Dodgyknees Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Where does Gary Gardner play? Isn't it about time he got a crack, rather than signing a Norwich reserve? I think he just wants to bring in some experience to help the young players out!How many PL appearances? 60,70? Experience? Or does Lambert just want friends around the place? I don't see Hoolahan making any difference to our present line up, and would expect him to be cuddling Holt on the bench.And the confusing thing is, you want Gardner to play, who has not shown anything to suggest he will make it. Strange. Anti Lambert agenda, pro Lerner agenda. You're going off on one of your tangents again! I enquired about where Gardner plays, nothing more. I am an ST holder and can't really remember seeing him play, which suggests that his chances to 'show anything' have been extremely limited. As one of our apparently brighter prospects, I would hate us to sign Hoolahan and have a Knight/Cahill situation. Because I question a potential signing makes me anti-Lambert? Sorry, I don't get that one. And I assume that you have mentioned the owner because you like to feed your personal obsession, because I can't see where he would be relevant to the discussion? You do make me laugh, accusing me of going 'off on a tangent' for expressing an opinion and asking a question. This is an open forum. That was my point exactly. Which was not off tangent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 3-4m for 31 hoolahan that fans dont even want? with respect i think i will pass on that one It would never happen, the top end of that (£4m) is getting close to what we paid for Benteke and it would be one of Lambert's biggest fees spent with us. I'd grab £1.5m for a 31 year old player (he'll be 32 by the end of the season) who is currently on the fringes of the squad, if that is what we have offered. Eh? We spent nearly £8m on Benteke. We didn't, but that is a whole other topic. Here we go again. The amount we spent on players last year is a matter of record. £21.7m If we didn't spend £7m on Benteke, who on earth cost a lot more than their reported values? Because if you went off the undervaluing that generally goes on, we'd have spent closer to £12m. But we didn't. £21.7m. Which is extremely close to the combined cost of all the players like Benteke and Westwood reported on sites like Soccerbase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I have never heard anyone claim Benteke costs £8m?? No-one knows for sure but £7m is the figure generally used Loving those pedantics 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Where does Gary Gardner play? Isn't it about time he got a crack, rather than signing a Norwich reserve? I think he just wants to bring in some experience to help the young players out!How many PL appearances? 60,70? Experience? Or does Lambert just want friends around the place? I don't see Hoolahan making any difference to our present line up, and would expect him to be cuddling Holt on the bench.And the confusing thing is, you want Gardner to play, who has not shown anything to suggest he will make it. Strange. Anti Lambert agenda, pro Lerner agenda. You're going off on one of your tangents again! I enquired about where Gardner plays, nothing more. I am an ST holder and can't really remember seeing him play, which suggests that his chances to 'show anything' have been extremely limited. As one of our apparently brighter prospects, I would hate us to sign Hoolahan and have a Knight/Cahill situation. Because I question a potential signing makes me anti-Lambert? Sorry, I don't get that one. And I assume that you have mentioned the owner because you like to feed your personal obsession, because I can't see where he would be relevant to the discussion? You do make me laugh, accusing me of going 'off on a tangent' for expressing an opinion and asking a question. This is an open forum. That was my point exactly. Which was not off tangent. Except that at no point did I state that I wanted Gardner to play, as you stated ('expressed opinion')so off tangent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunny*Nunny Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Nothing exciting but semi-interesting......... http://www.thestar.ie/star/hoolahans-whel-of-furtune-40125/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 All of this bad blood does no one at Norwich any good. It actually is bad for their current management team as well as it says that they are still bitter Lambert left them and ergo they still want him as their manager, they are not satisfied with what they have now Maybe they just don't want to sell? To us. If someone like Fulham, Newcastle, Stoke, Cardiff, WBA etc etc etc put in a bid of around 1.5M they'd sell him of that I have no doubt at all. It is us they have the issue with and it is because they are still sore we took Paul from them. I'm pretty sure we would not sell him for £1.5m to anyone else but its also correct to say we do not want to sell to Villa/Lambert if we can help it. Lambert/Villa manufactured his departure from us and then tried to avoid us getting the rightful compensation. Most clubs would be sore. Its no coincidence that Lambert falls out with every club he leaves/walks out on *because he is a ruthless individual who is **only ultimately concerned with his own career. That's fine, we knew that, benefitted from it for a while and ultimately should not have been surprised that he walked out on us in the same way he did Colchester. That's not to say though that we are not entitled to be disappointed or indeed that we should go about making his life easier now he's your manager by selling him any players he fancies when we don't need to sell them. * Utter rubbish. Have you met him or spoken to him, how long have you spent in his company in order to make this assessment. ** He's professional, professional people (in fact people in general) have a right to be concerned with their own careers nowt wrong with that 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunny*Nunny Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Is it wrong that the main reason I want this to go through is so Hoolahan can provide the assist to Holts winning goal against Norwich in March? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted January 23, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted January 23, 2014 Is it wrong that the main reason I want this to go through is so Hoolahan can provide the assist to Holts winning goal against Norwich in March? ...to send them down! