JonnyH Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 But ultimately, somebody has to be right and only time will tell who that is. Me, I'm just going to sit back and see how it unfolds. Jensen and RSC aren't a sign we're heading for world dominance, but at least they are a small step in the right direction for one area of the club. Where's the like button? Sorry Glenn- too much time on facebook. Can you put this as your status!?
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
Valois Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Rev, where have we learnt the Raos are paying his wages? They said Ronaldhino was a personal project but no mention of any other players falling into this category. Surely this is coming out of the minimum 5million transfer fund we keep been reminded about. The Ronnie deal was a completely seperate deal, which one of the Rao's were paying for with their own funds, not funds from Venkys.
Glenn Posted January 12, 2011 Author Posted January 12, 2011 Where's the like button? Sorry Glenn- too much time on facebook. Can you put this as your status!? The like button is the flashy rectangular bit on the grey background at the top of the page that normally has Esther Rantzen or cakes or something on it.
Pete1981 Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1346624/Manchester-City-misfit-Roque-Santa-Cruz-set-return-Blackburn.html?ITO=1490
Valois Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Hey Presto - RSC & Rochina, also Linganzi going to preston on loan http://aggbot.com/link.php?id=12170032&r=tw&c=38
Mr. E Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Ok so RSC Is he a better finisher than Benjani & Roberts? No brainer. Will players like Hoilett, Mame & Kalinic learn from a player of RSC ability? Getting £18m for him was a great deal, taking him back for FREE for 6 months (except wages) is another good move for both club & player....IF he's another success we sign him up again for around £3m (That is the price they wanted from Lazio).....IF he turns out a crock, he goes back - but at least we gave it a shot with a player who has top pedigree and has been our best striker since Shearer. The people not happy about it in general are the people who are not happy about anything, especially if it relates to our new owners. FFS if Cheryl Cole fell onto their lap they would probably kick off. Sort it out eh! Matt Jansen, Andy Cole, Chris Sutton, Benni McCarthy, Craig Bellamy were better strikers than Santa Cruz. And I still don't see why people believe the deal is that if he turns out a success he'll stay. He'll either go back to City or use it as an opportunity to show the richer clubs that he can still cut it. The only reason he would stay at Rovers is if he decides that no other club will be willing to have him. What possible reason is there to believe otherwise? I do not buy it for a second that Rovers have any say in whether the deal can become permanent. Ince said we would not sell Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz said he would not leave Rovers, and what happened? And if Cheryl Cole had already cheated on me on someone with more money and wanted to come back "for a few months" before she finds herself another sugar daddy...I would say no thanks as well.
Valois Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Matt Jansen, Andy Cole, Chris Sutton, Benni McCarthy, Craig Bellamy were better strikers than Santa Cruz. And I still don't see why people believe the deal is that if he turns out a success he'll stay. He'll either go back to City or use it as an opportunity to show the richer clubs that he can still cut it. The only reason he would stay at Rovers is if he decides that no other club will be willing to have him. What possible reason is there to believe otherwise? I do not buy it for a second that Rovers have any say in whether the deal can become permanent. Ince said we would not sell Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz said he would not leave Rovers, and what happened? And if Cheryl Cole had already cheated on me on someone with more money and wanted to come back "for a few months" before she finds herself another sugar daddy...I would say no thanks as well. I'm pretty sure there will be an agreement with the clubs of making the deal permanent, as its reported in the Mail, and i'm pretty sure he turned down Lazio, and Zaragoza already to come back to Rovers. (If reports are to be true). I'm pretty sure Cheryl Cole would have fallen into the deepest of depression before she would have the chance to cheat on you quite frankly.
G Somerset Rover Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 And if Cheryl Cole had already cheated on me on someone with more money and wanted to come back "for a few months" before she finds herself another sugar daddy...I would say no thanks as well. If you'd be prepared to turn her down then you, my friend, are a bumder.
RevidgeBlue Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Rev, where have we learnt the Raos are paying his wages? They said Ronaldhino was a personal project but no mention of any other players falling into this category. In answer to both you and bob who raised the same point above I can only assume as valois says that the money for RSC's wages is coming out of the overall January "pot" for transfers being provided by the new owners. At 90k p.w. (if correct) that's roughly 2m quids worth accounted for by the end of June. Alternatively, if you or bob know of a Bank that will allow an individual or organisation an unlimited spending splurge with their money in the current climate - I'd very much like their phone number!
47er Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Matt Jansen, Andy Cole, Chris Sutton, Benni McCarthy, Craig Bellamy were better strikers than Santa Cruz. And I still don't see why people believe the deal is that if he turns out a success he'll stay. He'll either go back to City or use it as an opportunity to show the richer clubs that he can still cut it. The only reason he would stay at Rovers is if he decides that no other club will be willing to have him. What possible reason is there to believe otherwise? I do not buy it for a second that Rovers have any say in whether the deal can become permanent. Ince said we would not sell Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz said he would not leave Rovers, and what happened? And if Cheryl Cole had already cheated on me on someone with more money and wanted to come back "for a few months" before she finds herself another sugar daddy...I would say no thanks as well. Benni McCarthy was the same as Roque------a wonderful first season. But whereas Roque's second season was blighted by injury, Benni just gave up. He simply has no true character. When fit, Roque was every bit as valuable as the others you mention but they all had different attributes. The only possible exception would be Bellamy, easily the best striker since Shearer imo. So, to sum up, welcome back Roque, you have quite a bit to make up for.
