John

[quote user="John"][quote user="First Wizard"]A criminal and class A drug user like Fry should not be a director of a family orintated club like CITY......period!   Tweet that. [/quote]Amen!Lord forbid us fans become a bunch of... Middle-aged... Drugged up... Gay''s... ... Slightly on the porkish side, like Vicarage Road on a Saturday night. And it will all be down to Mr Fry, and that damned quote that has seen Carrow Road become the most renowned crack den this side of the equator. Fact is, he''s been in the public eye for over 30 years now, and he''s been seen fitting enough for the nation as an icon, so much so he is described in the most innocent terms (or at least by what the BBC pertains to be) as a ''National Treasure''.At what point does the football fanatic demographic command this great sense of moral and ethical sensitivity, lacking the same thick skin that Harry Potter followers, Classic FM listeners... etc. have in dealing with Fry and his profane and shocking ways? Y''know, that group commonly noted for its anti-semitism, homophobia, history with assembled acts of violence, alcoholism, domestic abuse... etc.. I guess cocaine has always been that ''one step too far'', ey?I think it''s fair to say, for better or worse, kids will learn a lot more from their Dads and other adults at the football, than they will from a brief quotation stated in the papers (in the Daily Mail, none other than the tabloids answer to CBeebies of course) from someone with a remote connection via their partial involvement with the club they support.[/quote]In that i mean to ask why we, as a adults, don''t look to set that example ourselves, when that example is far more immediate to the younger generations than the rubbish that emits from the Daily Mail? I''m sure as hell no one i knew at school gave two-hoots about what came out of the Mail when i was at the age of 5.It''s this lack of trying to set an example or promote education in these very relative aspects of life (set by in this example) by the common man that has us willfully conceding our liberties to government, and in that, any sense of real moral responsiblity and understanding.This almost ''fashionable'' vilification of Stephen Fry serves no more than a classic example of those looking to defer responsibility by any means necessary; leading me to ask of the ''Fry haters'' isn''t it about time you grew the fudge up!?If Fry is considered any threat, it is born only out of an inferiority complex over the authority of ones opinion and intellect unto those they believe their influence presides over. And more than anything, it''s just immature.

[quote user="First Wizard"]A criminal and class A drug user like Fry should not be a director of a family orintated club like CITY......period!   Tweet that. [/quote]Amen!Lord forbid us fans become a bunch of... Middle-aged... Drugged up... Gay''s... ... Slightly on the porkish side, like Vicarage Road on a Saturday night. And it will all be down to Mr Fry, and that damned quote that has seen Carrow Road become the most renowned crack den this side of the equator. Fact is, he''s been in the public eye for over 30 years now, and he''s been seen fitting enough for the nation as an icon, so much so he is described in the most innocent terms (or at least by what the BBC pertains to be) as a ''National Treasure''.At what point does the football fanatic demographic command this great sense of moral and ethical sensitivity, lacking the same thick skin that Harry Potter followers, Classic FM listeners... etc. have in dealing with Fry and his profane and shocking ways? Y''know, that group commonly noted for its anti-semitism, homophobia, history with assembled acts of violence, alcoholism, domestic abuse... etc.. I guess cocaine has always been that ''one step too far'', ey?I think it''s fair to say, for better or worse, kids will learn a lot more from their Dads and other adults at the football, than they will from a brief quotation stated in the papers (in the Daily Mail, none other than the tabloids answer to CBeebies of course) from someone with a remote connection via their partial involvement with the club they support.

[quote user="blahblahblah"]Is Martin Taylor still with the blue-noses ?  And the fella Ba from the Hammers.[/quote]Been at Watford for a couple of years now Blah, but his contract is up.I realise time moves on, he''s older, returning players have rarely ever been seen in as good a light by the end of their second spell, we''ve moved upwards whilst he''s moved downwards... etc.. So is he still worth a punt?He might be. Scarce few defenders in the Championship have bettered him over 46 games for one, if the actm index is anything to go by.

