Jump to content

Confirmed Signing: Shay Given (Man City)


Mr_Dogg

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In terms of the fact we got nothing back for him then yes it is a waste, even back when we signed Big Brad I would rather we got someone younger and more long term. The top defences dont chop and change players every season, how long have Rio/Vidic/VDS been together? I know thats broken up now but you see my point.

Given is a good keeper, Foster is a good keeper. Ill be fine with either, but from a financial aspect and going on the figures that I have heard then I know which one sounds like the better deal. I wouldn't mind about the club losing 5m if it wasn't for the fact we now seem to have a sell to buy policy and are trying to balance books.

Wasn't VDS 35 when united signed him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5m is too much for given, but 10m is also too much for foster

if we can get given for 3m then we should, otherwise foster, but not for more than 8.

though i think its already been said, we should pick up a cheaper more experienced GK for now and spend what money is available for the more important areas and use future revenue to pay for the ideal gk further down the line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5m for Given is too much. Would prefer to pay a bit more and get Foster if we can.
Exactly the boat I am in

Did we pay anything for Friedel?

Friedel cost us three mill. At the time I thought we were nuts paying such a fee. I was wrong. That said, I'd still prefer the younger keeper in Foster if we don't have to pay too much more than the five mill Man City supposedly want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, Given would be better value for money if we paid max 4 mill, i am not entirely sold on Foster, he is prone to some really daft errors and doesnt do the easy things well, ok, he comes up with the odd superb save but that is par for the course in the PL. We should have offered Brad a 1 year with an option of 1 year coaching included package, now we find ourselves 5 weeks away from kick off with no goalkeeper. I watched Micheal Rensing play against Dortmund live, he was awesome, ok he fell from grace at Bayern, but he joined Koln on a free and a 3 mill euro bid would be enough to take him to VP, and not get ripped off for Foster by the blue nose t**ts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I would love Foster, Given makes more sense. We would pay twice as much for Foster and in a couple of seasons he would likely leave us for Arsenal or Spurs.

Given on the other hand will hardly any resale value and keepers are in their prime at their age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come back on a flight (monday) with James Collins and Matthew Etherington from Malaga, a couple of the lads spoke to him. He was in Marbella with Given and said that he wants to come to villa, but as has already been said. They can't agree a fee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I would love Foster, Given makes more sense. We would pay twice as much for Foster and in a couple of seasons he would likely leave us for Arsenal or Spurs.

Given on the other hand will hardly any resale value and keepers are in their prime at their age.

Hang on a sec...how is Given not having any resale value a positive?? And how is Foster leaving for Arsenal in a few years a negative? (although of course not saying that will happen) Well, it is a negative of sorts, but at least we get money back - when you consider that Given will also be leaving in a few years but that will be down to retirement

Surely you mean Foster makes more sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, you want a consistency between the posts, if Foster comes here and does well someone else will be here to pick him up (for a bigger fee) a few years down the line, and we are back to square one. Whereas with Given we can get 4-5 years good service without the worry of any clubs looking to snap him up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if we can double our money on Foster 'in a few years time' surely that represents better value than losing Given for nothin 'in a few years'.

Not saying Foster will want to go of course. People just assuming again. Lets not forget he went to United and had a horrible time. Might not fancy that again.

Besides, if Foster is playing so well that a massive club comes in for him surely that benefits Aston Villa?

P.s not to mention Foster has age on his side and better injury record

Oh and also not forgetting he is also likely to break back into the England team if he comes here.

I could carry on but i wont

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it just me or is Foster another Thomas Sorenson. Makes a lot of good saves but is always prone to an error or two. Also cant be a coincidence 2 of his last 3 PL clubs were relegated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I would love Foster, Given makes more sense. We would pay twice as much for Foster and in a couple of seasons he would likely leave us for Arsenal or Spurs.

Given on the other hand will hardly any resale value and keepers are in their prime at their age.

When have Arsenal or Spurs ever signed a decent player off us? It just doesn't happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I would love Foster, Given makes more sense. We would pay twice as much for Foster and in a couple of seasons he would likely leave us for Arsenal or Spurs.

Given on the other hand will hardly any resale value and keepers are in their prime at their age.

When have Arsenal or Spurs ever signed a decent player off us? It just doesn't happen.

And if they brought Foster they wouldn't be either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â