[Archived] Nicko's January Rumour Mill

[RovertheHill]

  Ewood and I Would said:

Way to go, you completely ignored the things I said! I agree with your point but I will reiterate

Unlike Wayne Bridge, Roques WANTS to move to City and has done since Hughes moved there. Bridge would have happily (being the key word here) stayed at Chelsea. Unsettled players command lower tranfers fees and City will know how unsettled he is. THAT'S BUSINESS! If you are trying buy something from reluctant sellers, the pauper will always give in before the millionaire. THAT'S BUSINESS (and bloody obvious).

You say we don't need to sell him, well maybe the people that balance the books may disagree, there is no way we'd turn down a big offer if the club felt he wouldn't provide value for money anymore (in terms of wages). We DO need to sell him if his form won't justify his wage bill. That makes the fact he's got 4 years left worse and our league position is a moot point; there is no guarantee RSC will save us from relegation (esp as he's not on form this season) and probably more chance of BFS being able to use that dosh to get players in who will.

Face it, we're seen as the hobos of the premierleague appreciative of every penny we get, that will always affect transfer fees. Do you think Man U would have paid £30m for Berbatove had he been at Rovers? No chance it would have been £20m max.

Talk about ignoring things - let's take this one point at a time. If Roque has wanted to move to City since Hughes moved there why did he sign a new 4 year contract afterwards? Sounds very unsettled that doesn't it. And do you have a hotline to Wayne Bridge? You seem very sure he was happy at Chelsea. How do you know that Chelsea haven't been quietly hawking Bridge around for ages now? After all he's not featured for a while and even if you are rich you try to run things along business lines. The fact is you have no idea. I accept that Roque probably does want to go to City now, but whether that is to do with Hughes, or to do with the large slices of money he will get is anybody's guess. With Hughes' position being so precarious I would suggest it may be the latter. And Hughes therefore is clearly desperate to get the men he wants to make the team play the way he wants. That puts us in a STRONGER position. And as for the pauper will always give in before the millionaire - what tosh. For one, we are not paupers in the sense of your analogy. I re-state - WE DO NOT NEED TO SELL. For example, the club is not going into administration if we don't sell. We may CHOOSE to sell because it is in our best interests but that's it. I'm just glad it's JW negotiating and not you

[thenodrog]

  hawkiiz said:

Marco Zoro is available on a free, but they need to check on fitness.

He is an Ivory Coast international, only recently signed a 4 year deal at Benfica, so that one is but he is only 25 so it may be a good shout

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/200...15875-21027169/

Do we want anybody that is inclined to burst into floods of tears in our relegation battle? Do we hell. The sight of Arsenals Gallas blubbering on the pitch does not need repeating by someone wearing the blue and white halves.

[bubblerrovers]

Hang on, Mark Hughes has come out and stated publicly RSC has a cluase in his contract surely that has to be illegal?????

[RovertheHill]

  Ewood and I Would said:

Way to go, you completely ignored the things I said! I agree with your point but I will reiterate

Unlike Wayne Bridge, Roques WANTS to move to City and has done since Hughes moved there. Bridge would have happily (being the key word here) stayed at Chelsea. Unsettled players command lower tranfers fees and City will know how unsettled he is. THAT'S BUSINESS! If you are trying buy something from reluctant sellers, the pauper will always give in before the millionaire. THAT'S BUSINESS (and bloody obvious).

You say we don't need to sell him, well maybe the people that balance the books may disagree, there is no way we'd turn down a big offer if the club felt he wouldn't provide value for money anymore (in terms of wages). We DO need to sell him if his form won't justify his wage bill. That makes the fact he's got 4 years left worse and our league position is a moot point; there is no guarantee RSC will save us from relegation (esp as he's not on form this season) and probably more chance of BFS being able to use that dosh to get players in who will.

Face it, we're seen as the hobos of the premierleague appreciative of every penny we get, that will always affect transfer fees. Do you think Man U would have paid £30m for Berbatove had he been at Rovers? No chance it would have been £20m max.

Talk about ignoring things - let's take this one point at a time. If Roque has wanted to move to City since Hughes moved there why did he sign a new 4 year contract afterwards? Sounds very unsettled that doesn't it. And do you have a hotline to Wayne Bridge? You seem very sure he was happy at Chelsea. How do you know that Chelsea haven't been quietly hawking Bridge around for ages now? After all he's not featured for a while and even if you are rich you try to run things along business lines. The fact is you have no idea. I accept that Roque probably does want to go to City now, but whether that is to do with Hughes, or to do with the large slices of money he will get is anybody's guess. With Hughes' position being so precarious I would suggest it may be the latter. And Hughes therefore is clearly desperate to get the men he wants to make the team play the way he wants. That puts us in a STRONGER position. And as for the pauper will always give in before the millionaire - what tosh. For one, we are not paupers in the sense of your analogy. I re-state - WE DO NOT NEED TO SELL. For example, the club is not going into administration if we don't sell. We may CHOOSE to sell because it is in our best interests but that's it. I'm just glad it's JW negotiating and not you

OOOPS - double post - not sure how that happened - sorry

[hawkiiz]

  thenodrog said:

Do we want anybody that is inclined to burst into floods of tears in our relegation battle? Do we hell. The sight of Arsenals Gallas blubbering on the pitch does not need repeating by someone wearing the blue and white halves.

i know nothing about him, but if he is a good player i want him. if he can sort out our right back position he can cry all he want for me...

[thenodrog]

  PLZ Blue said:

Nicko

Any truth in the Mirror story written by David McDonnell that City will table a take it or leave it bid of £17.5M?

Doubt it.

BUT if it's true then I must say the sight of the self proclaimed richest club in the world grubbing around for half a million like cheapskates must be demeaning to the tea towel heads in Abu Dhabi. They pretend not to be of course and the press and media have all been taken in by it all but imo it's looking to be all fur coat and no knickers again just like with that last bgugger.

[PAFELL]

  philipl said:

The same article said Scott Parker had signed for City for £11m and £100k a week...

If West Ham with all their problems can tell City go stuff it in sufficiently straight terms that almost a week later they have not been back for Bellamy and Parker, then I am sure we can.

And Bellamy and Parker rather fancy the wages at Middle Eastlands like Roque does.

Well City can sign me instead, they signed Jo after all.

Who else would pay £18million for RSC? Good player but only man city appear willing to want to pay that or very near that. If Hughes is sacked then Rovers could kiss £18million good buy. RSC is injury prone and therefore £18mill would be good for Rovers.

[bellamy11]

  thenodrog said:

Do we want anybody that is inclined to burst into floods of tears in our relegation battle? Do we hell. The sight of Arsenals Gallas blubbering on the pitch does not need repeating by someone wearing the blue and white halves.

I dunno Drog, I reckon John Terry would be a useful asset for us right about now.

[Majiball]

Never heard of Zoro.

centre halves who can also play fullback just what we need.

[philipl]

  PAFELL said:

Who else would pay £18million for RSC? Good player but only man city appear willing to want to pay that or very near that. If Hughes is sacked then Rovers could kiss £18million good buy. RSC is injury prone and therefore £18mill would be good for Rovers.

Nobody is paying £18m for RSC- certainly not City at the moment.

If we get £18m, what position does £18m play in?

Doesn't look like we will be able to convert it into players. We are already about a third of the way through the window and I think the level of done deals is absolutely minimal. I am right in saying only five Premier League clubs have actually reached agreements on transfers yet?

[thenodrog]

If they paid an estimated 19m for Jo and 31m for Robinho then 18m is a bit of an insult to both us and RSC isn't it?

[broadsword]

  Majiball said:

Never heard of Zoro.

Andale, andale, arriba!

[LeftWinger]

  Majiball said:

Never heard of Zoro.

I think he'll be an excellent signing. I certainly think he'll make a mark on the Premiership.

[alexanders]

He wears a mask, has a sword and is a ladiesman

[tchocky]

  bellamy11 said:

I dunno Drog, I reckon John Terry would be a useful asset for us right about now.

Or a 1990 Gazza perhaps.

I remember Marco Zoro scoring in the ACN last time round. I don't think he played that much though and was mostly on the bench. Not sure he's good enough if he can't hold down a place at Benfica.

[Oklahoma]

Marc Zoro is not an option in Benfica squad.

He hasn't played all season but he is fit, as far as I know.

He could be a good option for Rovers. I think he can adapt well to premier league.

[alexanders]

Why isn't he an option in the Benfica squad?

I have also heard that he is a free agent which makes it worth a gamble.

[Oklahoma]

  tchocky said:

Or a 1990 Gazza perhaps.

I remember Marco Zoro scoring in the ACN last time round. I don't think he played that much though and was mostly on the bench. Not sure he's good enough if he can't hold down a place at Benfica.

In benfica, he has to compete against Luisao (brazil national team), David Luiz and Sidnei (young brazilian promisses) and Miguel Vitor (youth team player).

And Quique Flores, the manager that benfica signed in the beggining of the season doesn't like him.

Remember Samba?

Remember Nelsen?

maybe we can find another good player and very cheap.

[alexanders]

Hvae you seen Zoro in Action?

How's he like?

[Atomicrover]

  alexanders said:

He wears a mask, has a sword and is a ladiesman

...as opposed to the last management at City who were more associated with ladyboys....!

[leftfooter]

  alexanders said:

He wears a mask, has a sword and is a ladiesman

Just watch out for the flailing pen nub if you ask for his autograph.

[Oklahoma]

  alexanders said:

Hvae you seen Zoro in Action?

How's he like?

I haven't seen much of him but he seems to be a good defender, strong and reliable.

Don't know if he can be a good RB.

[Ewood and I Would]

  thenodrog said:

Doubt it.

BUT if it's true then I must say the sight of the self proclaimed richest club in the world grubbing around for half a million like cheapskates must be demeaning to the tea towel heads in Abu Dhabi. They pretend not to be of course and the press and media have all been taken in by it all but imo it's looking to be all fur coat and no knickers again just like with that last bgugger.

It's not "self proclaimed" it's a financial fact. I don't think I've heard any rep from City say it, only footy pundits and newsreaders so I don't agree that it's "self proclaimed" and more "media proclaimed".....

[Eddie]

They aren't the richest club in the world, that is a fact. They may have access to the most funds if their owners decide to write a blank cheque, but there isn't a Mancester City bank account out there brimming with a billion pounds.

[mattyboy6000]

  bubblerrovers said:

Hang on, Mark Hughes has come out and stated publicly RSC has a cluase in his contract surely that has to be illegal?????

i'd be very suprised if the terms of the contract were not conifdential between rovers and santa cruz

accordingly, for hughes to be aware of the clause in his contract and disclose has potential ramifications. the only way i would suggest hughes is aware of it is if santa cruz disclosed it to him- be it personally or by his agents. i'm not sure and don't have time to look into the precedent but I have a feeling this disclosure could amount to gross misconduct/ a repudiatory breach. if there is no contract Rovers could sue Santa for damages- whether this level of damages would be equivalent of a trasnfer fee i don't know. lots of if's and suppositions and even if these "ifs" were correct it would no doubt be a messy tortuous route to follow.