Ronin Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Glad the international break has come around when it did. Up front we'd be screwed if it hadn't - gives Roque and Derbs, plus Dunn and Grella, an extra week to recouperate!
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
ABBEY Posted September 6, 2008 Posted September 6, 2008 nice one the snorting cokehead gets more in a month than most get in two years.Dont normally slag off and give them a chance but this is the most annoying signing for me EVER.....bring back matty holmes
Bachoven Posted September 6, 2008 Posted September 6, 2008 nice one the snorting cokehead gets more in a month than most get in two years.Dont normally slag off and give them a chance but this is the most annoying signing for me EVER.....bring back matty holmes good old matty holmes... remember that summer when we're linked with some real stars but Ray Harford thought the squad was good enough,allthough he had to get matty holmes!
JAL Posted September 6, 2008 Author Posted September 6, 2008 nice one the snorting cokehead gets more in a month than most get in two years.Dont normally slag off and give them a chance but this is the most annoying signing for me EVER.....bring back matty holmes It make no sense what so ever, but more importantly it severely damaging Paul Inces credibility at such an important early stage of his managerial career at Rovers. Looking at this thread and many other Rovers related messageboard sights the feeling out there amongst Rovers fans is strong in what the ferk is Ince and the club playing at going down this route of recruitment. We've got one lazy boy in Benni MaCarthy we cant afford a second one in Blobbie Howler.
thenodrog Posted September 7, 2008 Posted September 7, 2008 good old matty holmes... remember that summer when we're linked with some real stars but Ray Harford thought the squad was good enough,allthough he had to get matty holmes! I'm still convinced that he thought that he was buying Michael Hughes. Both were at WHU at the time (hughes scored v the scum to earn out eternal gratitude alongside Miklosko) and Hughes was a good player too.
Majiball Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 Well here it is. Fowler to sign Prove em wrong Robbie, the winner against Arsenal will do as a start. I'm off to get the odds on 3-1 Rovers with Fowler scoring.
G Somerset Rover Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 Well here it is. Fowler to sign Prove em wrong Robbie, the winner against Arsenal will do as a start. I'm off to get the odds on 3-1 Rovers with Fowler scoring. I'm pretty sure that it says he'll be unveiled early next week, AFTER the Arsenal game. So I'd hold on to your money for now.
T4E Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 3 month pay as you play? Didn't he turn down 6 month pay as you play?
The1mattjansen Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 Has he been getting anything whilst he's been on the lengthiest trial in football history? To be fair, i don't think the widespread murmours of his wealth have helped him. If it had been any other aging pro then we would have let him sneak onto the bench and pickup a few grand a week. Its obviously worked against him having a few quid, in the typical English way.
Iceman Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 Will somebody please tell me what it is, that Fowler will bring to the squad that we don’t already have? Apart from experience, which we have plenty of in his position, nothing else. We have had better players in on trial, that never got a contract with us.. this guy has or did nothing in pre season, to warrant even a 3 month contract. As always we will, well we have no other choice but to give him a chance and support him. However I just think that we might as well have taken Recoba instead, or maybe have taken Zigic on loan, if we are so desperate for another striker
JAL Posted September 9, 2008 Author Posted September 9, 2008 Well here it is. Fowler to sign Prove em wrong Robbie, the winner against Arsenal will do as a start. I'm off to get the odds on 3-1 Rovers with Fowler scoring. What a joke and I aint smiling, will Ince be out by christmas with him ?
Hughesy Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 3 month pay as you play deal - nothing wrong with that - No risk taken, good move by the club. Much rather this than 12 months deal.
dingles staying down 4ever Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 3 month pay as you play deal - nothing wrong with that - No risk taken, good move by the club. Much rather this than 12 months deal. I've no complaints with this deal. It is better than the one rumoured to be on the table before. Rovers have very little to lose by this so I can't see why the anti-Ince brigade are appearing again.
67splitscreen Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 Ok we get Fowler for three months. Fowler has obviously seen sense, he want;s to play, Cardiff turned him down, no other options. It does give him the chance of being in the shop window for the January sales. Will we gain anything from this contract, really not sure, if he turns a game for us then it's a success, if he ends up not having played, nothing lost. So it's not something I'm going to get worked up about. It will not make a difference to Ince's tenure in any way.
Anti-Dingle-Brigade Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 I knew JAL would be banging on before I'd even logged on. It's a pay as you play. We won't lose anything from it.
Head Rover Heels Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 I don't see how it can be anything other than a good thing. Derbyshire still isn't fit by all accounts, RSC's legs are giving him jip, McCarthy is still the size of a cow - Without the international break we'd be in the middle of a mini striker crisis right now, and as good as the youth coming through are, they're not quite ready to be the only available players other than Roberts. Roberts' natural game means there is a good chance he'll either get hurt, or only be able to work at full tilt for 3/4 of a match - Having a couple of 15 year olds as back up would be a little less than ideal.
hawkiiz Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 the fact that norwegian club Brann turned down the oportunity to get Fowler this summer simply speaks VOLUMES. they are desperate for a striker, and still didnt fancy him! he wanted 1m GBP, which is steep for norway, but they said he is not good enough anyway
67splitscreen Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 the fact that norwegian club Brann turned down the oportunity to get Fowler this summer simply speaks VOLUMES. they are desperate for a striker, and still didnt fancy him! he wanted 1m GBP, which is steep for norway, but they said he is not good enough anyway There hardly going to say he's a worldie, are they, Then say sorry we can't afford you. Not that he is.
LDRover Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 So is it that if he doesn't play he doesn't get paid? Even if he gets injured? Can't see it myself, he'll be getting paid some kind of basic salary and whatever that is it's too much. And that's without mentioning the knock on effect of him taking a more deserving youngster's path towards the first team. Poor poor move by the manager.
bigbrandjohn Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 Heard the same old stuff with Andrews. Terrible decision, Manager is rubbish. Didnt do bad for a first outing in an difficult situation. Trust the process, it is a short term decision to give us cover until January. Without him we have no back up. Roque got injured and Derbyshire missed the u21 game. Ince came into the position late with little time to assess the squad. Glad we didnt spend the Bentley money irrationally. He will be in a much stronger position in January to buy and sell. If Fowler is given the service he will score goals.
RoverJoexx Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 At least we got a decent penalty taker now. A short term pay as you play deal with a basic wages on our term sounds fine to me. So we have got a backup striker with good premiership record. What's the fuss about? Show some faith to the management guys。
Tim Southampton Rover Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 A sensible signing. We get a goalscorer for 3 months. If he plays then its because he's been good in training which means we benefit. If he doesn't play then he wont be paid. He gets a chance to resurrect his career as well as become available in the transfer window in January.
John Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 Whilst being initially sceptical of the deal, I think it is always good to have options up front. Fowler has shown, if he is in shape and fit, he will get goals. His goals to games ratio backs this up. The deal is very much a safety first one, so not much to lose.
JAL Posted September 9, 2008 Author Posted September 9, 2008 So is it that if he doesn't play he doesn't get paid? Even if he gets injured? Can't see it myself, he'll be getting paid some kind of basic salary and whatever that is it's too much. And that's without mentioning the knock on effect of him taking a more deserving youngster's path towards the first team. Poor poor move by the manager. Here, here, its a typical Eddie Murphy decision that seriously questions the managers ability to manage at this level.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.