[Archived] Roque Santa Cruz Thread

[LeChuck]

Let's hope City stump up the money well before the window closes so we have chance to spend it. Surely they'll want him in as early as possible to help sort out the mess they're in as well.

[Bobby G]

If they dont sign him before the weekend and City lose, it may be the end of it. Interesting fact.

[Sysagent]

Mercenary b@st@rds the lot of them...

What ever happened to loyalty, allegience and sticking to yer principles?

I cannot believe we are even entertaining selling last years highest goal scorer for us to a team that is sat right next to us in the Premier League, it's like handing your enemies the bullets to shoot you with.

(Bit like the US of A)

[Bobby G]

Something Boro have said they wont do with Downing...

Maybe we dont see City as candidates for the drop.

[T4E]

he started reaming off City players.

I hope this was post-watershed?!?!

[gumboots]

Something Boro have said they wont do with Downing...

Maybe we dont see City as candidates for the drop.

If everyone refuses to sell to them then they have shown they are very much candidates for the drop. It just depends on enough clubs holding their nerve and being prepared to put up with histrionics from their players for a few weeks until they realise that if they want a summer move they had better get their heads down and start working.

[OscarRaven]

I see there is lack of a "Cruz is not for sale" quote.

Benni Mc makes Jason Robbo look good. Effectively we are one injury away from relegation if we sell Roque.

[philipl]

I haven't mentioned a single word to do with anyone's contract, or any clauses. Not this month or ever in the past.

Because even if I had the slightest idea about them (which I don't) I would never post anything so confidential in public.

Please edit your post.

http://www.brfcs.co.uk/mb/index.php?s=&amp...st&p=694328

I said at the time Tris and I repeat it now- I hope you are right.

http://www.brfcs.co.uk/mb/index.php?s=&amp...st&p=711804

If you are right, den gets it! But I guess den will be happy to suffer the consequences of Roque staying.

http://www.brfcs.co.uk/mb/index.php?s=&amp...st&p=711852

den's reply

http://www.brfcs.co.uk/mb/index.php?s=&amp...st&p=712617

http://www.brfcs.co.uk/mb/index.php?s=&amp...st&p=712618

Tris saying that RSC has an attitude problem and no injury on 21 December since when he has had zero time on the pitch or bench and Sam said three days ago it will be another seven to ten days before Roque is fit.

http://www.brfcs.co.uk/mb/index.php?s=&amp...st&p=713138

Tris's response

But unfortunately contradicted by David Dunn

Leaving Tris alone now, there are a few interesting snippets from the past I stumbled across whilst looking these things up:

Roque talking to Skysports immediately after signing his contract extension.

The LT being absolutely categorical in saying there is no contract clause. That says no clause at any time before 2012.

[waggy]

rsc wants out,lets agree a price and bring in new players

[DeadlyDirk]

You could argue that Sutton was a disaster when he left Rovers. His spell at Chelsea straight from us was a nightmare. He did well in Scotland though - but that was tecnically when he left Chelsea. I'm thinking players who've done well immediately after leaving Rovers.

I don't think doing anything in Scotland counts as an achievement, especially if its with Celtic or Rangers :-)

[Blue n White Rover]

Id take 20 million or 15 million with Sturridge and Ben Haim.

Swap deals don't happen nowadays, if that deal was going to go through it would go through as individual transfers. I can't think of the last time a swap deal happened.

I don't think Sturridge is the type of player Big Sam will be looking for. As much as the fans would love a player of his quality to come I just don't see Big Sam going for him.

[den]

If you are right, den gets it! But I guess den will be happy to suffer the consequences of Roque staying.

Den stands by every word he's ever posted on here. Rocky's sale makes no difference.

I find this all very depressing TBH. Who would have thought 6 months ago, that rovers would have sold all three of their best players - without any need to have done so? Stand up that man who said we're an ambitious club. Seems to me that the owners have only one ambition for this club.

Thank god I'm off to the Caribbean next week.

[philipl]

The Daily Mail said City bid £16m, the Daily Telegraph says £15m.

[alexanders]

We're holding out for £20m and that is ridicilous considering he is an injury-prone striker completely in the need of a quality winger to deliver the ball.

[Tris]

{blah, blah, bullsh!t, blah}

http://www.brfcs.co.uk/mb/index.php?s=&amp...st&p=712618

Tris saying that RSC has an attitude problem and no injury on 21 December since when he has had zero time on the pitch or bench and Sam said three days ago it will be another seven to ten days before Roque is fit.

Let's be really, really clear about two things, seeing as you have chosen to post links rather than quote what I actually posted and then substitute my words with your own fabrication.

1) Nowhere have I referred to RSC's contract or any clause. NOWHERE. NOT IN ANY OF THE LINKS YOU HAVE POSTED.

2) NOWHERE have I said he has "no injury". Here's that post from December 21st in full.

I put the matter straight to Roque tonight, to his face, in the Premier Lounge at Ewood.

