[Archived] Blackburn Rovers Transfer Topic

[LeChuck]

Also, as he has played in Germany for 2 years, I think he will qulaify for EU residencey in the not too distant future?

He's nowhere near unfortunately, it's 8 years or so in Germany. It's only 3 in Belgium so we really should have sent him to Cercle Brugge like we have done with other youngsters in the past. If we end up losing Hoilett then someone has made a huge mistake by sending him to Germany.

[G Somerset Rover]

I think I read in the LET today (it wasn't the NOTW story) that they believe Hughes to be preparing a £15 million bid and he hopes to complete the deal before he jets off on holiday this Thursday.

Fingers crossed on this one.

Edit: Yep it was in the LET, hope this link works:

Let article on Di Santo and RSC

[thenodrog]

btw...... Whats happened to talk of the icelandic lad who plays for Coventry? He did a sterling job on us AND most importantly I seem to rem that he possesses a long throw.

[Guest benmaxwell]

It's interesting, the LET are reporting that he's due for a medical at Man City for a possible £15 million move. The Sun have quoted him this morning, reminding people he has a £20 million release clause.

Why would he have to remind clubs he has a release clause if he was already on his way for a medical?

[kandi]

It's interesting, the LET are reporting that he's due for a medical at Man City for a possible £15 million move. The Sun have quoted him this morning, reminding people he has a £20 million release clause.

Why would he have to remind clubs he has a release clause if he was already on his way for a medical?

[/quote

Roque hasn`t speak to anyone about this clause,the qotes from The Sun aren`t up to date..

[67splitscreen]

More speculation IMO.

The qualifiers have finished have they not?. He has probably spent time with his family while in Paraguay.

I would think he is just returning to Cheshire now to be with his wife and children.

There may well be interest as reported, but I would be surprised if it is as far advanced as papers are reporting.

Sturridge, in the games I have seen since he took 2 points from us, he has been poor, very little of the threat he showed against us has been replicated.

Hughes, as we know is no mug, the lad does need more time to develop, Rovers dont have the squad to enable him to do this, we need players who will be ready come the first game.

[Ewood and I Would]

Hughes, as we know is no mug, the lad does need more time to develop, Rovers dont have the squad to enable him to do this, we need players who will be ready come the first game.

So why we getting Santos then?

[gumboots]

So why we getting Santos then?

exactly my thought!

[alexanders]

He is ready to go straight into our time. From what I've seen Santo is a superior player to Sturridge,

[gumboots]

He is ready to go straight into our time. From what I've seen Santo is a superior player to Sturridge,

So what have you seen? I'm not one of those who thinks we should go for sturridge but neither seems to me to be an obvious starter for a team like ours.

[Guest benmaxwell]

He is ready to go straight into our time. From what I've seen Santo is a superior player to Sturridge,

I'm sorry, but unless you have seen him play for Audax or Chelsea's reserves, i don't know how anyone can say this.

I have seen Sturridge play on a couple of occasions, and he is swimming in talent.

People blindley supporting this transfer on the basis of what Nicko said is just wrong. No offence Nicko, but we should all be judging this transfer on the basis of what we know.

As far as i am aware, Di Santo has not scored for Chelsea in all his sub appearences, and they have a much better source of assists then we do. So on current viewing, we should all have right to be hesitant.

I'm sorry, but until i see the goods, replacing Santa Cruz with Di Santo is crazy. I would be very very hesitant about our chances next season unless we bring in somebody at least partly proven to replace Roque ala Daz Bent.

[G Somerset Rover]

looks like Zurab has agreed to Join Gala on a 3 year contract after being tipped off by Tugay.........The Figures involved are that Rovers will get 2.5 Euros with the player getting 1.4 annual wages........................The player has all but agreed and will sign after he returns from his Holidays in Bodrum..........

This Transfer should allow Big Sam to step up his efforts for Pascal Chimbonda or the Argentine Chap.................

Rovers will also step up there efforts this week for PSG Midfeilder Jerome Rothen...............It is beleived his agent is flying over this week..............

Unleaded looks like being right on the money again with the Zurab story as Setanta have picked up on it:

Setanta's Zura story

Wonder whether he's in Bodrum or Hawaii?

[67splitscreen]

So why we getting Santos then?

Differant scenario IOM, Sturridge would cost a few mill in compo, we would be paying big wages.

I can see the current reasoning behind Santos on loan, maybe as third or fourth striker, if he proves he can do the business then he would move up in the pecking order all be it for a season, if not, he can be sent packing as and when, with little outlay.

We would have Sturridge on a contract, he may possibly make us money in the long term, that would be a positive of course, he could on the other hand be a flop.

I have read several topics on a number of City MB's, they have seen a lot more of him than ourselves, most are not convinced he will come up with the goods week in week out.

[Ewood and I Would]

I'm sorry, but unless you have seen him play for Audax or Chelsea's reserves, i don't know how anyone can say this.

I have seen Sturridge play on a couple of occasions, and he is swimming in talent.

People blindley supporting this transfer on the basis of what Nicko said is just wrong. No offence Nicko, but we should all be judging this transfer on the basis of what we know.

As far as i am aware, Di Santo has not scored for Chelsea in all his sub appearences, and they have a much better source of assists then we do. So on current viewing, we should all have right to be hesitant.