As much as it hurts (and that it does) to utilise an example against an article in favour of Lambert, this does somewhat suggest otherwise...http://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/lambert_cody_is_doing_great_but_remember_the_gulf_1_800253

[quote user="CT"]With the greatest of respect to Holty and the other forwards I believe the above to be so true.Look at Blackpool (as one example)- they gained promotion playing attacking football but failed to stay up because they simply cannot defend.[/quote]I gander you''ve read this, and taken it as gospel then...You''re opening statement, as far as i''m concerned, is totally unfounded, holds no weight in any respect, and looking at the tables of this year alone i believe it is not only easily dispelled, but turned on its head (and i''m getting tired of pundits batting out the same cliche''s in their analysis'' with respect to this utter misconception).When it comes to promotion, QPR in the Championship, of course the eventual Champions, scored a mass of 71 goals - 7th highest in the league, outside of the grouping around 6th and 3rd (in which only 1 goal separates the 4 teams) by a relatively big margin. Leeds had those strikers, ending the season with 81 goals (2nd in the league), and yet they finished in 7th place. Watford had those strikers (one in particular - the 20+ a season striker that would lead to this promotion challenge i assume?), ending the season with 77 goals (4th in the league), yet they finished in 14th place.By the end of the season it was quite clearly the defence of QPR that won them promotion; the jobs that consisted of forward play had merely been fulfilled, not excelled in by the fashion exhibited by the 6 teams above them in this respect.As for staying up, one would be right in saying Blackpool impressed in this department, scoring as many as Tottenham in 5th, with their defence ultimately their downfall. However, the all too common mistake some have made is that this has set some sort of precedent, when both West Ham (18h bottom scorers) and Birmingham (20th) consisted of 2/3''s of the 3 lowest scorers. Whilst West Ham''s defensive record was also fairly abysmal (although they did best West Brom''s, the team that finished 11th), Birmingham managed to equal the defensive record of the team that finished 9th (Aston Villa). The ultimate conclusion of this is that we should look to achieve a sort of parity, so that our final position in the Premier League is not made in spite of (or thanks to) a gaping hole in our team (as was the primary flaw in our last venture to the top division). It is a necessity that we look at our team for what it is, not at Blackpool''s side, or anyone elses for that matter, in some absurdly abstract sense in respect to our own side (that in essence makes no sense).Any talk of enhancing only a single department in the team, because of some illusionary perception concerning the ''status quo'', is nothing but trivial and mindless conjecture.As much as the naivety of this thread baffles me, it again gripes with me that people actually get paid to spout all this b0**0x time and time again.

[quote user="John"]Am i the only one not all that impressed with Lee Clark? Huddersfield are financed by wealthy backers, standards of attendances more or less correlate with their league position, and they were reasonally well set-up with realistic aspirations for the Championship prior to his arrival. Going by what i''ve read, Huddersfield fans didn''t really rate him after the first year under his management (some still don''t).The manner in which Huddersfield have progressed in the past couple of years strikes me as being "decent enough" but far from spectacular. They seemed to have followed the path they promised to after being taken over by Dean Hoyle in 2008, without defying expectation in the way Poyet, Malky, Robinson, or Lambert have.I''d sooner have Paul Tisdale, Keith Hill, or Mark Robins as manager before i so much as considered Lee Clark.[/quote]reasonably* Amongst others. [:$]

Am i the only one not all that impressed with Lee Clark? Huddersfield are financed by wealthy backers, standards of attendances more or less correlate with their league position, and they were reasonally well set-up with realistic aspirations for the Championship prior to his arrival. Going by what i''ve read, Huddersfield fans didn''t really rate him after the first year under his management (some still don''t).The manner in which Huddersfield have progressed in the past couple of years strikes me as being "decent enough" but far from spectacular. They seemed to have followed the path they promised to after being taken over by Dean Hoyle in 2008, without defying expectation in the way Poyet, Malky, Robinson, or Lambert have.I''d sooner have Paul Tisdale, Keith Hill, or Mark Robins as manager before i so much as considered Lee Clark.

[quote user="Bruce Eats Walkers"]I went in the Canary store today to get a shirt printed up with the intention of having it signed and put on display, However they have run out of the League One Champions shoulder badges and wont be getting any more (obvious reasons) was just wondering if anyone had any ideas where i could get one online before I make a call to Brighton![/quote]Doesn''t the date accompany the badge, i.e. Champions 2010-11?If so, your avenues may be narrowed even further.

