January Transfer Window Thread - rumours and signings here

^Might not be that high for Diarra, I'm sure we sold him aka Bentley with a sell on clause hence we might pay a bit less for him should we be the party to resign him.

And aye, logic would dictate we'd be linked for lots of DM's, but I don't think we'll splash the cash or end up getting one.

diarra was a complete tool to move to portsmouth, he only had flamini in front of him at the time......gilberto was always going to leave at the end of the season and as it happens he would have been 'the man'.

can't see wenger having it tbh, he had his chance and he decided to run.

good DM's are few and far between...should have gone for van bommel a couple of seasons back.
 
Van Bommel is utter turd, slow and a crap tackler, other than the fact that he's a playmaker, bench material now and was always overrated I think buying an old guy whose on his way to the morgue(in terms of football)is a bad idea. Keeping a Pires around for his final few years is different to buying an old player as a first teamer who you'll never get much out of.


Diarra wanted his chance to be defensive midfielder for France, that meant first team football before last summer, its completely understandable and I don't begrudge him anything for simply wanting to play football. Frankly Makelele was woeful in the Euro's and he had every chance of winning his place under a real manager, unfortunately up against someone who picks based on your birth month you've got little chance. By the next cup 5 more world class defensive midfields might appear and give you no chance, this time around he had a very very real chance of getting in the team but had no choice but first team football. Just a shame Wenger is so utterly short sighted, loan move, actually playing him, ridiculously cheap buyback clause or simply seeing Flamini was after money, were going to lose him anyway, play Diarra and drop the idiot.



City rumours today are Hughes is going to ask for a massive clearout, Elano, Ball, Garrido, Vassell. All very positive and right, garrido sucks, ball has always been crap, Vassell is a runner but completely incapable of being a striker. Elano is insanely inconsistant and apparently a huge pain, which was clear by the fact he can be world class but no other big manager wanted him despite his skill, he's a problem player and only Sven was stupid enough to buy him. The only worrying thing for them is that hughes seems to want to get Bridge as a replacement, surely a lampost for £30 would be more effective than either Ball or Bridge.... Hughes is still thinking somewhat small time, though Santa Cruz move is rumoured and he really is quality.

They've got Benjani, Jo, Sturridge and Evans upfront though, of which to the two youngsters actually look pretty damn good, and Jo and Benjani look quality aswell, not sure they really need Cruz as thats one senior striker, and 2 up and coming good strikers not playing most weeks.
 
It will be interesting to see who Mark Hughes brings in during January. He doesn't come across as the type of manager who goes out and signs superstars, you only need to look at the players he has been linked with since getting the City job, I don't even think Robinho would have been signed if he had a say.

Thats why it doesn't surprise me that he is being linked with the likes of Santa Cruz, although a good player he isnt the world class type you would be expecting the owners to be linked with.
 
Interesting you say that, considering the fact that he always mentioned the limited funds he had available to him when he was at Blackburn. I thought the main reasons for him leaving for Man City was cos of that?

The first thing he did when he signed for Man City was go for Ronaldinho!
 
No it wasn't, Ronaldinho rumours/targetting started before he got there, and was more a board thing than done by the manager anyway. Also afaik Hughes wasn't to in the know about Robinho either was he?

As for Cruz, he's an absolutely class striker, Blackburn have been positively mediocre for a couple years and he's still banging them in, he can score really from anywhere in anyway which often is a good indication of the quality of a striker. IE adebayor scoring from further than 6 yards is pretty damn rare, while Ian Wright was dangerous as long as he was within 30 yards of goal, same as say, a Messi, Eto, etc, etc.

Cruz is a positive if maybe unnecessary move considering the other strikers they have, but Bridge is a very, underwhelming sounding move considering the cash available to them. Hell, I have no idea why Chelsea offered him more money, a mediocre player whose far more likely to have a terrible game than a great game and at his worst is just embarassing. Though I'm not really sure who else is around and available at the moment.

But more proof that almost every buy Sven made was crap, Petrov and Geovanni were the only "good" players he bought and he shipped off Geovanni almost straight away after really not playing him and Petrov is only slightly less inconsistant than Elano. He overpaid for a lot of players very few other clubs wanted because they are inconsistant/troubled players, he got 1/3 a good season out of them then they went to utter crap, getting shot of Sven was a great move, but Hughes is still coping with quite a lot of not great players. Hammann was the other one, truly crap player, been crap for 3-4 years at least, Vassell will never be a decent striker and not a good midfielder, Garrido, its not a league winning squad but a quality defensive midfielder, a decent left back and they aren't far off being a good team.

Is it zabeleta at right back, did Hughes bring him in, the board, or was he bought before Hughes got there? He wasn't actually that bad in the last game but this year from what I've seen he's a horrible defender and can't cross at all, either needs time or they need a new rightback.
 
