Jump to content

Reo Coker


nycVILLA

Recommended Posts

What exactly is the basis for thinking he had a chip on his shoulder? I've never seen any evidence of it.

 

I don't know the guy personally but I used to know someone who did and I take his word for it when he says he is a really nice bloke. Something supported by the experience of meeting him by a chap who used to sit by me at VP.

 

Sure he got in a row with O'Neill and he didn't much fancy a pay cut, oh and his agent made some daft claims.

 

I'm not sure how any of that suggests he has a chip on his shoulder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly is the basis for thinking he had a chip on his shoulder? I've never seen any evidence of it.

 

I don't know the guy personally but I used to know someone who did and I take his word for it when he says he is a really nice bloke. Something supported by the experience of meeting him by a chap who used to sit by me at VP.

 

Sure he got in a row with O'Neill and he didn't much fancy a pay cut, oh and his agent made some daft claims.

 

I'm not sure how any of that suggests he has a chip on his shoulder.

 

This.  If he has a chip on his shoulder, isn't it a bit odd he has captained pretty much every club he has played for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly is the basis for thinking he had a chip on his shoulder? I've never seen any evidence of it.

 

I don't know the guy personally but I used to know someone who did and I take his word for it when he says he is a really nice bloke. Something supported by the experience of meeting him by a chap who used to sit by me at VP.

 

Sure he got in a row with O'Neill and he didn't much fancy a pay cut, oh and his agent made some daft claims.

 

I'm not sure how any of that suggests he has a chip on his shoulder.

 

This.  If he has a chip on his shoulder, isn't it a bit odd he has captained pretty much every club he has played for?

 

Quite. Not to mention his country at Under 21's level, I just don't buy it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He doesn't deserve half the stick he gets on here, I'd welcome him back at the club.

 

He has made some bad decisions but the club didn't exactly do right by him either the way they released him.

 

Overall I think he is a good guy and it is a great shame the way his career has gone.

 

Seems we can now "Like" moderators posts. This is good news, because this post I doth liketh. 

 

He's a very boisterous and outspoken character but I don't think he's a bad egg, just incredibly passionate. Very intelligent too and he shows leadership qualities on the pitch. 

 

I would gladly have him back till the end of the season. I would hazard a guess he would accept some form of pay as you play deal to keep himself fit, put his name back on the board. Maybe I'm just guessing here, but to me it seems like a no brainer.

 

I understand why he's not so popular with many fans. I've seen him play...

 

He'll run around a lot, win the ball, then now and then promptly give it straight back to the opposition. He's a rare kind of player though, I've yet to see another player with his engine. He will keep you in games with his energy and his physicality, he's a leader and a winner. It's a shame he's shit at football, but he has certain qualities we lack right now unless Delph can continue his recent form. Even then, I'd take an insurance policy between now and May. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like you I don't know him personally, but I too know a bloke that knows him and knows his family quite well, it was he that told me of his attitude problem.

 

People find other people differently. The overwhelming opinion from people who know or know of Reo-Coker is that he's a good guy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He doesn't deserve half the stick he gets on here, I'd welcome him back at the club.

 

He has made some bad decisions but the club didn't exactly do right by him either the way they released him.

What did the club do wrong? His contract ended and the club either decided they didn't want to offer him a new one or he wasn't happy with the terms that the club did offer.

 

I can't really see how the club is at fault. I'm not sure that there is fault to even be assigned. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are so many widely held misconceptions about what happened with Reo-Coker they appeared to have been accepted as truth. A little like the 'Warnock slagged off the club' line despite there never ever ever having been any substance to it other than one persons post on a forum. the power of the internet I guess, if something is said often enough it must be true. Only sometimes it isn't, there are just a lot of people who are wrong.

 

He wanted to stay, he wanted to sit down and discuss a new contract and so did Houllier but for whatever reason Houllier decided the talks should wait until the summer despite his contract counting down. His agent then started making noises about interest from clubs, which may or may not have been real but is fully understandable when his client is running out of contract.

 

Then Houllier got ill, the summer arrived and then Houllier left and no talks were forth coming. People seem to have this thing where they believe Reo-Coker was demanding a huge salary yet given everything that has happened at the club in the last two years I really think it is time people started to think a little bit more about past events.

 

For two years or more now decisions at the club have been made on a financial rather than footballing basis, players have been pushed out the door who would have been happy to stay and who would have made us better than we are now. These financial decisions have been made despite the players merits not because of them, players like Davies, Cuellar and Reo-Coker were moved on just to save money.