A good suggestion in Chops, but Iwan is right, unfortunately. Whilst it''d be a decent move, there is little, or no likelihood of anything happening in this department.We could return to Brighton with another offer Bennett, or go for Matt Phillips (although i can see Blackpool retaining him, whatever the outcome).I think we should focus our resources on Kazenga LuaLua though. The winger scored 4 goals in 7 starts for Brighton before injury, at the mere of 20. He''s leaving Newcastle in search of first team football, and it looks like Brighton is his destination. We would however be very sensible to intervene with an offer of our own, and get him playing at Carrow Road next season.Frightfully fast, sublime technique, a capable crosser, eye-catching dribbling skills, an awesome free-kick taker, and a good finisher. He''s got a big future in the game, likely to be more so than any of the 3 aforementioned players, and would be ideal for any wide alternative system we may wish to go for in trying to match-up to the width of the Premier League.

[quote user="Yellow Rages"][quote user="Yellow Rages"] [quote user="John"][quote user="Gingerpele"]Hmm, Drury is worth more than Tierney, Crofts, R.Martin, Lansbury, Jackson and C.Martin.... I still think Drury has something to offer, but he certainly isn''t worth much at all now. Some of those values are a bit silly.[/quote]''Some''?I''d go so far as to say i''d contest every single price evaluation on that list in relation to Norwich. I find that these sites are never reliable though, and i''d be shocked if they so much as entered the ball park in actual fact.[/quote]   I think you might be taking it too literally. It goes without saying that the prices are someones guess. Player prices are a matter of opinion and simply a reflection of status and desire. Example: Fernando Torres isn''t woth 50 mil, so what is he worth and how do you guage that? Do you compare him to other players? If so, who? And on what? Do you compare his fee to other players fees? Do you factor in his age, wage demands, prospects, injurys, stats, demand. It''s a price tag plucked out of the sky that happens to suit all parties at that particular time. So don''t get too strung on the prices of the players on this site. I was just impressed with the comprehensive database. [/quote] I would also add that if you were ever able to find a site that could magically know the price of any player if that were ever possible (somehow hypnotising every prospective buyer into believing it) then buy the site not the player and Bill Gates will be your butler. [/quote]All good points Rages, and in honesty, on no basis would i dispute with you. There are multiple factors that yeild to a progression of variables that no website or area of domain could feasibly hope to account for - and if there is one, i''m all in!My issue in the first instance, while seemingly out of place (it is after all, as you say, an impressive database), is the inkling of acknowledgement and reliability afforded to the ''off the wall'' price evaluations that don''t deserve the recognition they are given.My criticism wasn''t entirely necessary, but it''s best the weaker parts of the site are undermined so we can concentrate on it''s actual worth, rather than this constant cycle of fascination in the absurdity of it''s weaker elements (so i''m on your side really - i''m just being a bit of a pedant [;)]).

[quote user="Gingerpele"]Hmm, Drury is worth more than Tierney, Crofts, R.Martin, Lansbury, Jackson and C.Martin.... I still think Drury has something to offer, but he certainly isn''t worth much at all now. Some of those values are a bit silly.[/quote]''Some''?I''d go so far as to say i''d contest every single price evaluation on that list in relation to Norwich. I find that these sites are never reliable though, and i''d be shocked if they so much as entered the ball park in actual fact.

It''s against my better judgement that i''m partaking in this, but:1. Martin O''Neil2. Gus Poyet3. Alan Curbishley4. Karl Robinson5. Malky MackayAnd i hate to say it, given our recent history with former players at the helm, but i''ve always reckoned Dion Dublin would make a good manager, ever since his latter spell here. The players were clearly endeared to him, and i suspected he commanded more authority in the dressing room in the way that he was referenced to in the papers by the players on a weakly basis, with nothing but praise.Having served under Sir Alex Ferguson, Graham Taylor, and Ron Atkinson; like Lambert, he seemed a studious player that would have been somewhat cultivated by their methods in his appriach to the game also in my opinion.

