whelk Posted 4 October, 2014 Posted 4 October, 2014 Three are flippable. One doesn't flip itself, but flips others. Surely missed a chance to have Koeman as a pic. Brian Moore "he's going to flip one" and he did!
pap Posted 4 October, 2014 Posted 4 October, 2014 Surely missed a chance to have Koeman as a pic. Brian Moore "he's going to flip one" and he did! Defo. I will bear more Saints related stuff in mind next time.
OldNick Posted 4 October, 2014 Posted 4 October, 2014 Except the only person twisting stuff is you. "Lucky he was available" is a meaningless "twist" by you on the appointment of our new manager by the club. How was Koeman's appointment demonstrably more "lucky" than the appointment of any other manager by any other club in the history of football? I've asked you to answer that before but you didn't and I am sure you won't this time. You deride it as lucky because you don't want to give any credit our current regime. being available was a stroke of luck. The same bit of luck that Cortese had when MP was free and willing to join us. I think that the current regime made a superb choice, and so I am happy to give them credit for that.
Guan 2.0 Posted 4 October, 2014 Posted 4 October, 2014 Only part that doesn't tally is the player 'background check'. Some of those targeted seemed more like Ramirez and Osvaldo, than Pelle and Tadic (attitude-wise).
Saint_clark Posted 4 October, 2014 Posted 4 October, 2014 being available was a stroke of luck. The same bit of luck that Cortese had when MP was free and willing to join us. I think that the current regime made a superb choice, and so I am happy to give them credit for that. Surely by that logic when a player has as storming game you wouldn't say the manager picked the team well you'd say he was lucky those players were available?
Fowllyd Posted 4 October, 2014 Posted 4 October, 2014 being available was a stroke of luck. The same bit of luck that Cortese had when MP was free and willing to join us. I think that the current regime made a superb choice, and so I am happy to give them credit for that. Why are you so convinced that, had Koeman been under contract, we would not have made an approach? The article states that Koeman had been clearly identified as the best possible replacement some time before Pochettino left, so why would we not have approached him regardless?
Gemmel Posted 4 October, 2014 Posted 4 October, 2014 I can't see how it matters who pays his compensation. The only difference could be a matter of possible income tax but surely any payment would eventually come from Tottenham. You are right of course, but the article seem to suggest that Mo Po simply wanted to resign, with assurances he wasn't going to Tottenham. Saints stuck to the letter of contract, which meant that to resign would cost him two million of his own money. As the article says - "Magically" after that was made clear, spurs made an official approach. Reading between the lines and pure speculation, mo po was acting on advice from spurs, who were trying to dodge the compensation, but when we stuck firm to the contract he then had to go back to spurs and tell them, it would cost them 2 million quid to sign him. At that point he was probably sweating on whether they would still offer him the job.
Plumstead_Saint Posted 4 October, 2014 Posted 4 October, 2014 Reading between the lines and pure speculation, mo po was acting on advice from spurs, who were trying to dodge the compensation, but when we stuck firm to the contract he then had to go back to I do I hope so. Fingers crossed we smash them tomorrow. Then my faith in karmic justice will be restored.
CB Fry Posted 4 October, 2014 Posted 4 October, 2014 being available was a stroke of luck. The same bit of luck that Cortese had when MP was free and willing to join us. I think that the current regime made a superb choice, and so I am happy to give them credit for that. So you accept the board made a "choice", then, and not just stumbled upon Ronald Koeman through some random quirk of fate, like when you see an old school friend in a Supermarket car park? The club appointed an excellent manager from an expansive pool of in-work and out-of-work football managers from countries and leagues all over the world. With that in mind, shall we agree that "luck" played no more a significant role in this appointment than any other football appointment at any other club?
Turkish Posted 5 October, 2014 Posted 5 October, 2014 Remember this? http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28593032 Bit different to Jeremy Wilson's article.
stardustonmyfeet Posted 5 October, 2014 Posted 5 October, 2014 I haven't heard much about the 'background check' for a very long time. I think they stopped trumpeting it from the rooftops around the time we had trouble with Jason Puncheon. We knew he wasn't settling at other clubs but we brought him in anyway. He turned out ok but players like Forren and Taider (less than three) must have been signed on their youtube reputation rather than any knowledge of their attitudes.
adrian lord Posted 5 October, 2014 Posted 5 October, 2014 Has anyone ever had a real explanation for the Forren saga?
SuperSAINT Posted 5 October, 2014 Posted 5 October, 2014 Has anyone ever had a real explanation for the Forren saga? I might be dreaming this, but wasn't it because our incoming manager (Poch) wanted Osvaldo and because of the future cost of him we had to sign a cheaper alternative defender to the one we had actually wanted?
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