He has not had a back injury at any stage this season. His back is fine.

I thought I might have misheard, and knowing how good philip's "sources" are, I asked the question again.

RSC has not had any back injury this season. None. Nil. Nothing. No back injury. No back injury has been restricting him. No back injury has needed rest.

So philip - once again - I don't know where you get this stuff from but it's totally untrue.

No doubt you have a better source than the player himself so I can't wait to hear what that is ... or ... perhaps ... you keep posting stories on this website which are just your own take to fit your agenda. The analysis of accounts is great - I think you should stick to that.

Personally, I no longer believe anything else you post on here.

If you don't know the difference between the back and the lower leg because your head is so far up your own @rse then that's your problem, either that or learn to read properly.

In the meantime, stop making up stuff and posting it as if I've written it. It's not difficult to see why people are beginning to take anything you say with a heap of salt. Actually misrepresenting what another poster has written and trying to pass it off is the lowest of the low in my book.

[RovertheHill]

I don't believe that the money we got from Shearer made us stronger or better

I don't believe that the money we got from Duff made us stronger or better

I'm absolutely positive that the money we got from Bentley didn't make us stronger or better

Arguably, the only recent time "big" money has been used effectively was when Bellamy went

So, unless we already have a VERY GOOD replacement lined up we should be very careful about wanting £16m or £18m or £20m for Roque because in all likelihood it won't make us stronger or better, and from what I can see RSC is not throwing his toys out about not going in January.

[philipl]

I don't know where you get this stuff from but it's totally untrue.

The only thing that's been wrong with Santa Cruz is his attitude to wearing the blue and white shirt.

Tris did you click on the links I provided?

They go back to your posts so I wouldn't be accused of selected editing or quoting.

I must admit a post I was looking for I haven't found.

That was a statement saying there is no clause in January- thinking about it, that might have come from the club direct and not you.

Let's be really, really clear about two things, seeing as you have chosen to post links rather than quote what I actually posted and then substitute my words with your own fabrication.

1) Nowhere have I referred to RSC's contract or any clause. NOWHERE. NOT IN ANY OF THE LINKS YOU HAVE POSTED.

2) NOWHERE have I said he has an attititude problem. NOWHERE have I said he has "no injury". Here's that post from December 21st in full.

If you don't know the difference between the back and the lower leg because your head is so far up your own @rse then that's your problem, either that or learn to read properly.

In the meantime, stop making up stuff and posting it as if I've written it. It's not difficult to see why people are beginning to take anything you say with a heap of salt. Actually misrepresenting what another poster has written and trying to pass it off is the lowest of the low in my book.

[gazsimm]

We're holding out for £20m and that is ridicilous considering he is an injury-prone striker completely in the need of a quality winger to deliver the ball.

why is it ridicilous that we are holding out for a fee that Rovers want Alexander? i think Rovers will accept £18m instead of £20m as well. If ciity can spend £12m on a left back they can spend £18m on top class forward as well if they really want him.

[chris]

I don't believe that the money we got from Shearer made us stronger or better

I don't believe that the money we got from Duff made us stronger or better

I'm absolutely positive that the money we got from Bentley didn't make us stronger or better

Arguably, the only recent time "big" money has been used effectively was when Bellamy went

So, unless we already have a VERY GOOD replacement lined up we should be very careful about wanting £16m or £18m or £20m for Roque because in all likelihood it won't make us stronger or better, and from what I can see RSC is not throwing his toys out about not going in January.

you can have £100 million from the shearer sale, if you have Harford incharge, it would never make a diffence he was uneless, how can you go from 1st to 20th in 15 months

[Gav]

rsc wants out,lets agree a price and bring in new players

Exactly.

[alexanders]

why is it ridicilous that we are holding out for a fee that Rovers want Alexander? i think Rovers will accept £18m instead of £20m as well. If ciity can spend £12m on a left back they can spend £18m on top class forward as well if they really want him.

Bad typo from a Norwegian.

What I mean is that £20M is a ridicilous or very high sum for an injury prone player, but that is City shopping these days.

[Mr. E]

Why is Hughes dicking around with us? $20 mil isn't even loose change for the arabs - give it to us and take him.

But the very disappointing thing is that the Fulham game is coming up and we haven't bought anyone. We need new players, and Cruz will fund that.

[Majiball]

Bad typo from a Norwegian.

What I mean is that £20M is a ridicilous or very high sum for an injury prone player, but that is City shopping these days.

They paid it for Jo.

[gazsimm]

Why is Hughes dicking around with us? $20 mil isn't even loose change for the arabs - give it to us and take him.

But the very disappointing thing is that the Fulham game is coming up and we haven't bought anyone. We need new players, and Cruz will fund that.

i still think we have enough in our squad to compete against fulham on saturday, we do need a couple of players before the deadline passes, but sam will not just go out and rush deals through for the sake of it.

[modes98]

Tris and Phillipl: No more please, continue your war of words on pm if your that fussed.