[quote user="marvin the martian"]It''s going to be a struggle. I can''t help but feel some people have forgotten how difficult the prem is. In the last two seasons we''ve played both Blackburn and Sunderland reserves and they''ve both had a comfortable win. [/quote] In all fairness, these are the teams we fielded against those respective sides:Against Sunderland at home -CITY: Alnwick, Otsemobor, Tudur Jones, Holt (c) (Martin 60), Whaley (McDonald 60), Doherty, Hoolahan, Spillane, Adeyemi (Smith 75), Lappin, Daley. Subs not used: Rudd (GK), Nelson, Hughes, McVeigh.Against Blackburn away -CITY: Rudd, R. Martin (Hughes 71), Gill, Holt (Johnson 66), Jackson, Hoolahan (McNamee 66), Fox, Lappin, Ward, Francomb, Askou subs: Ruddy (GK) Surman, C. Martin, Smith. In both cases we fielded our share of reserves also (whilst retaining some of the spine, i.e. Hoolahan, Holt, Doherty, Fox... etc.), and in both cases we gave a good account of ourselves when the performances are assessed a little deeper than simply the results.The fact we''ve dropped out of the cup to Orient and Carlisle in the two other knock-out competitions we''ve partaken in during Lamberts time here also surely puts the managers approach to them into persepective, as opposed to his approach to the league (in every game played after a cup exit we are unbeaten - 2 wins & 2 draws).I have faith in us rising up to the mantle in this league (although not to the extent in which i''d afford my irrational superstitious self a prediction).

[quote user="blahblahblah"]Sorry John, I''ll let you get there first next time [:)]  I must find something for these idle hands to do ![/quote]You need not worry Blah; i''m very open to the idea of people voluntarily arguing on my behalf if they can do it as well as you can. [Y]

[quote user="YankeeCanary"]John, for someone who likes to write your words often appear designed to appeal to coincide with the emotions and popular opinions of others. If that is your objective then you have succeeded. If, on the other hand, you wish to be a writer that forms an opinion based upon critical and objective input then you have failed. Here are the essential elements: 1)  Paul Lambert is undoubtedly ambitious. 2 ) He has changed clubs before when under contract. 3) He is coming off the back of two successive promotions to take Norwich back into the Premiership and, therefore, his star is at the brightest point of his managerial career. 3) Those people with a lot more money than Norwich City has are willing to go to great lengths to go after someone they think may be a steal.   Personally, I don''t think the West Ham opening has any particular appeal for Paul Lambert. However, John, do you not think the above essential elements would contribute to an interesting time over the next couple of months relating to possibilities for Paul Lambert without a need for anyone to conclude that he is self-gratifying, detestable, pernicious or a narcissistic a***hole? If so, then perhaps you could apply your writing ability to a critical assessment of that.           [/quote]Because my opinion happens to coincide on this singular occasion with what you percieve to be the majority, you presume that is my tendancy? Quite the contrary, i''ve had many a fractious argument on this board, suggesting for example that Holt will score over 20 goals in the Championship, McDonald remains an asset worth persevering with, we''ll contend for promotion at the first time of asking... etc..1) Paul Lambert is ambitious. On the other hand speculation over him conniving with other clubs for purely selfish means on a purely unfounded basis indicates to me that discussions have taken a turn down a road that was never worth tredding. On this point, neither the board nor Lamberts word has ever been enough for fans that concern themselves with such gossip.2) & 3) On these points i totally concur with Blah. Lambert has never been a man devoid of ambition (it is in fact what has kept the flame burning during his tenure here - note; his challenge to the players to take the victories you are on the cusp of taking). He will one day leave this club, for whatever reason (the likely one being what Blah has covered). His facets however have not established themselves at a level appropriate to his potential, hence why i don''t see any imminent departure, nor do i see him as an oppertunist plotting his way to one as we speak (the kind of Lambert many seem to have become fixated by when managers get sacked, and the rumour mill dawns upon us).4 (or the ''other'' 3)) Again, Blah said in response no less than i would have.My comments were not pinpointed at you in the first place YC, more this whole thread, and the mass of arguments i feel to be a shame that i''ve encountered amongst City fans.As for how and what i write, i believe we covered this vexed ''tutorship'' mentality you''ve got going on:http://services.pinkun.com/FORUMS/PINKUN/CS/forums/2/2513631/ShowPost.aspx#2513631

I must say, that whenever Lambert is ever touted for a potential move he always sounds a self-gratfying, detestable, pernicious, narcissistic a***hole.In no way, shape, or form, does the Lambert i know in this three-dimensional universe compiled by physical matter and energy emulate the aforementioned characteristics; he is in fact frequently quoted to the contrary, and his conduct and manner the polar opposite to one conniving his way to a world where all gravitates around his own means.Some people on here desperately need to take a step backwards before they can be taken seriously.

