Whitey Grandad Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 Au contraire. Never rated him particularly, but we did make a profit when we sold him - which is rarity nowadays. And how much did the 'tugged shirt' potentially cost us?
Victor Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 Saeijs -whilst not saying he likes him, says training and preparation is now hard and intense What? - you mean implying it wasn't before .......and, of course, Saeijs has been at the club for, ooooooh, let's see -yep, AGES and AGES - so if he says it is so, then surely it IS so!
Arizona Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 and they replaced Thomas with the far better Clarke Carlisle who cost next to nothing! Burley's worst transfer however was "Pele" - how he had the nerve to call himself that still shocks me. He was an excellent holding midfielder, so naturally Burley played him in defence.
Window Cleaner Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 Au contraire. Never rated him particularly, but we did make a profit when we sold him - which is rarity nowadays. How do you come to that conclusion then?? As far as I know we bought him for 1.1 million and sold him for 900K
Andy_Porter Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 Thomas could play right back and give us better height defending set pieces as well as allowing James to play right wing and get forward more with his crossing ability. I'm not sure Thomas would work at right back with our current system. If we where to change to a proper old fashioned 4-4-2 then he would be our best option there. Will be good cover when he's fit again, we don't have many options at rb or cb.
Stu Man Do Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 and they replaced Thomas with the far better Clarke Carlisle who cost next to nothing! Burley's worst transfer however was "Pele" - how he had the nerve to call himself that still shocks me. To be fair Pele was a fairly decent MF player looked decent in our best winning sequence of the play off season. Far from the worst transfer Burley ever made.
AndyNorthernSaints Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 I'm not sure Thomas would work at right back with our current system. If we where to change to a proper old fashioned 4-4-2 then he would be our best option there. Will be good cover when he's fit again, we don't have many options at rb or cb. I thought we were playing more of a old fashioned 442 formation?
Danbert Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 Marcello Sarmiento? Steven O'Halloran? 1 Year contract extension for Darren Powell? How many of them cost over a million?
Arizona Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 How many of them cost over a million? And it comes back to the, 'he's worse because he cost more' argument. He may have been one of the worst value signings, but he was the solid defender we were so badly lacking at the start of last season. After the 4-1 home defeat by Palace and defeat by the Posh, do you think we could have coped without him? A couple of extra defeats at the start of the season and you do the math. Relegation would have cost one heck of a lot more than £1.1m
saintwarwick Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 and they replaced Thomas with the far better Clarke Carlisle who cost next to nothing! Burley's worst transfer however was "Pele" - how he had the nerve to call himself that still shocks me. Nope, has to be Powell.
NickG Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 What? - you mean implying it wasn't before .......and, of course, Saeijs has been at the club for, ooooooh, let's see -yep, AGES and AGES - so if he says it is so, then surely it IS so! sorry, you are right - Saeijs is a liar.
saintwarwick Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 How do you come to that conclusion then?? As far as I know we bought him for 1.1 million and sold him for 900K We bought Pele for around £600k and sold him to West Brom for a £1million, good bit of business imo.
AndyNorthernSaints Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 Nope, has to be Powell. Redkrapp bought Donkey Powell.
saintwarwick Posted 23 February, 2009 Posted 23 February, 2009 Redkrapp bought Donkey Powell. I stand corrected.
Victor Posted 24 February, 2009 Posted 24 February, 2009 sorry, you are right - Saeijs is a liar. Do I really need to explain, are you really that simple-minded? I was not calling him a liar, I was merely giving one reason why I feel his opinion is not worth a hill of beans.
Andy_Porter Posted 24 February, 2009 Posted 24 February, 2009 I thought we were playing more of a old fashioned 442 formation? Not really a traditional 4-4-2, James is supplying all the width down the right and on Saturday he must have put in about 15 crosses, I don't think Thomas would be suited to playing RB like that. With a proper winger infront of him he would be fine but they way we're playing is very narrow down the right.
Window Cleaner Posted 24 February, 2009 Posted 24 February, 2009 (edited) We bought Pele for around £600k and sold him to West Brom for a £1million, good bit of business imo. No we didn't. I don't know where you all keep getting your figures from. Pedro Pélé cost us 1.5 million euros when we bought him from Belenenses. From the annual account 2006. Since the end of account the team has been strengthened by 7 new arrivals for a total cost of 5.7 million £ Wright-Phillips,Davis,Pélé,Skacel,Viafara,Jermaine Wright,Idiakiez. As far as I know II and Wright were on "frees". BWP 750K (including 250 prize from coca Cola) Davis 1 million, Skacel 1.6 million,Viafara 1 million (or 900K) so that leaves 1.35 million for Pélé;As far as I know he cost 1/1.1 million so Jermaine Wright and II weren't as free as all that. Edited 24 February, 2009 by Window Cleaner
Arizona Posted 24 February, 2009 Posted 24 February, 2009 No we didn't. I don't know where you all keep getting your figures from. Pedro Pélé cost us 1.5 million euros when we bought him from Belenenses. From the annual account 2006. Since the end of account the team has been strengthened by 7 new arrivals for a total cost of 5.7 million £ Wright-Phillips,Davis,Pélé,Skacel,Viafara,Jermaine Wright,Idiakiez. As far as I know II and Wright were on "frees". BWP 750K (including 250 prize from coca Cola) Davis 1 million, Skacel 1.6 million,Viafara 1 million (or 900K) so that leaves 1.35 million for Pélé;As far as I know he cost 1/1.1 million so Jermaine Wright and II weren't as free as all that. Well for a start Davis was nearer £1.2m going by most accounts on here and II cost us £350k. That leaves Pele with £800k. Also you do seem to have based your transfer fee on assumption that all those figures are exact.
Window Cleaner Posted 24 February, 2009 Posted 24 February, 2009 Well for a start Davis was nearer £1.2m going by most accounts on here and II cost us £350k. That leaves Pele with £800k. Also you do seem to have based your transfer fee on assumption that all those figures are exact. I remember reading the Belenenses web site at the time and it definitely said 1.5 million euros. Sorry lads he really did cost that much and we didn't make anything on him at all. didn't lose much though so not a bad deal. If only Burley hadn't messed him about as a CD.
Whitey Grandad Posted 24 February, 2009 Posted 24 February, 2009 I remember reading the Belenenses web site at the time and it definitely said 1.5 million euros. Sorry lads he really did cost that much and we didn't make anything on him at all. didn't lose much though so not a bad deal. If only Burley hadn't messed him about as a CD. The fee was quoted variously as 'undisclosed' and 'around £1m', e.g. http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11700_2384162,00.html We sold him for about the same apparently http://www.expressandstar.com/2007/08/10/pele-faces-fight-for-place/
JustMike Posted 25 February, 2009 Posted 25 February, 2009 coming back from injury, probably too little too late but he would have been handy at RB this season.. http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=11413
del boy Posted 25 February, 2009 Posted 25 February, 2009 coming back from injury, probably too little too late but he would have been handy at RB this season.. http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=11413 If its touch and go whether he makes it back for a couple of games he would be better off just getting 100% for next season, not taking the risk of a further setback.
Whitey Grandad Posted 25 February, 2009 Posted 25 February, 2009 If its touch and go whether he makes it back for a couple of games he would be better off just getting 100% for next season, not taking the risk of a further setback. Exactly. You usually find that when a player returns after a long lay-off they get other problems such as pulled hamstrings.
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