[Archived] Transfers Part 2

[rigger]

he's been one of the best centre halves in this division for a while now.

Personally, I would say one season.

[Ricky]

I'm not sure he has been one of the best centre halfs at the club let alone the league. I'm pretty sure if pressed I could pick 7 or 8 championship centre halfs who I would pick ahead of him.

He's prone to an error and isn't the quickest.

But all that said, with Venkys recent history of pocketing transfer money I wouldn't have sold him.

[Speedie Dived]

100% agreed...this guy has been lamented as not being good enough for years. Cryer is bitter as always but tbf he is on the money about Hanley...he does have a mistake in him, he is slow and he 'lead' us to a 17th place finish in his best ever season. He's pretty average all in all. Baptiste as he was last time at Rovers will easily fill that void...which kind of proves the the price tag for Hanley is inflated.

All of this just depends on what Coyle is given to replace Hanley and further enhance the squad.

Hanley has never been slow. I cannot recall a time that he has been out paced in the channels or by a ball over the top. He suffered with all that was going on at the club but no doubt he will go on to higher things now. I would put a bet on him playing in the Premier League longer than Rhodes.

[arbitro]

I'm not sure he has been one of the best centre halfs at the club let alone the league. I'm pretty sure if pressed I could pick 7 or 8 championship centre halfs who I would pick ahead of him.

He's prone to an error and isn't the quickest.

But all that said, with Venkys recent history of pocketing transfer money I wouldn't have sold him.

Up to last season I thought Hanley was a big time Charlie, unfit and taking his role for granted. He really flourished under Lambert and I really believe it was because at last he was playing for a proper manager. Under Benitez and playing with better players I think he can kick on and become a steady PL centre half.

[JBiz]

I'm not sure he has been one of the best centre halfs at the club let alone the league. I'm pretty sure if pressed I could pick 7 or 8 championship centre halfs who I would pick ahead of him.

He's prone to an error and isn't the quickest.

But all that said, with Venkys recent history of pocketing transfer money I wouldn't have sold him.

He's quick is Hanley, and I'd suggest the main error he had in his locker is losing his head, for example Wigan away a few seasons ago.

I don't think he's at the Duffy level of "daily clanger".

Also, pocketing transfer money?

[Ricky]

JBizzle, pocketing transfer money as in not reinvesting it in the team. Hence why we have a skeleton squad after selling players for a total of over £15m recently.

[Iceman]

You'd have thought though that a current international and club captain who will only get better would have fetched a bit more, especially as he could well be in the Prem in 12 months. There is a premium on British players too. Maybe Hanley really was being an arse, and maybe it was he who decided to put the bandage on his knee, although there was nothing wrong with him. If he was faking injury to push through a move then the club probably had no choice but to accept a lower offer than they hoped. It isn't unheard of.

Just a thought, before anybody gets 'happy-clappy' on my 'arris

He would not be able to fake a a knee injury, especially with medical staff in attendance. There would be scans done to test the severity of his injury. So I doubt it was Hanley who was faking it, rather the club probably telling Coyle to make something up ala Nelsen before he made a miraculous recovery when he signed for Spurs

[DE.]

I think Hanley may have suffered here from an overall lack of motivation. He never had to be at his best under Bowyer, because he was pretty much always selected no matter what. Same goes for Lowe (who tries hard but never seems to improve). This season was better, though I doubt it was a coincidence that this coincided with Lambert's brief spell in charge. Newcastle are a club with ambition and expectation, something we lost at both club and fan level years ago. He'll either adapt and flourish, or fail miserably. I think he'll do alright, as long as he stays away from the town centre...

[Ricky]

Is he better than Steven Taylor who they let leave on a free?

[Iceman]

Chris Samba is a free agent, can't we use the £6million to pay his wages? I'd love to see him back.

how much do you think the Russians paid him a week in salary? Will never happen, and i like big Samba.

[JBiz]

JBizzle, pocketing transfer money as in not reinvesting it in the team. Hence why we have a skeleton squad after selling players for a total of over £15m recently.

Yea, I agree on the reinvestment but the reason for that goes back to all the ridiculous mistakes made early days.

Pocketing, trousering, snaffling etc - if anyone's "pocketing", it's those we are still paying off with this money. I find it difficult to just accept the owners are "pocketing" in some scam (which I now see wasn't the suggestion)

Do I believe the owners would invest more if they hadn't lost 120m already? Probably.

[chaddyrovers]

He would not be able to fake a a knee injury, especially with medical staff in attendance. There would be scans done to test the severity of his injury. So I doubt it was Hanley who was faking it,

Really?

Agents will be talking to clubs and vice versa before the buying club even puts a bid to the selling club

Also IMO Hanley knew Newcastle wanted him just before the game in Austria and didnt want to risk his move by getting injury here before he moves.

[Al]

Why are people obsessed with sources? Neo is usually bang on the money..he's not gonna be able to name his source!

Because often it's just an opinion and needs verification.

[mustard]

Yea, I agree on the reinvestment but the reason for that goes back to all the ridiculous mistakes made early days.

