'Fancy Dan' footballers quote

[Guest Willow Owl]

5 hours ago, soldierboyblue said:

Who was better at the time?

Never said he wasn’t one of our better players at the time, did I ? 
 
See original replies 

[@owlstalk]

 

 

I have to say.. It's rare to see someone so venomously against a player.

And of all the players to be so against...

 

 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Willow Owl said:

Like I said, In my opinion he wasn’t that great for us. He was technically one of better players at the club so obviously stood out when he had a good game. 
My opinion to get rid was based solely on his actions on the referee, nothing to do with his ability. I would have said the same if Waddle or Hirst had done similar.

 

I don’t get why you keep going on about West Ham. It wasn’t as though he joined and suddenly they challenged for the premier league title. He was loved by the fans and pundits for his eccentricities and on the odd occasion of brilliance that’s it.
As stated before, if he was that good how come he never joined a top premier league club and never played for his country at full international level.

 

Just my opinion

 

 

 

 

 

Who was better for us at the time and who has been better since in terms of ability?

 

Would you expect him to turn them into title challengers? They got into Europe and finished as high as they had done in over a decade twice with him in the side and he was their player of the year so must have been doing OK.

 

As has been said, Italy had a lot of great players in his position in the 90's, how many times did David Hirst play for England - does that mean he wasn't top quality? As with Hirst, Man Utd tried to sign Di Canio, it may be that he wasn't quite at that level but he was certainly good enough for the level we were at - a level we fell away from after binning the Fancy Dans and have never returned to since. 

 

 

[Guest Willow Owl]

7 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

For pure entertainment he was top notch though

When he was on it he was great.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Willow Owl said:

Ferguson didn't sign him though did he?Maybe he decided he didn't need the grief that went with him. Or he just wasn’t as good as Giggs and company.

 

Quoting other Italian players proves he wasn’t a top notch player as I have said

 

So you agree that he was a borderline nutter?  something I said earlier.

 

Find any post that I have said he wasn’t a good player ?

 

Hirst was a great player and at one time was ahead of Shearer. Injuries and off field antics was probably the main reason he didn’t get more caps. Waddle played over 60 times for England so don’t get that one . Le tissier agree should have had a hundred caps in my opinion but emphasis was on fitness and running all day never a strong point of his.

 

I have made no strange insistence on him having to single handedly take mid table teams to greatness. If you check back I replied to a post that said when he went to West Ham he took them to 2 top half finishes, Europe and a relegation. Something I said was not a mark of his success. Hirstyboywonder was basically saying if we had kept him we would have finished higher. 

His first full season I believe he scored 14 goals and we finished 16th. The previous season Andy Booth scored 13 and we finished 7th. So that argument is shot to bits.

 

Find anywhere I have said he was dross.
 

That’s what happens when people quote on snippets and don’t read the full original posts. It means I have to post a lengthy response explaining my comments 

 

phew 

 

 

Di Canio brought more than just goals. He provided assists and was a threat that opponents took into account and therefore opened up space for others.

Booth was effective when playing with Carbone but for some reason was happy to see the back of him - have a look at the 96-97 season and see how many of Booth's goals Carbone is involved in. 

Booth certainly didn't become more effective once we had got rid of the Fancy Dans.

 

West Ham were more successful with Di Canio in the side than they were without him until his 5th season with them which suggests we could have got a couple of good seasons out of him and also shows they got a bargain. We got 12th place followed by relegated. glad we moved on!

[Guest Willow Owl]

1 minute ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

Who was better for us at the time and who has been better since in terms of ability?

 

Would you expect him to turn them into title challengers? They got into Europe and finished as high as they had done in over a decade twice with him in the side and he was their player of the year so must have been doing OK.

 

As has been said, Italy had a lot of great players in his position in the 90's, how many times did David Hirst play for England - does that mean he wasn't top quality? As with Hirst, Man Utd tried to sign Di Canio, it may be that he wasn't quite at that level but he was certainly good enough for the level we were at - a level we fell away from after binning the Fancy Dans and have never returned to since. 

 

 

What don’t you get. For the umpteenth time he was a good player for us I have never said he wasn’t. He was also our most technically gifted player at the time.  Just don’t think he did it consistently. 
 

Not exactly comparing apples with apples We have been out of the premier league for over 20 years so very very unlikely to attract players with any significant premier league ability. 

I believe ( in my opinion ) the club did right to get rid of him. What he did was a disgrace. NOTHING TO DO WITH FOOTBALL ABILITY.

