[20%] [0%] [3%] [8%] [3%] [40%] [0%] [0%] [0%] [28%] 
World Soccer said it was closer to £10.2m.Rabbit wrote:Eduardo - 16 million and he's done sweet FA...
Cesc wrote:World Soccer said it was closer to £10.2m.Rabbit wrote:Eduardo - 16 million and he's done sweet FA...
He has been slightly unlucky with fitness problems, but when he has played he has looked slightly lost at times. Hopefully he can find himself soon. He has done it internationally at Croatia.
Its a good job van Persie and Adebayor have been sensational.
Babel: unfinshed article, young, inconsistent, too expensive - nothing that hasn't been said before he played one game for pool. Doesn't help being played out of position and rafatated. Still talented and odd moment of brilliance. could go eitehr way but Rafa's pool not the right club at this time.The-Frank-Tavern wrote:Babel - dutch usually settle well, so a big disappointment. looks too much money
Smith - knew what you were getting too much money but so so buy
Harewood - never understood it, less so now
Hargreaves - time will tell v good player injury prone though it would seem too early to judge
Eduardo - brazilian coming from e europe too early to tell
D.Bent - bad buy didn't need him bad buy
Allaridere - done better than i expected when hes started but has had probs with injuries in the past which again has reared its head, too early to tell much like hargreaves
Bianchi - not enjoying england but sven was bound to have 1 disappointment given the signings he made in such a short period, could still come good if he settles
Nugent - no explanation for this, other than he ain't as good as harry thought, sale in jan.
Re: What summer buy looks the worst now by Arnaud loves Catherine Tue Oct 23, 2007 1:13 pm
he's not even being harewood because he hasn't been playing. can't get on the bench even when carew's injured. that penalty is about his sole contribution in the league. £4m well spentDD wrote:
Harewood: Not doing bad or right. Just being Harewood. Oh, and that penalty against Spurs.
L r d wrote:Difference between not playing because your injured... and not playing because you have been poor when being played out of position.
L r d wrote:Difference between not playing because your injured... and not playing because you have been poor when you have played.
110% wrote:L r d wrote:Difference between not playing because your injured... and not playing because you have been poor when you have played.
there's also a difference between playing and not playing
wasn't babel involed in the winner at the weekend? so his contribution so far has exceeded hargreaves's contribution at a lower price, therefore according to your own thread title of "whihc looks worst buy now" babel has been better than hargreaves
i voted for bent anyway, just showing you how stupid your argument is
L r d wrote:110% wrote:L r d wrote:Difference between not playing because your injured... and not playing because you have been poor when you have played.
there's also a difference between playing and not playing
wasn't babel involed in the winner at the weekend? so his contribution so far has exceeded hargreaves's contribution at a lower price, therefore according to your own thread title of "whihc looks worst buy now" babel has been better than hargreaves
i voted for bent anyway, just showing you how stupid your argument is
So a guy who cost 13 mill and has not even got a place ahead of riise, is a better buy because he's played rubbish? as opposed to hargreaves who hasnt played...but maybe will play a big part when fit. Your argument is stupid not mine.
L r d wrote:110% wrote:L r d wrote:Difference between not playing because your injured... and not playing because you have been poor when you have played.
there's also a difference between playing and not playing
wasn't babel involed in the winner at the weekend? so his contribution so far has exceeded hargreaves's contribution at a lower price, therefore according to your own thread title of "whihc looks worst buy now" babel has been better than hargreaves
i voted for bent anyway, just showing you how stupid your argument is
So a guy who cost 13 mill and has not even got a place ahead of riise, is a better buy because he's played rubbish? as opposed to hargreaves who hasnt played...but maybe will play a big part when fit. Your argument is stupid not mine.
robert wrote:I'm going with Hargreaves. We paid 17 million for constant knee tendonitis! On the + side had he not been injured then we wouldn't have been able to see what Anderson is capable off just yet.
COTR wrote:robert wrote:I'm going with Hargreaves. We paid 17 million for constant knee tendonitis! On the + side had he not been injured then we wouldn't have been able to see what Anderson is capable off just yet.
don't be silly. hargreaves will be fine
I am actually yet to see anderson play a game for united so can't comment on him
Bianchi seems like a total waste of space
COTR wrote:robert wrote:I'm going with Hargreaves. We paid 17 million for constant knee tendonitis! On the + side had he not been injured then we wouldn't have been able to see what Anderson is capable off just yet.
don't be silly. hargreaves will be fine
I am actually yet to see anderson play a game for united so can't comment on him
Bianchi seems like a total waste of space
Calidad wrote:Babel is an average player, I never really expected him to make much of an impact. Never understood how some here were comparing him to Henry.
|
|
|
Home