't, he said in a couple of interviews that he wasn't expecting to play... No, if you watched his interviews on Saints player after he signed he said he was fit to play and excited about potentially making his debut at Old Trafford. Not a hint of not playing for 7 months.
pap Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 Are you sure pappy? He was on loan At Blackpool in 2009 and played 9 timea and has played 88 games for Everton since. Ah, might be my bad. Says he has played 81 games in total from 2009 onwards with Blackpool in between. Potentially crap example, but the general point is that "full international" isn't a term that can be bandied about as if it's equal. Full Spanish international not making the team, such as with Casillas at Real Madrid, is one thing. Full Norwegian international from Norway is something else. And yeah, I acknowledge that there are anomalies like Ibra who seem to sparkle in comparison with their international team mates, but generally, a full international from a big nation is likely to be better quality than full international from a smaller one - something that has been borne out by the results of major international tournaments.
CB Fry Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 Signed up for 5 1/2 year extension jan 2012. Hasn't really featured for Everton since 2010 - been playing his football for Blackpool. Fact check, CB? Including coming on as sub, just the one hundred first team appearance for top eight Premier League Everton. But yes, barely in the team in the season just gone with a paltry 40 appearance with a month oug with a hamstring injury. (Jesus I feel like MLG.) I guess the facts I am looking at is government leaked false flag information. You know the truth, dontcha Papster?
Turkish Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 Ah, might be my bad. Says he has played 81 games in total from 2009 onwards with Blackpool in between. Potentially crap example, but the general point is that "full international" isn't a term that can be bandied about as if it's equal. Full Spanish international not making the team, such as with Casillas at Real Madrid, is one thing. Full Norwegian international from Norway is something else. And yeah, I acknowledge that there are anomalies like Ibra who seem to sparkle in comparison with their international team mates, but generally, a full international from a big nation is likely to be better quality than full international from a smaller one - something that has been borne out by the results of major international tournaments. He wasn't a full international when he joined Everton either! Didn't make his ROI debut until 2011. Anyway, its not like Norway is some footballing backwater with a population of 7000 and all league games are played on gravl pitches. his central defensive partner for Norway is Brende Hangeland, he signed for Fulham from the Danish league, hardly La Liga, he was a year older and 26, but roughly similar age to Forren, he was a full international and he signed for Fulham in the January transfer window. This is where the similarity ends though as Fulham are obviously behind us and didn't have the brilliant strategy of signing players and not using them for 9 months, which according to some 'makes sense' he actually made his debut 11 days after signing and was man of the match (according to Wiki). He's a massive player for them and I think most people would rate him on of the best defenders in the premier league, I wonder how much better the transfer could have gone if Fulham had signed him for the following season and not played him for almost a year?
pap Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 Including coming on as sub, just the one hundred first team appearance for top eight Premier League Everton. But yes, barely in the team in the season just gone with a paltry 40 appearance with a month oug with a hamstring injury. (Jesus I feel like MLG.) I guess the facts I am looking at is government leaked false flag information. You know the truth, dontcha Papster? Y'see, if you'd looked at the post above there CB, you'd have seen me already admit my mistake. It's called humility, matey Do continue wasting everyone's time, though.
aintforever Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 I agree with that part...but he did pick up a knock in training sometime in the Spring, if I recall correctly(?) but was selected for the bench on 7 occasions... however, we did enough to win points in 5 of those 7 games... ......the two games we lost were Spurs away (when we conceded in the 86th minute)......and WBA ..when, to be fair ...half the team could have been subbed. - and we still wouldn't have won ! . perhaps it's just down to the fact that MP didn't feel he needed to use him? If he was better than Jos, Fonte or Yoshida of course he would have used him. Managers pick their best players. The fact that the Norwegian season ended last November and he had a nice holiday afterwards is no reason why he wouldn't play in March or April. If anything he should be fresher and raring to go.
pap Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 He wasn't a full international when he joined Everton either! Didn't make his ROI debut until 2011. Anyway, its not like Norway is some footballing backwater with a population of 7000 and all league games are played on gravl pitches. his central defensive partner for Norway is Brende Hangeland, he signed for Fulham from the Danish league, hardly La Liga, he was a year older and 26, but roughly similar age to Forren, he was a full international and he signed for Fulham in the January transfer window. This is where the similarity ends though as Fulham are obviously behind us and didn't have the brilliant strategy of signing players and not using them for 9 months, which according to some 'makes sense' he actually made his debut 11 days after signing and was man of the match (according to Wiki). He's a massive player for them and I think most people would rate him on of the best defenders in the premier league, I wonder how much better the transfer could have gone if Fulham had signed him for the following season and not played him for almost a year? Norway is a country of 5m people. To your point, they do better than most countries of a similar size at qualifying for international tournaments, if not very fun to watch once there. As for why Forren hasn't played this year? Only people in the club will know that. Worst case scenario; he's a load of crap on a big contract that'll siphon money from the coffers. Best case scenario; wasn't ready for the cut and thrust of a relegation dogfight / needed hols.