He got player of the season for us scoring 14 goals and we finished 16th. The previous season Booth scored 13 and we finished 7th. Why do you keep bringing West Ham into this ?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Willow Owl said:

What don’t you get. For the umpteenth time he was a good player for us I have never said he wasn’t. He was also our most technically gifted player at the time.  Just don’t think he did it consistently. 
 

Not exactly comparing apples with apples We have been out of the premier league for over 20 years so very very unlikely to attract players with any significant premier league ability. 

I believe ( in my opinion ) the club did right to get rid of him. What he did was a disgrace. NOTHING TO DO WITH FOOTBALL ABILITY.

He got player of the season for us scoring 14 goals and we finished 16th. The previous season Booth scored 13 and we finished 7th. Why do you keep bringing West Ham into this ?

 

Do you think it irrelevant that West Ham got Di Canio for a bargain price from us and went on to improve with him in the side while we took a decision to cast him aside and went on to be relegated after we cast aside our other Fancy Dan?

 

Booth scored more goals with the help of Carbone and then Di Canio as well than he did without them. 

 

He did it consistently enough to be player of the year in his 1 full season with us and our record without him suggests we replaced him and Carbone with inferior players. 

 

No need to get irate, it's just a debate.

[Guest Willow Owl]

9 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

Di Canio brought more than just goals. He provided assists and was a threat that opponents took into account and therefore opened up space for others.

Booth was effective when playing with Carbone but for some reason was happy to see the back of him - have a look at the 96-97 season and see how many of Booth's goals Carbone is involved in. 

Booth certainly didn't become more effective once we had got rid of the Fancy Dans.

 

West Ham were more successful with Di Canio in the side than they were without him until his 5th season with them which suggests we could have got a couple of good seasons out of him and also shows they got a bargain. We got 12th place followed by relegated. glad we moved on!

No matter what he brought we still finished nine places worse off than the previous season.

STOP BRINGING WEST HAM INTO IT. GOT NOTHING TO WITH ANYTHING I HAVE POSTED. 
If he hadn’t pushed the ref then who knows, we may have got 2/3  more good seasons out of him. However if we had continued to lose 9 places a season like we did in his first we would have been in league 1 even quicker than we were.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Willow Owl said:

No matter what he brought we still finished nine places worse off than the previous season.

STOP BRINGING WEST HAM INTO IT. GOT NOTHING TO WITH ANYTHING I HAVE POSTED. 
If he hadn’t pushed the ref then who knows, we may have got 2/3  more good seasons out of him. However if we had continued to lose 9 places a season like we did in his first we would have been in league 1 even quicker than we were.

 

4 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

Do you think it irrelevant that West Ham got Di Canio for a bargain price from us and went on to improve with him in the side while we took a decision to cast him aside and went on to be relegated after we cast aside our other Fancy Dan?

 

 

This is really getting you quite angry isn't it! 

 

You think we would have got relegated in the season we binned him of had he stayed? The Arsenal game was our 8th of the season and the 3rd won that we won. The other 2 victories were thanks in no small part to his displays and he was our top scorer at the time.

[@owlstalk]

 

@Willow Owl - why do you get so angrymad in this thread?

It's just a discussion.. 

 

 

[Guest Willow Owl]

1 minute ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

Do you think it irrelevant that West Ham got Di Canio for a bargain price from us and went on to improve with him in the side while we took a decision to cast him aside and went on to be relegated after we cast aside our other Fancy Dan?

 

Booth scored more goals with the help of Carbone and then Di Canio as well than he did without them. 

 

He did it consistently enough to be player of the year in his 1 full season with us and our record without him suggests we replaced him and Carbone with inferior players. 

 

No need to get irate, it's just a debate.

Yes it is irrelevant what he achieved or what is perceived he achieved at West Ham as he wasn’t our player because of his own stupid actions.

 

Did he or did he not cause the problem himself ?
Would the club have got rid of him to West Ham if he hadn’t pushed Alcock ?

 

He was player of the year yet we finished 9 places worse. 
 

I’m not irate just do not understand what you are getting at. Your argument is based on if’s, buts and maybes.

 

The reality is we sold him on the cheap to get rid of him because of what he himself did not the club. Whether you agree with that then fine. 

[Guest Willow Owl]

3 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

@Willow Owl - why do you get so angrymad in this thread?

It's just a discussion.. 

 

 

I’m not angry pal. Just keep having to constantly repeat what I have said. 
if he’s on the wind up then I can go on all night

[Guest Willow Owl]

37 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

I have to say.. It's rare to see someone so venomously against a player.

