Jump to content


Sheffield Wednesday Fan
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by hirstyboywonder

  1. Lost on me, don't watch line of duty. Happy to admit I was wrong on Jos, though sacking him in July would have meant we would have another manager now, not Steve Bruce. Or do you agree with the OP that we should have broke the bank (even though it was already smashed to pieces at the time) to go for Bruce last summer and for some reason he would have decided to walk out on a team he had just taken to the play-off final at that time?
  2. Are you OK? Seen you mocking certain posters on here the past few days, changing your avatar and negging their every post. Now laughing at everyone who had the temerity to disagree or question you on something a year ago. Anyone would think you have never got anything wrong. All seems a little bit juvenile for a grandad.
  3. Spot on You want your head testing if you think that Steve Bruce would have walked out on Aston Villa last summer after taking them to the play-off final and we would have somehow managed to tempt him in while under a transfer embargo, never mind the fact we may not have been able to afford, or indeed been allowed under the terms of the embargo, to pay Villa off for their manager who was under contract at the time. Things change very quickly in football and a few months on, when he was no longer under contract and in a better place personally to take on a new challenge we got him. I had my reservations about him due to the fact he has previously spent some good money at other clubs and we weren't in a position to spend anything but I concede a don't think we could have hoped for a better manager when we appointed him and am happy to have him. The way Jos ended the previous season suggested he should be given a chance, this proved to be the wrong call and the vast majority agree he should have gone weeks if not months before he eventually did. However, had we got rid of him last summer Steve Bruce would not currently be our manager.
  4. If they are going to charge him for that then they should be charging players from every game as that kind of language is used every game towards the officials when arguing the throw over something as trivial as a throw in on the halfway line.
  5. How did you find that and who was paying Gordon Watson to pass his opinion on football? Stating Ireland will roll all over Italy in midfield at Euro 2012 and Yohan Cabaye was a better player at the time than Andrea Pirlo. Shocked he hasn't gone on to bigger and better things in the world of football punditry based on that!
  6. Pudil was far better for 18 months.
  7. He was rarely awesome, as some have said, his back-post defending left a lot to be desired but as you say, he could be faulted for effort and at times he did seem to get more stick than many more established players in our squad. We used to sit on the Kop and watch our typical pattern of play that led towards us being relegated in 2010 - when we didn't go long Grant would roll it out to Spurr, our 'playmaker' (ahem), Potter would drop deep to pick the ball up from Spurr, giving the impression he was about to dictate the play, after looking up, he would decide there was no pass on and with the opposition now pressing us Potter would give it back to Spurr and shuffle off leaving the left-back with no option but to play a usually fruitless ball up the line. Happy days!
  8. It is a bit strange that Carbone is generally not regarded as highly for us as Di Canio is. Benito was excellent in 96-97 once he had settled in and he worked really well with Booth that season. After Di Canio had gone early in 1998-99 Carbone was the one player worth turning up to see that season and scored some great goals. Understandably that summer he wanted a new contract. The club offered him what they thought was reasonable he wanted more, this resulted in him being transfer listed. He missed the first week of pre-season training on a sick note and when he returned I remember him playing one warm up game with the kids on the same day most of the first team was playing elsewhere. He started the season on the bench- pretty surprising given his form the previous season and our other options. Scored as a sub in the first game, continued to be out of the squad or named as a sub and then spat the dummy out when this happened away at Southampton. Villa got him for the remainder of the season, we received less than £1M and got relegated without him. Carbone and more so Di Canio came with reputations as being difficult to manage but capable of winning games on their own. The club knew what they were getting into with Di Canio with the way he finished up at Celtic and his previous clubs so must take some of the blame for this happening in similar fashion. Wilson was way out his depth in terms of dealing with ego's in the dressing room and has never managed anywhere near that level again. He was a really good player for us in what was a great time to watch Wednesday but the managerial job was too big for him.
  9. Scored 7 times in League One and failed to get them promoted, having been part of a side that got relegated 2 seasons in succession. Sticks up for his team mates when they get into bother on nights out though apparently so the fact he is a failure on the pitch recently and isn't getting younger can be glossed over.