Oh, the irony.The word ''trust'' is clearly a term too easily bandied about these days.

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="John"]Like the Young Ones said, and as Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm pointed out, it would seem he wasn''t initially bought by Liverpool for a transfer fee.[/quote]I may be wrong here, but I understood that although he was technically ''free'', Barcelona had sued over this and the compensation for the costs was then technically the transfer fee.They did exactly the same thing over Fran Merida when Arsenal ''signed'' him, and got £2.2 million in compensation, and apparently the same course of action was due to be followed regarding Pacheco.However, I can''t find solid information either way on this, other than an old article about the Merida situation:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premier_league/arsenal/article2633746.eceEither way, I still can''t see him being a cheap release...[/quote]Using the powers of Google, i haven''t found any incriment of evidence suggesting they furthered that particular lawsuit against Pacheco, let alone won £5 million off him, as they had won £2.2 million from Merida.Said in Lehmans terms, it seems Merida simply didn''t sign the professional contract at 17 as was agreed when he was 14. Is there any evidence of Pacheco having broken a similar agreement? I can''t find any, only token paper speculation injected into a 3 and-a-half year old story to make it a bit more plump from what i can gather.That''s another thing, it''s 3 and-a-half years old. Such a massive outgoing, especially considering the manic economic past few years Liverpool have suffered, would surely have been covered or noted in that time? A reasonably financially stable Arsenal side didn''t manage to hide a more minor lawsuit against one of it''s players from the press; how could Liverpool have done so with a more major lawsuit against Pacheco, considering the circumstances? Seems like something the tabloids would be more than happy to jump on, with Liverpool having been in turmoil at the time.Seems dubious, at best, to me. I personally see little reason why the price can''t be as low as £1 million, depending on the effects of outside factors.

[quote user="Indy_Bones"]I can see at least 4 players in the current Liverpool setup being preferred to Dani in his main position, which combined with the suggestion that they are looking to further expand the squad over the summer, and I see his chances as being extremely limited - particularly when on his return, he''s being left out of TRAINING???Price wise it''s horribly difficult to call accurately, as Liverpool are likely to want to recoup a large percentage of their initial outlay back, I''d suggest at least 60% or more, meaning that we''re looking at probably around the 3 mil mark. This will then be further altered by their view on his potential, number of potential suitors, the players view and a number of other variables.This could then drop the price down to around 1.5/2 mil, or similarly increase it to close to the original 5 mil that Liverpool paid.I''d suggest that 3 mil or less should be a definite look, but we need to be very wary of paying over the odds, as although he looked well whilst here, this is the Prem, and he''s not a guaranteed starter for us, so would we like to pay a healthy chunk of our transfer budget on a player who''s not a likely regular starter? The potential is very clearly there, the question is - can he live up to it (and at what price)...[/quote]Like the Young Ones said, and as Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm pointed out, it would seem he wasn''t initially bought by Liverpool for a transfer fee.

[quote user="Gingerpele"]If there are any other clubs wanting him, and/or Liverlose want to keep him, then i can''t see him going for less than £4 million at the very least. He''s a young player with obvious talent, that they haven''t really tested at a higher level yet. He was a runner up with spain in the under 19s tournament, also getting the most goals. He''s spanish, which at the moment, young Spanish players must surely be worth a bit more? I really just can''t see why anyone thinks he will be going for £2 million, i will be happy to admit i''m wrong at a later date. But all those things added up make him worth more than £2 million, and these days players go for more than there worth.[/quote]Fairly young, but untested at the age of 20, and the talent you speak of doesn''t seem to have made much of an impact upon the management staff at Merseyside. His Spanish heritage may have been made more fashionable by the World Cup, but like the Caroll example, the association seems far too vague when it comes to business. As for his success in the U19 tournament, Maceo Rigters won the Golden Boot in the U21 European Championship; what has he done since? It doesn''t seem enough to me to constitute a £5 million+ price tage.We may have to agree to differ on this; i can''t see us allying our perception of the facts behind this.