And of all the players to be so against...

 

 

Not against him pal,  He was a good player and great to watch when on it, but was he that great for us or was he just the best we had at that time. He brought on the problems himself by pushing Alcock and everybody has an opinion if the club was right or not. I believe they were right but that’s my opinion.

[@owlstalk]

9 minutes ago, Willow Owl said:

I’m not angry pal. Just keep having to constantly repeat what I have said. 
if he’s on the wind up then I can go on all night

 

 

 

I like your style

[DJMortimer]

18 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

@Willow Owl - why do you get so angrymad in this thread?

It's just a discussion.. 

 

 

 

 

Maybe that's why he doesn't like Di Canio? Reminded him too much of his own anger management issues.

 

 

[Dutch McLovin]

On 27/03/2020 at 10:43, adelphi1867 said:

I will post you my address for you to send the Tenner.

As I said, Dicanio was a truly gifted player, but ask your self this.

Why didn't Man utd, Arsenal and even Spurs, where Pleat was at the time, buy such a talent for £1.75m?.

Secondly, in the summer of 1997 the squad was needing a Left back, a Central Defender and a midfield holding player to move the squad on to challenging for a top 6 spot, we did not need Dicanio at that time.

Celtic got rid, signed Regi Blinker and Paul Lambert, who had just won the Bundeslige, European cup, and world cup, then went on to dominate Scottish football for a decade, this after a decade of being second to rangers.

We did need those players your right and we could have done without losing Blinker. But to get someone of Di Canio’s ability was a real coop for the club. The problem we had was we needed more. 

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Willow Owl said:

Yes it is irrelevant what he achieved or what is perceived he achieved at West Ham as he wasn’t our player because of his own stupid actions.

 

Did he or did he not cause the problem himself ?
Would the club have got rid of him to West Ham if he hadn’t pushed Alcock ?

 

He was player of the year yet we finished 9 places worse. 
 

I’m not irate just do not understand what you are getting at. Your argument is based on if’s, buts and maybes.

 

The reality is we sold him on the cheap to get rid of him because of what he himself did not the club. Whether you agree with that then fine. 

 

My if's and buts? You said we might have got relegated earlier if he had stayed!

 

The reality that we sold him on the cheap is awful business on our part. We fully and openly advertised the fact we wanted nothing to do with him which further decreased his value after the incident. The value obviously went down as a result of what he did but the club made it worse by showing their hand to everyone - great move!

 

11 minutes ago, Willow Owl said:

Not against him pal,  He was a good player and great to watch when on it, but was he that great for us or was he just the best we had at that time. He brought on the problems himself by pushing Alcock and everybody has an opinion if the club was right or not. I believe they were right but that’s my opinion.

 

Best we had at that time, Fair enough - we got rid and got relegated. Good move

[DJMortimer]

It really is astonishing that someone is actually inferring that a team comprising the likes of Atherton, Nolan, Briscoe, Newsome, Humphreys, Oakes, Nicol, Magilton, Booth etc was better off without someone like Di Canio.

 

 

[soldierboyblue]

1 hour ago, Willow Owl said:

Never said he wasn’t one of our better players at the time, did I ? 
 
See original replies 

I never said you did - I asked the question who was better

[pazowl55]

7 hours ago, DJMortimer said:

 

Alex Ferguson tried to sign him for Manchester United. But what did he ever achieve?

 

The Italian squad was stuffed in those positions at that time with the likes of Baggio, Del Piero, Vialli, Totti, Zola, Vieri, Inzaghi, Mancini, Casiraghi, Ravanelli. If you have a large number of quality players like that, you don't need to persist with one who is a borderline nutcase. And didn't he have something of a feud going with one of the national team managers at that time?

 

Players like Hirst, Waddle and Le Tissier were ignored internationally for lengthy periods despite the clamour to include them from supporters and the media. Doesn't mean they were no good.

 

And again, there's this strange insistence that he should have been able to single-handedly take mid-table teams to greatness. The basis of our greatest squad in the last half century got relegated in 1990, so numerous quality players didn't make a difference there, never mind isolating one of them.

 

Di Canio will not go down as an all-time legend like Shearer, Giggs and Dalglish, which is fair enough given their respective achievements. But that doesn't put him in amongst the dross either.

 

Exactly. Think of how many top quality Spanish midfielders never got caps for there country. If your country is blessed with talent in particular positions in your era what can you do.