  10. As the game was conducted under FA rules using FA officials by clubs governed by the FA, I would assume that if they had any pertinent evidence that gave reason to believe racist language was used then they would have had to submit this under the laws of the land when the criminal trial was conducted.
  11. Agree with this, but the comparison you made with the Stokes incident is not appropriate. Stokes, as with Forestieri was found not guilty in a court of law. Stokes was found guilty by the ECB of bringing the game into disrepute - he actually pleaded guilty to this charge - the evidence was there for all to see that he had done that, even though the circumstances surrounding the incident meant he was not guilty of affray in the eyes of the law. The criminal trial Forestieri went through found no evidence of racial language being used so not sure how the FA can prove there was evidence of this.
  12. But in the Terry case, as has been said numerous times, the words were clearly used and there was clear evidence of this. The criminal courts found him not guilty on the basis that in his version of events, he used the words to confirm to the player that he hadn't called him that. The FA banned him on the basis that those words shouldn't have been uttered on the football pitch at all. In this case Forestieri has denied using racist words and the courts found no evidence to suggest that any such words were used. Surely the FA don't have any evidence to the contrary as this would have to have been submitted as part of the criminal trial. Of course the FA should conduct their own investigation into what happened but surely it is better to invite both parties to submit evidence/their testimonies as to what happened in detail rather than charging a player then giving him the chance to respond if there is seemingly no clear evidence in support of what has been alleged?
  13. Only one club valued Madine at that price and the rest of the top two divisions were probably aghast by what Cardiff were willing to pay. As much as you would like to think players like Rhodes should be worth more than Gary Madine, who has never really proved his worth at Championship level never mind PL, that one transfer can't really be used as a barometer for setting the price on others.
  14. The thing is, has there been that many genuine offers for our players that we have turned down in recent years? Forestieri maybe but at the time there may have been decent offers plenty of our fan base would have chosen not to sell. Who else have we had decent offers for that we could have taken?
  15. £7M is an over-evaluation at this time. Norwich in the past couple of weeks have suggested they would like to take him off our hands on a free transfer - given that they want him and clearly hold him in high regard for his attitude and dressing room influence as much as his goals - that is an under-evaluation on their part. It seems this thread is far quicker to jump on our owner for his over estimation than it is to jump on cash-rich Norwich for their under estimation of a player who has evidently contributed effectively to getting them to where they are now. Around £4M would still seem fair enough in the current market - which is as close to our valuation than it is to theirs so not sure why it is our club that are getting more stick on here in this usual course of negotiation.
  16. Didn't have Big Ron down as a fan of tattoos.
  17. The Championship figures are fairly insignificant at the side of the PL. Stoke's parachute payments for example help big time though: https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/stoke-city-championship-prize-money-2902109
  18. Over £100M for getting relegated. How much are the parachute payments now, and what do you get for finishing mid-table in the Championship?
  19. It's ridiculous, and the more money it attracts the more it attracts unscrupulous characters.
  20. I have all the vision of a mole with cataracts! I did also state that the organisation would release a statement to say they are purely funding us with a view to making a profit which would then fund the horrible intentions of their organisation, not sure UAE have done that in the case of City!
  21. I don't know to be honest, it can be a very blurred line but like I say there is a difference between the scenario you described and ANY form of investment as was suggested.
  22. In all honesty probably not if they invested the money to develop the local community in a positive way like no one else has done previously, if they are respectful and follow our laws in their investments in our country I doubt there would be major objections. That wasn't quite how I phrased it though was it, the UAE are not an overtly terrorist organisation looking to make money to fund terrorist acts and while they have laws that we wouldn't allow here many westerners now seem happy enough to invest their holiday money over there.
  23. For the sake of argument, say DC next week sold us to some organisation that are overtly terrorist or have views and an agenda that the majority of right-thinking people would have a problem with. Said organisation issues a statement saying they have invested in us as they believe they can get us to the PL and then sell us for a significant profit that could then be used to fund their organisation. You wouldn't have a problem with that?
  24. That wasn't the original question was it. Your question also asked who cares where it comes from? I simply answered that a fair few will do. I guess you are implying that Abromovich's wealth is not all legitimate? No doubt big business in the newly commercial Soviet Union at that time was somewhat murky but there is a difference between that and an overtly criminally funded organisation.
  • Create New...