Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS, SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

[Archived] Roque Santa Cruz Return - Done Deal

Glenn

By Glenn
in Football Messageboard Archive

Recommended Posts

jim mk2

jim mk2

Posted
Posted

Who else could we get of the same or similar quality? My point is; if he wasn't so injury prone he'd be way out of our league.

But he is injury prone, which is why his career has never really taken off and why he is with us. And "quality" is meaningless if he is always on the treatment table.

Chucking £90,000 a week at a player with a terrible injury track record and who is likely to break down at any moment never made sense.

  • Replies 589
  • Created
  • Last Reply
CrazyIvan Champions League

CrazyIvan

Posted
Posted

Chucking £90,000 a week at a player with a terrible injury track record and who is likely to break down at any moment never made sense.

Shame you didn't tell Man City that eh? £17 million for a crock...

Ah well, he's only on LOAN!!!

Paul World Cup

Paul

Posted
Posted
<br /><br />

<br />

Shame you didn't tell Man City that eh? £17 million for a crock...<br />

<br />

Ah well, he's only on LOAN!!!<br />

Their club, their money I have zero interest in how they spend it.

PAFELL World Cup

PAFELL

Posted
Posted

Funny how no-one was complaining about his return a week ago.

I wasn't completely convinced. I just considered there was maybe better ways of spending that amount on a loan player, who is injury prone. I would have rather rovers got Daniel Sturridge on loan. Would be curious to know if he is on 90 grand a week.

Paul World Cup

Paul

Posted
Posted
Sam wanted him.</a><br />

So what? I didn't really like Sam so it's hardly a valid response. I like Steve Kean, the point I was making, which is clearly difficult for some, was the player's injury is NOT the manager's fault. The responsibility for signing him though was Kean's. Personally I feel using our last loan spot and £90k a week was a poor decision. Just like I think signing Kalinic was a poor decision.

jim mk2

jim mk2

Posted
Posted

Funny how no-one was complaining about his return a week ago.

Alot of people gave misgivings about Santa Cruz...funny how you missed that.

S15 Champions League

S15

Posted
Posted

So what? I didn't really like Sam so it's hardly a valid response. I like Steve Kean, the point I was making, which is clearly difficult for some, was the player's injury is NOT the manager's fault. The responsibility for signing him though was Kean's. Personally I feel using our last loan spot and £90k a week was a poor decision. Just like I think signing Kalinic was a poor decision.

It was a response to Jim, a vehement Sam fan who was criticising Kean for bringing Santa Cruz back.

  • Backroom
Tom World Cup

Tom

Posted
  • Backroom
Posted

If Kean didn't play him people would complain he hasn't been given time to get match fit, if he was taken off as a precaution I'm not worried.

He showed some true class against West Brom and I think it will be a good loan signing.

47er

47er

Posted
Posted

There was a few, I was one of them.

I think most of us assumed (or hoped) he was over the worst of his injuries and we'd have a relatively good run. You'd expect the medical to have sorted that out. Still wouldn't have played him v Villa though. We'd already given up (we played Andrews) so what was the point?

Amo World Cup

Amo

Posted
Posted

So what? I didn't really like Sam so it's hardly a valid response. I like Steve Kean, the point I was making, which is clearly difficult for some, was the player's injury is NOT the manager's fault. The responsibility for signing him though was Kean's. Personally I feel using our last loan spot and £90k a week was a poor decision. Just like I think signing Kalinic was a poor decision.

If Jim is going to use the signing of Crocky as (another) stick to beat the manager, he better acknowledge his idol wanted him back as well.

92er Champions League

92er

Posted
Posted

I think most of us assumed (or hoped) he was over the worst of his injuries and we'd have a relatively good run. You'd expect the medical to have sorted that out. Still wouldn't have played him v Villa though. We'd already given up (we played Andrews) so what was the point?

Rightly or wrongly Nicko was sceptical about the medical and how quick it was.

philipl World Cup

philipl

Posted
Posted

Rightly or wrongly Nicko was sceptical about the medical and how quick it was.

If he gets injured for a prolonged period, he would go back to City and Rovers would not pay his wages- apparently part of the loan deal.

Paul World Cup

Paul

Posted
Posted

Me too, look back through the site if you don't believe me. I wasn't on my own either.

And me........................but then if one posts some thing which in any manner questions the club's actions it gets ignored or flamed. Hardly worth it these days.

S15 Champions League

S15

Posted
Posted

And me........................but then if one posts some thing which in any manner questions the club's actions it gets ignored or flamed. Hardly worth it these days.

Give me a break Paul, nobody minds constructive negative comments. Nobody gave any grief to anybody who turned around and said ''RSC is a good player but he's injured too often so I'd have preferred the loan to be used elsewhere."

However, "Kean is clearly out of his depth because he resigned RSC" is the kind of comment that will rightly be scorned upon.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.