• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Pav Contract Extention - Why is the Question ???

ArcspacE said:
Considering the position we were in throughout the season, resources available and overall squad quality - yes, it was very disappointing not to make 4th again and consolidate on our brief success.
Click to expand...

I should have made my point clearler, I am talking about last season. Are you?

I think the balanced view is to take into consideration that it was our first foray into the Champions League, a new experience, new pressure and we finished 5th as well as a decent Champion's League campaign. An excellent sason in my opinion. No team goes from strength to strength season after season.
 
So am I

You can't simply look at the finishing position out of conext - one needs to consider all facts at the time

We had a chance to build on 4th, failed miserably to attract any players during January and faded in the last 6-8 weeks like we've done countless of times before.

And if anything - thought this season we'd have learnt something from that.
 
Eh, please, there are enough Harry bashing threads. This is a Pav bashing thread so let's keep it there, no?

On topic, even the thread title here is making me tilt my tits off. GHod, even the very idea that PavDONKEY should not have been sold makes my temperature rise.
 
ArcspacE said:
So am I

You can't simply look at the finishing position out of conext - one needs to consider all facts at the time

We had a chance to build on 4th, failed miserably to attract any players during January and faded in the last 6-8 weeks like we've done countless of times before.

And if anything - thought this season we'd have learnt something from that.
Click to expand...

Before Redknapp too, so has it crossed your mind maybe it's not down to him?
 
ArcspacE said:
There was only one slight difference though - CL football on the cards
Click to expand...

So you think Redknapp was telling Levy not to spend money?

Arsenal fans said the same about Wenger. I always had the theory that the reason Wenger didn't spend was because there was no money to spend, and that he publically said there was to placate the fans and take the heat. They had a stadium to pay off.

We're looking to build a new stadium. Money is going to be tight for a very long time....with or without CL qualification.
 
The Moonlit Knight said:
So you think Redknapp was telling Levy not to spend money?

Arsenal fans said the same about Wenger. I always had the theory that the reason Wenger didn't spend was because there was no money to spend, and that he publically said there was to placate the fans and take the heat. They had a stadium to pay off.

We're looking to build a new stadium. Money is going to be tight for a very long time....with or without CL qualification.
Click to expand...

We aren't skint, that's rubbish.

You even claimed yourself earlier today we've had large bids (for unrealistic targets perhaps) rejected and so did Arry. Are you know contradicting yourself?


Point is - we were in arguably our best position in decades to attract players and we failed to prepare and execute when it mattered.
 
ArcspacE said:
We aren't skint, that's rubbish.

You even claimed yourself earlier today we've had large bids (for unrealistic targets perhaps) rejected and so did Arry. Are you know contradicting yourself?


Point is - we were in arguably our best position in decades to attract players and we failed to prepare and execute when it mattered.
Click to expand...

I don't think we're skint, but I don't think we're flush. I think making big bids, knowing full well you don't have a hope in hell of getting that player, is a clever tactic to promote the illusion we're a "player".
 
@ Jimmy

Please read my posts before you answer back.

I never said they were lot of awful players - I said there was an awful lot of them. Pardon is I misused the grammer, I do am writing in my second language, you know.

Back on topic:

The names I put up are the ones which I consider very likely to leave, for one reason or another.

The point is, there is a big, big bunch of players who might not be there at all, the upside being that we save A-LOT of wages, the flipside that they need replacements right away.

And I didn't even consider Saha and Nelsen not being extended, there !

So what do you think about that ?
 
I think we have spent about 100mil or more acquiring land around WHL for the stadium project in the last few seasons. I'm guessing that this is the reason we are not throwing a lot of money around.

In saying that I am surprised at our lack of transfer activity recently. We had a chance to consolidate in the CL positions and have missed it (again!). This surprises me the most as Levy can surely see the upside to investing in top player talent. I guess what happened was in January they said, "Hey we're doing fine lets just get a few oldies to fill out the squad. We'll don't need anyone." To do this once was a big big mistake. To do it twice is plain stupid. We'll never know how they, Levy and Redknapp, came to this decision but Levy is the boss and so the I guess has the final say.
 