I'm sorry, but until i see the goods, replacing Santa Cruz with Di Santo is crazy. I would be very very hesitant about our chances next season unless we bring in somebody at least partly proven to replace Roque ala Daz Bent.

Spot on, he's made 16 apperances for Chelsea and scored 0. Admitedly I don't know how many minutes that equates to as most (if not all) were sub appearances but still when you think of the likes of Macheda or Wellbeck and Man U, I can't help but feel there are far better young strikers at top teams we could've asked looked at for a loan deal.

Basically my feelings are if we were signing this chap permantly I'd be happy, if we were getting Macheda on loan I'd be happy...but this chap on loan? Not sure yet

[alexanders]

I have seen Santo a couple of times for the reserves and when he came on as a sub against Stoke City, where Chelsea turned the whole game around (assist from Di Santo) and won 2-1.

He seems a great target man, but maybe I haven't seen enough of Sturridge to make up my mind completely.

[Ewood and I Would]

.

I can see the current reasoning behind Santos on loan, maybe as third or fourth striker, if he proves he can do the business then he would move up in the pecking order all be it for a season, if not, he can be sent packing as and when, with little outlay.

Nicko's said we were contractually obliged to play him so he won't be 4th choice, it's part of the deal and another reason I'm not too happy about the whole thing...

Anyone else happy that another club can tell Sam who he should pick for a game?

Rovers have had to agree with Chelsea that di Santo WILL play. There is no point in him going somewhere and warming a bench.

[T4E]

Nicko's said we were contractually obliged to play him

Where?

[Hughesy]

Where does that say we are contractually obliged to play for us??? Why do people always twist it!?

I think it says, he has enough talent and therefore will play. Fook me he is a complete different level to Jason Roberts & Derbs - So if Roque goes, that puts him as 2nd choice striker, maybe 3rd if another comes in.

He will play, because he has the ability and talent to play - not because Roman says 'HE MUST' play.

[67splitscreen]

Nicko's said we were contractually obliged to play him so he won't be 4th choice, it's part of the deal and another reason I'm not too happy about the whole thing...

Anyone else happy that another club can tell Sam who he should pick for a game?

Dosen,t wash for me.

Sam or any other manager is not going to commit to a contractual agreement playing him, when he's not proven, I could just see a scenario now come the end of the year, played 20 scored nill, the crowd on his back, Sam can't drop him. All three parties would gain absolutly nothing from it.

There is obviously the reverse scenario in which case we will all be singing his praise, and what a great bit of business Sam did.

Thats why he is a manager and I'm not.

Where does that say we are contractually obliged to play for us??? Why do people always twist it!?

I think it says, he has enough talent and therefore will play. Fook me he is a complete different level to Jason Roberts & Derbs - So if Roque goes, that puts him as 2nd choice striker, maybe 3rd if another comes in.

He will play, because he has the ability and talent to play - not because Roman says 'HE MUST' play.

Better put argument than my version, must play FM, thank you.

[modes98]

I'm sorry, but unless you have seen him play for Audax or Chelsea's reserves, i don't know how anyone can say this.

I'm sorry, but until i see the goods, replacing Santa Cruz with Di Santo is crazy.

He has made sub appearances for Chelsea as well, so you have seen him play in those games.

It has already been stated that he would not be a replacement for Santa Cruz. Just because he is a similar type of player doesn't mean he would be a replacement. If Santa left then we would be looking to bring in a proven PL goal scorer and Di Santo would be his partner.

[Hughesy]

The way to look at it is simple.

Last season: Benni, Roberts, Samba (Cant really count RSC as he was always injured, and Derbs was out on loan)

Next Season: Benni, Roberts, Di Santo, Samba & 1 other (Possibly someone like Crouch)

To me that says improvement!

[JAL]

btw...... Whats happened to talk of the icelandic lad who plays for Coventry? He did a sterling job on us AND most importantly I seem to rem that he possesses a long throw.

The Icelandic lad certainly didnt look good or stand out in the replay at the Ricoh, he looks like a one game wonder a bit like that Mifsud guy the season before.

[unluckymorton]

The Icelandic lad certainly didnt look good or stand out in the replay at the Ricoh, he looks like a one game wonder a bit like that Mifsud guy the season before.

Maybe he's a decent player in a very average Championship side. He could perform and shine with better players around him, just like most players do.

[Hughesy]

I thought we might show some interest in Gunnarson too - but he has come out and said he's staying at Cov anyway. Im not sure if he will be too lightweight in the prem?! He did however have a handy throwing!

So far our summer activity is looking promising I think. Also £2.2m for Zurab & £4m for Derbs would be 2 very good pieces of business should they happen.

[MeanGreenMachine]

As far as i am aware, Di Santo has not scored for Chelsea in all his sub appearences, and they have a much better source of assists then we do. So on current viewing, we should all have right to be hesitant.

I'm sorry, but until i see the goods, replacing Santa Cruz with Di Santo is crazy. I would be very very hesitant about our chances next season unless we bring in somebody at least partly proven to replace Roque ala Daz Bent.

Nice judge a young lad on sub appearences alone.....

Its very hard to come into a team like chelsea and standout from the odd sub appearance. Strikers need a run of games in the first team to show their worth and to score goals.