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob182 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 All of this bad blood does no one at Norwich any good. It actually is bad for their current management team as well as it says that they are still bitter Lambert left them and ergo they still want him as their manager, they are not satisfied with what they have now Maybe they just don't want to sell? Why wouldn't they want to sell? Hughton doesn't play him and we're not currently a direct relegation rival. If they sold him to us, Hughton would have money to spend and we'd have a player (that we want) to try to beat the teams that are around Norwich, therefore furthering their chances of survival. In addition to what Richard said, it must also make Hughton feel like they're not selling him because they're possibly thinking of sacking him and bringing in another manager, who could fancy Wes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay.P.A Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 We need to bring this guy in. He wants to play for us and under Lambert again. He will be a good player for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan-scott Posted January 23, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted January 23, 2014 He's pushing for it but by the sounds of it Norwich don't want to play ball, if I were Lambert I'd move on to the next target and leave Norwich with an unhappy player and out of pocket. There's plenty more fish in the sea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son Of Wiz Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 The bottom line is we not sell to Villa regardless of the offer, period. Thats from a respected ITK journo M Dennis this morning. This is getting well spiteful now imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunny*Nunny Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Next.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daveburnside Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 The bottom line is we not sell to Villa regardless of the offer, period. Thats from a respected ITK journo M Dennis this morning. This is getting well spiteful now imo. How does it make you feel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son Of Wiz Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 (edited) The bottom line is we not sell to Villa regardless of the offer, period. Thats from a respected ITK journo M Dennis this morning. This is getting well spiteful now imo. How does it make you feel? Fed up to be honest mate and sorry for Wes caught up in it, here's that ITK article: Mick Dennis Lift's the Lid a Little. Norwich City have complained formally to Aston Villa about their pursuit of Wes Hoolahan – and have received a curt reply. The exchange of letters between the two clubs demonstrates the deterioration of relations between them and explains why Norwich, who have rejected a transfer request from Hoolahan, are especially determined not to sell him to Villa. Norwich wrote complaining that Villa manager Paul Lambert had publicly extolled Hoolahan’s ability, despite the Norfolk club saying he is not for sale. Villa wrote back merely acknowledging the receipt of the Norwich letter and “noting its contents”. The acrimony between the two clubs stems from events after Lambert left Norwich for Villa 19 months ago. There was an escalating series of bad-tempered exchanges between Lambert, people representing him, and Norwich chief executive David McNally and chairman Alan Bowkett. There was more bad blood when reserve goalkeeper Jed Steer followed Lambert to Villa Park last summer. Then Villa bid £750,000 for Hoolahan at about the time the 31-year-old Republic of Ireland midfielder reported that he had picked up an injury and could not play in the FA Cup third round tie against Fulham. Hoolahan also told Norwich staff, verbally, that he wanted to join Villa. Norwich manager Chris Hughton told the Norwich board he wants to keep Hoolahan, who had just forced his way into the first team. So Norwich told the player they had no intention of selling him and refused at first to even talk with Villa about the bid until after a tribunal hearing about goalkeeper Steer. Once that tribunal had made its ruling – that Villa must pay £450,000 immediately and, in theory could hand over up to £1.75m – Norwich rejected the offer for Hoolahan. The popular midfielder – the only survivor from the era before Lambert lifted Norwich 54 places in three seasons – reported that he was fit but “not in the right frame of mind” to play. Despite that, Hughton has continued to select him as a sub. This week Hoolahan submitted a written transfer request, but insisted: “There has not been any big row or anything.” Norwich rejected the request and have told him again that they do not intend to sell him. That remains the position privately as well as publicly. I understand that the only circumstances in which they might be prepared to part with Hoolahan in this transfer window is if they could sign someone better at his sort of role – operating centrally just behind the main striker. Even then they would want at least £3m for Hoolahan and would still not want Villa to be his destination. They regard Villa as direct rivals in their attempt to secure a fourth successive season in the Premier League. In 2009, soon after he had arrived at Norwich , Lambert tried to sell Hoolahan. And, if the Scot had remained in charge at Carrow Road for the summer in which he moved to Villa, he would have sold Grant Holt – the striker with whom he has now been reunited. Lambert’s list of players he wanted to move on had already been presented to the Norwich board when he decamped to Villa. Holt was on that list. In the event, however, Lambert left and new Norwich manager Chris Hughton gave Holt a new contract. The striker stayed for one season under Hughton in the Premier League before joining Wigan for £2m last summer. After scoring just twice in 19 appearances for Wigan he accepted a loan move to Villa for the rest of the season. Edited January 23, 2014 by Son Of Wiz 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daveburnside Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Even if Norwich do keep hold of him, it seems like such a small victory. They get to keep a player who hasn't really figured much and is only going to decrease in value until his contact expires. So petty. So so petty. Poor Wes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mart-L7 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Take about cutting your own nose off :s if he was playing week in week out I could see their point but this just stopping a player play probably the last few years of his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENTLEMAN Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 We have the reason as to why Lambert left Norwich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Cropley Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Mick Dennis....the impartial journalist, who just happens to be a Norwich City insider, on the board of their Sports Foundation and a patron of the Supporters Association ? Let him keep feeding the carrot-crunchers as much shite as their board likes. The fact remains that the lad wants out - and will most likely get his wish sooner rather than later. The cobblers about Lambert wanting to sell both of them is irrelevant- many managers decide to get rid of players to try a new strategy or type of tactics, doesn't mean they never rated them, or won't ever work with them again. Just another example of a piss ant club trying to play big boys games....zzzzz 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 So petty from Norwich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts