As it's quiet - a player poll (part deux)
Moderators: Gnome, last.caress, Wilko1304, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks
- Up the Junction
- Thinks he owns the place
- Posts: 70932
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 12:03 am
- Has liked: 744 likes
- Total likes: 3444 likes
- Countryboy
- Posts: 5827
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 6:35 am
- Location: Staying home on a Saturday afternoon
Be fair ... Scotty Parker cost more than twice as much, has played even less, and is wasting just as much in wages.Marky wrote:Been a lot but I think taking into account wages and to a lesser extent transfer fee Its the crock from Le Arse
A truly useless, piss-poor signing that only goes to prove that if Curbs was ever allowed to play his personal first-choice team ... it's be sh*t
- prince_huggy
- Posts: 7572
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 2:30 pm
- Has liked: 21 likes
- Total likes: 5 likes
- davids cross
- Uncle David
- Posts: 27205
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 10:20 pm
- Has liked: 674 likes
- Total likes: 1289 likes
- Bobby Orangeboom
- Posts: 34465
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:10 pm
- Location: London, unfortunately.
Parker for me too...Countryboy wrote: Be fair ... Scotty Parker cost more than twice as much, has played even less, and is wasting just as much in wages.
A truly useless, piss-poor signing that only goes to prove that if Curbs was ever allowed to play his personal first-choice team ... it's be sh*t
- Hambrosia Stu
- Posts: 18222
- Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:03 pm
- Location: Deepest, darkest, Devonia
Same here. You have to keep in mind the context in which they were signed.davids cross wrote:I don't think any of them have been rank bad signings....just my opinion.
Possibly Davenport if I had to vote.
The likes of Quashie and Davenport were signed when we were in a real scrap at the bottom of the table. To judge such signings with the current school of thought, that we're a top 10 side, and should have top 10 players, would be harsh imo
As for Parker, he was my first thought. But it's the same really with a few of them, Faubert, Dyer, Ljungberg....all to early really to say
I mean I've never really seen why we signed Parker. But in 2 months time he could have put his injury problems behind him and be the lynchpin of our midfield. I'd be mighty surprised, but you just never know!
- davids cross
- Uncle David
- Posts: 27205
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 10:20 pm
- Has liked: 674 likes
- Total likes: 1289 likes
-
- Posts: 2907
- Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 6:35 pm
- MooreHurst
- Posts: 3471
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 10:43 am
- Location: Over the Rainbow!
- Total likes: 1 like
Quashie - shocking signing, brings nothing to the team whatsoever, and what is worrying, is if he hadn't got injured against Spurs, Curbs could have carried on picking him.
Davenport also, understand we needed a CB at the time. But 3m and the reported wages on him is money down the drain on a player of that ability.
Davenport also, understand we needed a CB at the time. But 3m and the reported wages on him is money down the drain on a player of that ability.
- carnage
- Posts: 22524
- Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 2:22 pm
- Location: KFC
- Has liked: 84 likes
- Total likes: 707 likes
What, not even someone who has failed to kick a ball for us yet?Torquemada wrote:At least we are familiar with all the crocks that are there to come back, but Blanco.....wasn't aware he was with us half the time, didn't contribute to getting us out of the shít last year, bit of a waste of space really. Can't say that of the others.
Without knowing a player's weekly wage, I am stuck between Ljunberg and Parker.
I rather expect that both will spend most of his respective contracts in the treatment room. Parker seems to me to be the more difficult to understand. Seems he can't jog onto the pitch without straining something or other.
Parker it is, then.
I rather expect that both will spend most of his respective contracts in the treatment room. Parker seems to me to be the more difficult to understand. Seems he can't jog onto the pitch without straining something or other.
Parker it is, then.
b*llocks was it Quashie, im shocked that hes been voted for so much, he was £1.75m, thats half of Davenports price and 1/4 Parkers, who has played very litttle, and when he has played, hasnt looked great, like Dyer has.
Quashie bought fight and determination to the team and thats worth the money on its own, if the players had shown that in the first place we wouldnt have been in the mess.
People hate Quashie so much they decide he is a bigger waste of money then a £6m Faubert who we may not see play this year and most have decided he is class without ever watching him play.
Quashie bought fight and determination to the team and thats worth the money on its own, if the players had shown that in the first place we wouldnt have been in the mess.
People hate Quashie so much they decide he is a bigger waste of money then a £6m Faubert who we may not see play this year and most have decided he is class without ever watching him play.
- rare as rockinghorse shat
- Posts: 55216
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 2:43 am
- Location: **** the board
- Has liked: 3 likes
- Total likes: 77 likes
- EvilC
- Posts: 18221
- Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 5:54 pm
- Location: In the street as the cold wind blows, in the ghetto...
- Has liked: 2628 likes
- Total likes: 1178 likes
- mattjp
- Posts: 2736
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:15 am
- Location: Chelmsford
- Has liked: 29 likes
- Total likes: 44 likes
- Contact:
I voted Davenport. £3m odd is a lot of money for someone who I don't really think is gonna play for us again. It's hard to judge the players who are injured really. Who knows if/when they'll get fit and how good they'll be then?
Quashie shouldn't be voted for. One of the few players who looked up for the fight around Jan/Feb last year.
Quashie shouldn't be voted for. One of the few players who looked up for the fight around Jan/Feb last year.