Last edited:
What's with all the Santa Cruz loving all of a sudden? I remember when he signed for Blackburn everyone laughed their socks off because of his appalling goalscoring record. Now all of a sudden he's 'absolutely class'? Amazing how opinions can change sometimes.
 
I'd frankly never heard of him before, or not that I can remember, he played, I watched, he was class. I've admitedly not watched enough of him to say exactly how good he is but, he has the ability to create and score goals, he's very smart with the ball and some of his finishing has been fantastic. Come to think of it I've not seen a Blackburn game with him playing in ages but I'm sure some of his better games last year he reminds me of berbatov, deft touches, good finishing, smart finishing, great control of the ball though of the top of my head I can't really remember him being quite as , tricky, for want of abetter word, as Berbatov is.

23 goals and 8 assists in an otherwise decidedly average/poor year for Blackburn last year, possibly a lucky year, possibly not. The way he took his goals made me think it wasn't luck. I don't know anything other than he was injured a lot in his time at Bayern and there was heavy competition, not sure if he was played out of position much or not, who knows.
 
Van Bommel is utter turd, slow and a crap tackler, other than the fact that he's a playmaker, bench material now and was always overrated I think buying an old guy whose on his way to the morgue(in terms of football)is a bad idea. Keeping a Pires around for his final few years is different to buying an old player as a first teamer who you'll never get much out of.

do you ever stop to read the drivel you continue to post?

VB can play the holding position and also go forward, how you end up talking about Pires in the same breath i don't know ....completely different players not to mention the fact i talked about signing VB a few seasons back not at this moment.

and messi dangerous 30 yards from goal? clueless!
 
Last edited:
Wow, drunkenmaster is on a role tonight. Especially naming 2 players who don't strike me as dangerous from 30 yards at all (but knocking a Van Bommel who is known for it).
 
You could say Messi is dangerous from 30 yards just because he'll run through your entire defence before rounding the keeper and rolling it in the net :p

As far as long range shooting goes though, no.
 
I'd say Messi is dangerous from 30 yards. There's where he operates.

He's unlikely to stick it in the top corner from there but he's fairly likely to craft a chance somewhere.
 
Van Bommel is utter turd, slow and a crap tackler, other than the fact that he's a playmaker, bench material now and was always overrated I think buying an old guy whose on his way to the morgue(in terms of football)is a bad idea. Keeping a Pires around for his final few years is different to buying an old player as a first teamer who you'll never get much out of

Am I confusing this Van Bommel with another Van Bommel.

PSV=DM
Barca=DM
Bayen=DM
Holland=DM
 
I'd say Messi is dangerous from 30 yards. There's where he operates.

He's unlikely to stick it in the top corner from there but he's fairly likely to craft a chance somewhere.

Great creator from 30 yards perhaps, but not dangerous. Man Utd put him 30 yards out twice in Europe last season and he didn't do much.

I would say the players who are dangerous from 30 yards are the likes of Ronaldo, Lampard, Gerrard, Alonso etc...
 
In other news, Man Utd linked with a £20m bid for Xavi.

Don't know what to make of it to be fair. Would be nice to get some experience in Midfield, but to do that you have to be willing to just cut the cord with Scholes and Giggs. This whole moving Giggs infield is ******** - if he's unfit to navigate the wing then he's finished.

I'm not a big fan of Xavi from what I've seen either. I was shocked he got player of the tournament at the Euro's as Spain only ticked when Fabregas came on and Xavi only shone in the final, but he is a neat passer. Xavi, Anderson and Carrick as a Midfield trio is tasty.
 
In other news, Man Utd linked with a £20m bid for Xavi.

Don't know what to make of it to be fair. Would be nice to get some experience in Midfield, but to do that you have to be willing to just cut the cord with Scholes and Giggs. This whole moving Giggs infield is ******** - if he's unfit to navigate the wing then he's finished.

I'm not a big fan of Xavi from what I've seen either. I was shocked he got player of the tournament at the Euro's as Spain only ticked when Fabregas came on and Xavi only shone in the final, but he is a neat passer. Xavi, Anderson and Carrick as a Midfield trio is tasty.

He's a good player but I doubt Barca would have the appetite to sell, us to have the money or him the inclination to come to the sub tropical climes of Manchester. Not to mention a midfield 3 for us would be pretty unbalanced attacking wise. I think this is more than likeley some creative jouranalism and some pie in the sky from the agent.

Rather than get Xavi, I would prefer to see the continued development of Nain and Anderson at the expense of a big name coming in. If the money is there, then they should get Tevez signed up
 
Can people read, firstly, anywhere within 30 yards, as opposed to simply shooting from 6 yards, if you can't tell what I mean you need help. I also said DANGEROUS, not SCORE A GOAL. As people have said give the ball to Ian Wright anywhere in the 30 yards and he looks dangerous and he could score from anywhere, give Messi the ball and he looks dangerous and can score from anywhere in the box, and outside, maybe not often at 30 yards, but again i didn't say specifically 30 yards, nor score.