[quote user="Gingerpele"][quote user="John"][quote user="John"][quote user="Gingerpele"]You can''t really think he will be that cheap AJ....[/quote]If AJ has at least half a mind (which i believe he does), he''ll stick by his judgement.Seems sound to me.[/quote]In saying that, i''d like to understand the reasoning behind your estimation of a £7/8 million price tag?You can''t really think he will be that expensive Gingerpele....[/quote] Yes have you seen the price of transfers recently? That isn''t based on what he should be worth, its based on how much strikers are being sold for. I know last day January transfers are generally higher, but still if Andy Carroll is even worth £20 million, then Pacheco is worth more than £2 million.... Quite a bit more.[/quote]The gravitas of the Carroll situation could have well pulled up the market. But, in doing that you''re failing to account for the situation itself, in which even an inflated market wouldn''t indicate toward a price much in excess of £2 million.Solely using the Caroll saga as any sort of reference point could constitute any range of bizarre prices.[quote user="Gingerpele"]And if £2 million was enough, why haven''t we agreed a deal yet? We quite clearly should be able to spend £2 million on a player of his quality, in a position (well he can play two well enough which is a huge bonus, especially since one is Hoolahan''s position) the deal should already be done.[/quote]Rather presumptuous Gingerpele, surely?He''s a classy player, but at the same time he spent a lot of time on the bench here. There''s not all that much evidence to suggest he''s a priority of ours, or that our management consider ourselves in urgent need of him.And how many deals in excess of £1 million have been agreed so far? Can''t be many. The final whistle has only just called a halt to our season (and their season isn''t even finished yet).

[quote user="chicken"]Several misstakes made here. Firstly reading too much into things. He has gone back to Liverpool who still have games left in this season. Right now they have three world class strikers of which one normally sits on the bench. Just like one of our players coming back from loan for the last two games of the season, they would have to be in terrific form to get into the team or injuries to other players as you would not want to disrupt the balance and form of a team that is doing well. He will know for sure what his future is once the season is finished. I should imagine another loan. Also its not a great idea to compare transfers because you never know exactly what is involved. Barnett had another year on his contract I think so they would have been looking at selling him this summer anyway. He wasn''t that rated by them and they obviously paid an inflated price for him at that time. Just like Wolves paid £1.5million for Shackell who is now a lower championship defender.[/quote]The Barnett example (just as the reference to Huckerby) was principally used to illustrate how the great majority are frequently wrong on these kind of issues, where the polar opposite came to fruition.Any correlation between the two transfers themselves was left open to interpretation.The crux of the matter obviously lays at the foot of both the parent club and the player. How much the player is valued by the parent club, and what the player wishes to do in light of that. All we need to be sure of is that our interest remains persistant; if we do, we''re likely to get the best possible deal we can out of this scenario, if there is one to be made.

[quote user="John"][quote user="Gingerpele"]You can''t really think he will be that cheap AJ....[/quote]If AJ has at least half a mind (which i believe he does), he''ll stick by his judgement.Seems sound to me.[/quote]In saying that, i''d like to understand the reasoning behind your estimation of a £7/8 million price tag?You can''t really think he will be that expensive Gingerpele....

[quote user="Gingerpele"]You can''t really think he will be that cheap AJ....[/quote]If AJ has at least half a mind (which i believe he does), he''ll stick by his judgement.Seems sound to me.

[quote user="Gingerpele"]I think he would definatly be up for coming back here, but probably only on loan.... It would be an amazing deal if we got him permanently, but i can see Liverlose pricing him up quite high, £7/8 million maybe?[/quote]He''s been at Liverpool for roughly 4 years, now of course roughly 4 years older than when the original purchase was made, making 14 appearances in that time, and having clearly failed to impress with successive management teams. Pray tell, why has the price risen by as much as £3 million? Scratch that, why has the price risen?I distinctly remember the situation with Leon Barnett; no one here thought it near possible that we could permanently purchase him. Bought by West Brom for a total of £3 million, once a regular feature in the West Brom side, on the back of a successful loan spell, the door never seemed so much as ajar if words on here were to be taken for granted.It happened. Lambert even indicated the price was essentially a steal.The same could also apply to the Huckerby situation.Of course both of the situations were eased somewhat by the desire of the player to make the move happen. If recent updates on this little ''saga'' are anything to go by in that respect however, perhaps it''s not so far-fetched? We''re also better equipped, supplemented by Premier League money, of which we were devoid of in the two aforementioned cases.Perhaps he won''t be a cheap buy, but i''m well aware of the ''track record'' your average fan has in trying to calculate any outcome in the transfer market.