[Archived] Benni Mccarthy - Gone

[Uddersfelt Blue]

...or 32 in 63 starts. It's a phenomenal record.

However if he thinks he is bigger than the team and is not prepared to accept that he can't always play 90 minutes then we are better off without him.

Don't get me wrong I hope he stays but this not the first time he's thrown his dummy out of his pram.

[DP]

When were the other times?

[dillo_dillo]

Benni? No thanks.

[Oklahoma]

And maybe, just maybe, this is all press speculation, made to create problems inside Rovers and to get him to be transfered.

[James No. 7]

And maybe, just maybe, this is all press speculation, made to create problems inside Rovers and to get him to be transfered.

Surely it's the case that we don't know the full details. I trust Sparky to handle the situation, whatever it is, in whatever way he sees fit. He's no sucker.

[LeChuck]

However if he thinks he is bigger than the team and is not prepared to accept that he can't always play 90 minutes then we are better off without him.

Don't get me wrong I hope he stays but this not the first time he's thrown his dummy out of his pram.

Jesus.

One minute he's a lazy sod who just wants to earn money...

...the next he's getting chastised for being unhappy about not being on the pitch.

What do we want it to be? Happy to take the money, or wanting to be on the pitch influencing games and scoring goals? We can't have it both ways.

Selling Benni would be madness, we'll never get a replacement as good as him.

[3recurring]

Some rumors are circulating within the press this morning that this latest spell of unrest is down to Chelsea re-igniting their interest in Benni.

It's recently been confirmed that Drogba will definitely need an operation on his knee, which, when they decide to go ahead with it, will keep him out of contention for Chelsea for a not insignificant amount of time.

Drogba has, also, already been confirmed as playing in the ACN (in which McCarthy won't be involved), from mid January, to possibly mid February, depending on the Ivory Coast's progress.

Combine this with the doubt over Shevchenko's future (a move abroad as early as January has been mentioned), and suddenly Chelsea's attacking options are left looking decidedly threadbare, leaving them with only two designated first-team strikers to choose from - Salomon Kalou, with just three goals this season, and Claudio Pizarro, with only one.

[philipl]

There seem to be more concerted rumours on the Chelsea pages that:

Bendtner is moving from Arsenal for £12m, and

Lulinha is moving from Corinthians fir £8m, and

a Ronaldinho deal has been done

The Benni story appears to be of the journalistic 2 + 2 variety whereas there are alleged quotes linking Kenyon and Arnesen to each of the above. There is also the 16 year old new Zlatan for £300K.

[Eddie]

Lulinha will never more as little as that.

[thenodrog]

Lulinha will never more as little as that.

Have you been out drinking all night with Jordan?

Edited December 6, 2007 by thenodrog

[Eddie]

It was supposed to be "move for".

[Dunnfc]

Read one of the funniest things ever this morning!

Celtic and Rangers want him, like hed go there

[Rovermatt]

While it's a weaker league I don't see why that's so hilarious. Celtic is an enormous club where Champions League football is a relative certainty. Even Rangers is a grander outfit than Rovers.

[den]

Even Rangers is a grander outfit than Rovers.

They get more fans on than rovers do, due to there being no other other clubs in Scotland. What else makes them "grander" than rovers, Rovermatt?

[Rovermatt]

I should think it's fairly obvious that they are a bigger club than Rovers. Are you disputing this?

[den]

I should think it's fairly obvious that they are a bigger club than Rovers. Are you disputing this?

You said they are a grander club than rovers, so I'm just asking this Matt -

They get more fans on than rovers do, due to there being no other other clubs in Scotland. What else makes them "grander" than rovers?

Edited December 6, 2007 by den

[USRoverME]

When was the last time Rovers challenged for the last 16 of the Champions League?

When was the last time Rangers and/or Celtic didn't?

certainly that says it all in relation to a player like Benni and his Porto track record.

[den]

When was the last time Rovers challenged for the last 16 of the Champions League?