Adebayor, does not look dangerous at 30 yards, the majority of the time if he's outside the 6 yard box he won't score, nor will he turn and run at defenders, nor will he set up goals. Can you see the difference between what I actually said, and what you decided I said, two completely different things.

As for Van Bommel, I didn't say he doesn't shoot from 30 yards, however he rarely scores, I also didn't say he wasn't a DM, he is however utter crap as a DM, but he liked to get forward and he wasn't a Fabregas style playmaker but he always wanted everything to go through him, he likes being on the ball a lot more than a Makelele who can be great yet almost completely invisible in a game due to his lack of being on the ball. he's very very average, then we got linked with him in those 30yr old + years at which point he was old and useless. Barca jumped on and promptly benched him or played him in mostly completely pointless games, even then he did entirely nothing to show his apparent quality.

Basically people thought he was good because he played for Holland, in the champs league and generally people see highlights of the good stuff, so over the years people see the few odd 30 yarders and think he's brilliant.

As for Xavi, he's a great passer, but he was always the defensive man in the Barca midfield with Iniesta, or one of the other dozen. I have no idea also why he was named man of the tourney, as you said the second Fabregas came on as a sub Spain came alive, the only reason Xavi appeared better in the final is because Fabregas was so feared he was basically triple marked the whole game leaving craploads of space for everyone else. Xavi is very very good though, and personally with Hargreaves out, and Anderson not really a defensive mid, neither Carrick maybe Fergie wants a stronger defensive player to shore up a defense not being run by Quieroz. But then Xavi isn't only a defensive midfielder, which makes him not that much more defensive than Carrick or Anderson.

Maybe he's not encouraged by Carrick's injury proneness, or Hargreaves and see's Anderson as too inexperienced, I really don't know its an odd link for an expensive player who seems unlikely to move from Barca anyway.

EDIT:- Xavi, Carrick, Anderson might be a way Fergie can go, Rooney's neither a striker, nor a winger, nor a midfielder, maybe his only option is to have Berb upfront and stick Rooney high up the pitch but not as an out and out striker, a more Chelsea style 4-3-3 might suit Rooney and Tevev better as both players are really neither wingers nor strikers. Just can't see Xavi leaving, or going for that cheap tbh, which makes buying another out and out striker seem like the better choice.
 
Last edited:
do you ever stop to read the drivel you continue to post?

VB can play the holding position and also go forward, how you end up talking about Pires in the same breath i don't know ....completely different players not to mention the fact i talked about signing VB a few seasons back not at this moment.

and messi dangerous 30 yards from goal? clueless!

See, what we have here is failure to learn reading comprehension.

We were talking about Arsenal and defensive midfielders and you mentioned we should have bought Bommel, I said he was turd, thats it, I didn't remotely compare Van Bommel to Pires. I compared the situations of keeping a 30 year old Pires with much to offer without a huge transfer fee for an extremely effective sub player as he ages, to paying a large sum for Bommel whose moving into the end of his career, is getting much worse and wouldn't play all that much. IE keeping an old player is cheap and effective, spending massively on a guy whose about to become a bench warmer is neither cheap, nor effective and an utter waste.

The simple fact is Bommel was never great, at his best he was average, a couple of great performances(i'm sure there were some though I couldn't name/remember a single one offhand) in the CL that you happen to see doesn't mean he's a great player, it means he played great in those games. If he was so good, why did he only end up at really one truly great club where he was instantly found wanting and benched for being all hype and nothing to back it up. He's slow, his passings not that great, he's not great defensively, he's not great going forwards, he likes to shoot from range and occasionally scores them, big whoop. He's not good now, he wasn't ever great but 3-4 years ago when we were linked with him he was at his best, aging and getting worse rapidly, again he would have been an overly expensive inflated price player and we would have been paying over the odd's for his worst years. PIres on the other hand got injured, seriously, still came back, was brilliant at the end of the first season, was brilliant last year and has been their best player this year still. We could have kept him without a transfer fee and had goals, experience, talent, creativity, flair for probably 4-5 extra years. WHich offered better value?

For instance Vieira was getting worse, and we kept him a year to long and his value halfed, Henry was getting worse, we kept him a year to long and his value halfed. Getting Bommel would have been the same as Inter buying Vieira a year before they did at 30mil instead of 15, losing massive value and finding themselves with a bench warmer, getting Bommel would have been a joke.
 
Last edited:
It's amazing how people tell drunkenmaster to stop posting rubbish and it just bounces off him, like water off a duck's back. He just doesn't take any comments on board. Incredible.
 
Back
Top Bottom