Levy loves the policy of buying talent and seeing it flourish IMO. The likes of Modric fit his MO perfectly and I think he would happily spend bucket loads on players like this.

Redknapp however has always seemed reluctant, prefering a "tried and tested" type player instead.

Odd, considering his most of his best performers were Levy type buys...
 
DanishWhite said:
@ Jimmy

Please read my posts before you answer back.

I never said they were lot of awful players - I said there was an awful lot of them. Pardon is I misused the grammer, I do am writing in my second language, you know.

Back on topic:

The names I put up are the ones which I consider very likely to leave, for one reason or another.

The point is, there is a big, big bunch of players who might not be there at all, the upside being that we save A-LOT of wages, the flipside that they need replacements right away.

And I didn't even consider Saha and Nelsen not being extended, there !

So what do you think about that ?
Click to expand...

I think some of the named players have been under used and others should never have been put out on loan, some should never have been bought in the first place, the exception being Bentley who was bought as an option to Lennon, we had Pienaar who can play anywhere and let him go and kept Krankie who cannot play nowhere, I think its the players that have made us perform over the last couple of seasons and that Redknap has been lucky, its all right being critical of our players but improving on them will be difficult.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Levy loves the policy of buying talent and seeing it flourish IMO. The likes of Modric fit his MO perfectly and I think he would happily spend bucket loads on players like this.

Redknapp however has always seemed reluctant, prefering a "tried and tested" type player instead.

Odd, considering his most of his best performers were Levy type buys...
Click to expand...

Parker, Friedel, VDV, Ade and Crouch? Bale and Modric are the two exceptions, certainly not the rule.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Kaboul, Ekotto, Bale, Modric, Lennon, Walker... All fit the Levy mould of preferred buys and have all been among Harrys best and most regular performers.
Click to expand...

I'll ignore you said that! Walker was one of Redknapp's, and not his finest hour that's for sure!

If you were to list all the players signed since Levy has been at the club I think you'd be surprised.
 
Im not saying Redknapp didnt sign him, Im saying there is a clear distinction between each members preferred buying style.

Sandro came in under Redknapp (Im sure with Redknapps full consent) and had Levys fingerprints all over it.

Friedel, Parker, Gallas - Harry all over without doubt (and no, Im not slagging them off either, 3 good buys)

The point I was trying to make initially is that if these two chaps transfer ideals were more closely aligned then I am certain more business would have been conducted.

It seems to me they are naturally at odds on this topic, which I doubt helps transfers and tx window planning
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Im not saying Redknapp didnt sign him, Im saying there is a clear distinction between each members preferred buying style.

Sandro came in under Redknapp (Im sure with Redknapps full consent) and had Levys fingerprints all over it.

Friedel, Parker, Gallas - Harry all over without doubt (and no, Im not slagging them off either, 3 good buys)

The point I was trying to make initially is that if these two chaps transfer ideals were more closely aligned then I am certain more business would have been conducted.

It seems to me they are naturally at odds on this topic, which I doubt helps transfers and tx window planning
Click to expand...

Good point.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Im not saying Redknapp didnt sign him, Im saying there is a clear distinction between each members preferred buying style.

Sandro came in under Redknapp (Im sure with Redknapps full consent) and had Levys fingerprints all over it.

Friedel, Parker, Gallas - Harry all over without doubt (and no, Im not slagging them off either, 3 good buys)

The point I was trying to make initially is that if these two chaps transfer ideals were more closely aligned then I am certain more business would have been conducted.

It seems to me they are naturally at odds on this topic, which I doubt helps transfers and tx window planning
Click to expand...

And yet it was the Chief Scout that Harry poached from Portsmouth who apparently convinced Harry to sign him without Harry even seeing in him in the flesh?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back