 

What is worse is if I recall correctly is that we released Reo-Coker at a time when it was quite obvious Houllier wasn't going to remain as manager, when he wasn't actively working in the role and about 4 days before he was relieved from his position. Hardly suggests a football decision, but rather a club being run by two men desperate to cut costs regardless of consequences. Seemingly signing Stephen Ireland without a manager and selling Milner wasn't quite enough for Mr Burns and Smithers.

 

What do people believe, Houllier was allowed to make the decision on which players to release or renew the contracts of only a few days before being removed from the job or the decision was taken out of his hands? It has to be one or the other. If it was the former then those running the club are idiots and if it is the later then what the hell are they doing making football decisions again.

 

People will no doubt say it was unfortunate timing, what else could they do. Well they could have sorted out the manager situation earlier, they could have not officially released players while they were on holiday until a new man was appointed. For me there is plenty they could have done differently and plenty they should rightly be blamed for.

 

But ultimately what I blame them for is the totally unprofessional and disrespectful way they treated Reo-Coker. Regardless of if they wanted to keep him or not the way they handled his release was terrible and not the sort of thing you expect from a club.

 

Reo-Coker at the time said

 

"Before Gerard Houllier was taken ill and left the club, he said he wanted to sit me down this summer and negotiate a new deal"

 

 When the season ended, there was no contact from Villa to negotiate my contract.

 

 We never sat down together, which I was told would happen.

 

 While on holiday, I was getting texts from friends and reading Tweets that I'd been released. I was disappointed. It should've been handled better  

 and with more respect.

 

Well personally not only do I believe him but I agree with him and said so at the time. Manager or no manager at the time that is no way to treat a player and says everything about the people running the club and the sort of job they are doing. People in the game talk and that is not the sort of reputation you want to be getting.

 

So yes I believe there is a lot to blame the 'club' for or more accurately the two idiots that are running it. I don't think Reo-Coker really did a thing wrong while he was here or after he left with the exception of the bust up with O'Neill. All the talk of club x or y came from his agent, take a look at the OS and the interview with him and see what he has to say about his time here despite the way he was treated at the end.

 

I really do struggle to understand why some people hold the views on Reo-Coker that they do given that there is so little if anything to support them and quite a bit to the contrary to put them in doubt.

 

I understand peoples views on him as a player, I'm not talking about that. I'm talking specifically about their views on him as a individual which to me make no sense whatsoever. Bad attitude? Youngest ever Wimbledon captain, England Under 21 captain and led various other sides and people say he has a bad attitude? Seriously it is almost comical.

 

What has happened to him since he left us appears to me at least to be in part linked to what happened to Muamba, since that I think Reo-Coker is perhaps more interested in real life than the game and who can really blame him. That isn't a bad attitude it is just life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"People will no doubt say it was unfortunate timing, what else could they do. Well they could have sorted out the manager situation earlier, they could have not officially released players while they were on holiday until a new man was appointed. For me there is plenty they could have done differently and plenty they should rightly be blamed for."

 

The players left the club when the contract that they had signed expired. The board didn't choose for contracts in football to finish at the end of June. They can't say to the players "do you mind hanging around for another two weeks just in case the new bloke fancies offering you a new deal".

 

If he were a player that Houllier has desperately wanted to keep then he would have been offered what we thought he was worth long before he could have walked away for free. The fact that it was being 'left until the summer' indicates he wasn't hugely worried whether he stayed or went. I seem to remember he found the time to make sure that Gabby was signed to a longer deal well before the summer.  

 

And when Houllier left, short of resigning every one of the players on expired contracts on the off chance that the next bloke wanted him, again I don't really see the issue.

 

As for Reo-Coker's shock of "While on holiday, I was getting texts from friends and reading Tweets that I'd been released. I was disappointed". Well you knew that your contract expired on June 30th. You knew that you hadn't signed a new one..What exactly did you think was going to happen?

Edited by ml1dch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Buckets of energy. Thimbles of ability.

He didn't move much though, he walked about the middle of the park, he improved a lot under houllier playing him to his strengths, a forward thinking midfielder, Mon signed him for some bizarre reason to sit in front of the back 4. He admitted in an interview on avfc a few weeks ago that we never saw the best of him cus he was never played where he should have been. Not worth what we paid, but gave us more of a return on his transfer fee than the likes of sidwell, Hutton, beye etc.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â