Turkish Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 (edited) Norway is a country of 5m people. To your point, they do better than most countries of a similar size at qualifying for international tournaments, if not very fun to watch once there. As for why Forren hasn't played this year? Only people in the club will know that. Worst case scenario; he's a load of crap on a big contract that'll siphon money from the coffers. Best case scenario; wasn't ready for the cut and thrust of a relegation dogfight / needed hols. I don't see what population has got to do with it. Uruguays population is smaller than that but it hasn't stopped Ramirez playing. Edited 9 June, 2013 by Turkish
Chez Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 The £5m game? the first game he plays next season might be even more important. Premiership survival could depend on the result. For me it was Jos' good form that kept him out of the side, but seeing as some on here descrobe him as "calamity Jos" you have to ask how good is Forren? Having seen nothing of him I have no idea. He doesn't look the biggest, which is a slight concern, but surely he is better than Yoshida.
pap Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 I don't see what population has got to do with it. Uruguays population is smaller than that but it hasn't stopped Ramirez playing. It's not the only factor, otherwise China would be perpetual world champions. However when nations do care about football and have a strong league, population does help. International football teams can only pick from their own nationals.
for_heaven's_Saint Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 As pointed out before, Forren was not to be played as MP has a partner lined up. What do you mean? MP has a centre back pairing in mind that includes Forren and doesn't want him to play until he has both?
Monk Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 That excuse is just b*ll****, it doesn't take that long to get fit. He hasn't played because he is not good enough to get in the side - it's as simple as that. Nimitz not.
Monk Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?44581-For-those-doubters-Forren
david in sweden Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 If he was better than Jos, Fonte or Yoshida of course he would have used him. Managers pick their best players. The fact that the Norwegian season ended last November and he had a nice holiday afterwards is no reason why he wouldn't play in March or April. If anything he should be fresher and raring to go. of course (in theory) that is correct, but I go back to my original comment. We lost only 2 of our last 10 games, were within 5 minutes of earning a point at Spurs, so why would he (MP) want to change the line-up just to please some fans? Forran was on the bench in 6 of the last 10 matches, and in 2 of those Jos was subbed with Fonte, an far more experienced player - good decision IMHO). I wouldn't start " experimenting " when we still weren't sure of safety - especially as we drew 5 of the last 10 games. Had we lost 1 or 2 of those games we might have been down instead of Wigan. I don't know why people want to criticise players who haven't played - just because they haven't played. His time will come. ...it's the manager 's decision (thankfully), and security was a priority right up to the beginning of May. Fonte looked better after he came back in March, after showing some very indifferent form prior to that .....(thankfully when Jos and Yoshida were the first choices).
The9 Posted 9 June, 2013 Author Posted 9 June, 2013 of course (in theory) that is correct, but I go back to my original comment. We lost only 2 of our last 10 games, were within 5 minutes of earning a point at Spurs, so why would he (MP) want to change the line-up just to please some fans? Forran was on the bench in 6 of the last 10 matches, and in 2 of those Jos was subbed with Fonte, an far more experienced player - good decision IMHO). I wouldn't start " experimenting " when we still weren't sure of safety - especially as we drew 5 of the last 10 games. Had we lost 1 or 2 of those games we might have been down instead of Wigan. I don't know why people want to criticise players who haven't played - just because they haven't played. His time will come. ...it's the manager 's decision (thankfully), and security was a priority right up to the beginning of May. Fonte looked better after he came back in March, after showing some very indifferent form prior to that .....(thankfully when Jos and Yoshida were the first choices). Just to point out that I'm not sure why you think picking Forren would be done "to please the fans", who as far as I could tell weren't particularly bothered whether he played or not. Also, in order to have finished below Wigan we'd have had to done more than "lose one or two" of the last 10, we'd had to have lost two of the games we actually won, or lost one of the games we won and three of the games we drew. Or to look at it another way, we were never worse than a 90% chance to stay up after we beat Reading with 6 games left and didn't need any of the 4 points we did get from those matches, so it would have been an ideal time to experiment IF the manager felt we need to. Again, we'll only know if the "saving Forren" theory is true or not at the start of next season.
Chez Posted 9 June, 2013 Posted 9 June, 2013 I don't know why people want to criticise players who haven't played - just because they haven't played. not sure people are criticising Forren (whilst Jos is at the club we have a ready made whipping boy) for not playing, it's more a case of wondering about the transfer. Jos and Fonte played well and the manager didn't want to change a `settled back four' might be the simple answer to why he didn't figure, but we made two centre back subs whilst he was on the bench and he was overlooked on both occasions.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now