BRFC1995 Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 In answer to both you and bob who raised the same point above I can only assume as valois says that the money for RSC's wages is coming out of the overall January "pot" for transfers being provided by the new owners. At 90k p.w. (if correct) that's roughly 2m quids worth accounted for by the end of June. Alternatively, if you or bob know of a Bank that will allow an individual or organisation an unlimited spending splurge with their money in the current climate - I'd very much like their phone number! insurance covers wages when injured surely so being optimistic i'll say roque is fit 50% of the time maybe it'll cost £1m.
BangkokRover Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 If he gets injured do we still have to pay his wages or is that taken care of by insurance?
BRFC1995 Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 If he gets injured do we still have to pay his wages or is that taken care of by insurance? there would have to be a mass of clauses as its not unimaginable that someone made of glass would'nt break in the 1st game and i can't see us being dumb enough not to have an out clause rather than pay £2m for nothing for 6 months
Backroom Madon Posted January 12, 2011 Backroom Posted January 12, 2011 Well somebody down at Rovers seems to think Roque has signed on the dotted line.... My link
XLM Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 there would have to be a mass of clauses as its not unimaginable that someone made of glass would'nt break in the 1st game and i can't see us being dumb enough not to have an out clause rather than pay £2m for nothing for 6 months Usually if a player picks up a lengthy injury (anything over a couple of weeks or a month depending on the terms of the loan) they go back to the parent club. They foot the wages and the medical bill. I would have thought it would be a similar case with this deal as well. That's how I understand it anyway, I'm more than willing to stand corrected.
Exiled in Toronto Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Without the 17 million we got for Roque, thanks to him signing a new contract during Ince's early days, we'd have had to sell anything not bolted down. I thought at the time that perhaps he was doing us a favour by committing to a long contract when he had probably already been tapped up by Hughes, in my opinion, allegedly, according to reports, some would have us believe.
joey_big_nose Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 I find it crazy we are paying the full wack of his wages, I hope the physios are certain that he is in shape. People have said we lack the delivery without Bentley, but Olsson does seem to have quality crossing required. I suppose if Rocky is fit it will be him plus AN Other. Probably Mame Diouf as his pace will compliment Rocky well. Hard to see where Kalinic will fit in.
philipl Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 Delighted Roque is back- I hear he is truly at peak fitness and cannot wait to get regular football again. Doubt we are paying the full £90k. Well done JW for getting this deal done. And for those who want to believe that this shows the Venky's are a money machine, I sincerely hope you are correct. However, (and this will go over the heads of our younger readers) I cannot help but recall the words of Malcolm Muggeridege. When asked why most of Britain's greatest intellects were avowed Marxists in the 1930s, he answered that they swallowed the propaganda of Stalin with a naive credulity that even an African witch doctor would have found astonishing. I fear (and deep down know) you are swallowing a story every bit as much as the Trust did. It is a good show of that there is no doubt but just six weeks after committing to the sale, I hear the recipients sent their Harrods hampers back from whence they had come unopened. Let's see where we are three weeks from now.
BangkokRover Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 I find it crazy we are paying the full wack of his wages, I hope the physios are certain that he is in shape. People have said we lack the delivery without Bentley, but Olsson does seem to have quality crossing required. I suppose if Rocky is fit it will be him plus AN Other. Probably Mame Diouf as his pace will compliment Rocky well. Hard to see where Kalinic will fit in. Rovers should keep pushing Kalinic as he is a good player. Remember he is still young and learning about the EPL. Plus he is actually a Rovers player unlike MB Diouf who is only on loan. I have to admit I think service could be a problem but it not have to be crosses in to the box we could also supply our strikers with passes. But until we get a creative midfielder the midfielders we have are going to have to work very hard.
RevidgeBlue Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 I fear (and deep down know) you are swallowing a story every bit as much as the Trust did. Did the Trust not carry out their own extensive due dilligence on the new owners including sending their man out to India to observe their business operations?
Mc Love Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 90k a week - leave em off Kean, we have the "glorious" Venkys now, we supposedly can do better
RevidgeBlue Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 It is a good show of that there is no doubt but just six weeks after committing to the sale, I hear the recipients sent their Harrods hampers back from whence they had come unopened. I read this part with some disbelief and I apologise if I am reading it incorrectly. The basis for your opposition to the Rao's is that you believe the Walkers returned some Christmas presents from them unopened?
philipl Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 I read this part with some disbelief and I apologise if I am reading it incorrectly. The basis for your opposition to the Rao's is that you believe the Walkers returned some Christmas presents from them unopened? No go back and read what I wrote in full. My fear is Rev that you are going to end up looking far more foolish than any poster on here currently thinks I am. And just ask any Hindu from that neck of the woods how they would interpret getting their presents returned unopened. Just stop and think about what that action really means if the story is true.
RevidgeBlue Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 No go back and read what I wrote in full. My fear is Rev that you are going to end up looking far more foolish than any poster on here currently thinks I am. And just ask any Hindu from that neck of the woods how they would interpret getting their presents returned unopened. Just stop and think about what that action really means if the story is true. Completely irrelevant I'd say other than to indicate that if that had indeed happened the Walkers had fallen out with the Rao's. Would they not have been miffed about Sam getting the chop?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.