Pocketing, trousering, snaffling etc - if anyone's "pocketing", it's those we are still paying off with this money. I find it difficult to just accept the owners are "pocketing" in some scam (which I now see wasn't the suggestion)

Do I believe the owners would invest more if they hadn't lost 120m already? Probably.

Still makes no sense. Losing £20m a season when we don't sell players, already £100m in debt. If Venky's wanted to cover the costs and eradicate the debt over the next five years, we'd have to bring in £40m in player sales (or from elsewhere) every season. If they decide to spread it over ten years, that's still £30m a season in player sales needed.

There is no way they are going to recoup all their money and if they didn't want to invest, they should have listened to Seneca. My only hope and prayer is they're making as much in sales as they can now to sell us off as the sooner it happens, the more there is left to salvage as we're only going to drop down the leagues if they remain.

[47er]

Because often it's just an opinion and needs verification.

We want to sort out the wheat from the Chad.

[tomphil]

Still makes no sense. Losing £20m a season when we don't sell players, already £100m in debt. If Venky's wanted to cover the costs and eradicate the debt over the next five years, we'd have to bring in £40m in player sales (or from elsewhere) every season. If they decide to spread it over ten years, that's still £30m a season in player sales needed.

There is no way they are going to recoup all their money and if they didn't want to invest, they should have listened to Seneca. My only hope and prayer is they're making as much in sales as they can now to sell us off as the sooner it happens, the more there is left to salvage as we're only going to drop down the leagues if they remain.

Your wasting your time, he won't accept it because he simply doesn't want to. He accepts Coco and tantric etc have pocketed but won't have it that some V's may have as well, odd logic because at the end of the day it's the clubs income of nearly 400 mill and the bank debt not their money so they haven't been robbing themselves.

[JBiz]

Your wasting your time, he won't accept it because he simply doesn't want to. He accepts Coco and tantric etc have pocketed but won't have it that some V's may have as well, odd logic because at the end of the day it's the clubs income of nearly 400 mill and the bank debt not their money so they haven't been robbing themselves.

"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence"

Answers on a postcard who said that!

[tomphil]

"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence"

Answers on a postcard who said that!

Nobody can see the Bermuda Triangle.... but it's there.

[1arC]

how much do you think the Russians paid him a week in salary? Will never happen, and i like big Samba.

Isn't he still on our payroll? Perhaps it just needs topping up a bit. Maybe Tony Field is still on there too, as he was on decent pay in his day.

Nobody can see the Bermuda Triangle.... but it's there.

What about gravity, does that exist?

[ABBEY]

At least Husbands & boyfriends around Chorley and brinscall can stop worrying ... Allegedly

[1arC]

At least Husbands & boyfriends around Chorley and brinscall can stop worrying ... Allegedly

Why he isn't gay is he?

[Mani]

Ok, the 'further enhance' bit was a poor choice of words...but my point still stands. The fee, whether you think is fair (I do) or not is more or less irrelevant to us as fans as the only thing that matters is whether Coyle will be given the money to replace Hanley. Imo it won't take too much to replace Hanley as he is a good defender at best.

Further enhance??? The squad hasn't been enhanced since these tosspots came in.....are you trying to suggest that coyle will be given it all to replace him? If so, you're fast entering the twilight zone of the Chaddy.

I was suggesting nothing of the type. I was just pointing out that the only thing that matters about Hanleys transfer is if Coyle will be given enough money to get a replacement. I don't think you'd need to spend anything like £5.5m to replace those performances...

Don't go there Ribble, Mani has his head so far up venkys jacksys he won't be able to hear u anyway

Zzzzzzzzzz clueless.

[mustard]

Ok, the 'further enhance' bit was a poor choice of words...but my point still stands. The fee, whether you think is fair (I do) or not is more or less irrelevant to us as fans as the only thing that matters is whether Coyle will be given the money to replace Hanley. Imo it won't take too much to replace Hanley as he is a good defender at best.

I was suggesting nothing of the type. I was just pointing out that the only thing that matters about Hanleys transfer is if Coyle will be given enough money to get a replacement. I don't think you'd need to spend anything like £5.5m to replace those performances...

Zzzzzzzzzz clueless.

Why didn't Newcastle look for someone cheaper then? They obviously see something in him. I can't see Coyle getting more than £500k if he is really, really lucky. And we need two centre halves, a left back, possibly a goalkeeper and certainly a midfielder if we want to have ourselves a full bench. I think Duffy will want out now Hanley's going and if that happens, I can't see Marshall wanting to stay in a team so devoid of quality and ambition. Worry we are going to look much worse off in a few weeks time.

[G Somerset Rover]

Because often it's just an opinion and needs verification.

Could be off here as I don't frequent the board as much as I used to, but I swear I haven't seen him get one right as of yet, and I'm not saying that to be harsh - just seems to be my observations!

[OJRovers]

At least Hanley going should see the end of the old FFP excuse which we've already heard from Cheston this summer.

£5.5m straight profit on an academy player should give some headway for wages spend in the accounts.