When was the last time Rangers and/or Celtic didn't?

certainly that says it all in relation to a player like Benni and his Porto track record.

It's a nailed on certainty that they play in the champs league, they have no-one to beat. If they played in the prem, they wouldn't be doing. - just like rovers don't.

[Rovermatt]

Without getting sucked into a discussion about the definition of 'big club' I would contend that Rangers with all its tradition, success and large fanbase could readily be described as 'grander' than Rovers. Having said that we are a much better team, with better players, more money and we play in a superior competition.

[den]

Without getting sucked into a discussion about the definition of 'big club' I would contend that Rangers with all its tradition, success and large fanbase could readily be described as 'grander' than Rovers. Having said that we are a much better team, with better players, more money and we play in a superior competition.

Yeah, I don't want to get sucked in either,especially as we're off topic. - and I know what you mean Matt, I just wanted you to explain how Rangers were grander, apart from their support. The bit in bold is pretty grand as well.

Edited December 6, 2007 by den

[Bazzanotsogreat]

Without getting sucked into a discussion about the definition of 'big club' I would contend that Rangers with all its tradition, success and large fanbase could readily be described as 'grander' than Rovers. Having said that we are a much better team, with better players, more money and we play in a superior competition.

And in another biggie, the ability to attract quality players rather than he Journeymen that the Old Firm rely on , and yes i believe that if rovers played Celtic & rangers ten times we would win at least half of those games.

Celtic and rangers have grander names, nic stadia and more fans so do Clubs like Boca, River, Corinthians, PAOK etc etc. But can you definatly say they are bigger clubs than Rovers?. What the biggest advantage is the level of competition we face week in week out not just 4 difficult dometic league games and a hanfull of continetal games to raise yourself.

[mjs]

Whether we fans think he should stay or go is irrelevant, it all comes down to what Benni thinks. And at the moment (and some fans don't want to see what is staring them right in the face) Benni is clearly not putting in 100%, which suggests he isn't entirely happy. It's an amazing coincidence that his sulking has started again very close to the opening of the transfer window.

And, like it or not, Celtic and Rangers are bigger than us and I think he would be very tempted at the chance of playing for either of them in the Champions League.

For what it's worth I hope he stays, but I don't hold out too much hope at the moment.

[USRoverME]

one last off-topic from me, but I might be itnersted enough to make this its own thread, but..

do we really think that if Celtic and Rangers were dropped into the prem right now, that they'd be below Rovers? Basically a mid-table side?

certainly we had a bad day at the office, but a team that lost to Larissa in a 2 legged tie as opposed to two teams with life in the group stages of the CL? One of those team having taken the eventual winners fo the CL to AET int he round of 16 last season?

[LeChuck]

I should think it's fairly obvious that they are a bigger club than Rovers. Are you disputing this?

Whilst I agree that Celtic and Rangers are bigger clubs than Rovers, that's not necessarily the point.

Rovers are the more attractive club to play for by quite some distance though, due to the Scottish league being miles behind the English in terms of prestige. That is unless, of course, you're a Glaswegian mummy's boy.

[joey_big_nose]

one last off-topic from me, but I might be itnersted enough to make this its own thread, but..

do we really think that if Celtic and Rangers were dropped into the prem right now, that they'd be below Rovers? Basically a mid-table side?

certainly we had a bad day at the office, but a team that lost to Larissa in a 2 legged tie as opposed to two teams with life in the group stages of the CL? One of those team having taken the eventual winners fo the CL to AET int he round of 16 last season?

Well in terms of player for player I would say that Rovers are a better team than Rangers or Celtic bu only just. And due to ;ong term season on season participation in Europe thye are both far better than us on that stage.

The raw fact of it is that we have more money than Rangers or Celtic, and a more competiive league to test our players in. But if Ranger and Celtic joined they would quickly gain those advantages and obviously have huge gate revenues from the attendance.

It would be premature however to say that the gate monies would guarantee success however. You only need to look over at Newcastle...