Jezzard 16 Posted September 2, 2016 ...as an insurance in the unlikely (huh) scenario that we didn''t sign enough strikers? Rather than a) Lafferty, or b) scraping the barrel around non-contracted players? Okay so he would have cost slightly more in wages (counter that we''ve saved by not signed anyone) but it could have well worked out at this level when Lafferty or Chamakh almost certainly won''t. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king canary 7,606 Posted September 2, 2016 Because he''s not very good Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kick it off 1,952 Posted September 2, 2016 To be honest, much as I wanted Ricky to work out, he just didn''t. I think Chamakh brings more to the table in the brand of football we play than Ricky does/would. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hogesar 9,672 Posted September 2, 2016 I think Chamackh offers a little bit more than RvW!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted September 2, 2016 Odd post. Chamakh a completely different option to RvW. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The young canary 0 Posted September 2, 2016 I suspect we wanted to get the wolfs wages off the books but odd we did it early but didn''t replace him asap afterwards Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Iwans Big Toe 312 Posted September 2, 2016 We didn''t need him any more as we''ve got Naismith, who looks completely out of his depth, couldn''t hit a barn door with a nail gun and offers practically nothing to the team. If we''d have kept RVW as well it would only have been as cover, so it was in his best interests to move on and invest the money in a young player the manager had no intention of playing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanaryOne 0 Posted September 2, 2016 Hilarious how some of the happy clappers having mocked those down the road for the signing of Leon Best are now making out Chamakh has a role to play . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lappinitup 629 Posted September 2, 2016 [quote user="CanaryOne"]Hilarious how some of the happy clappers having mocked those down the road for the signing of Leon Best are now making out Chamakh has a role to play . [/quote]Nappy crapper uses scum as a stick to beat our club with. New low even for them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Clint 221 Posted September 2, 2016 From what I''ve seen, I''d rather have RVW on the wage bill than Naismith. Unfortunately we couldn''t offload the latter (cos we''re paying him far too much) and we could the former. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hogesar 9,672 Posted September 2, 2016 [quote user="CanaryOne"]Hilarious how some of the happy clappers having mocked those down the road for the signing of Leon Best are now making out Chamakh has a role to play . [/quote]Best is older, and most recent clubs include Rotherham and a loan spell at Brighton.Chamakh is younger and his most recent clubs include Palace, West Ham & Arsenal.Now, if you need me to explain the immediate difference between the two (before even taking into account type of player, suitability etc) then may I suggest you follow this link http://piv.pivpiv.dk/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Buh 0 Posted September 2, 2016 Chamakh isn''t Messi but he looks like it compared to RVWand, no, I don''t care that he''s scored some goals since he''s left. He''s awful. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fuzzar 1,702 Posted September 2, 2016 Please stop mentioning RvW. It sets off an alarm in Indy Bones'' cage, then he wakes up and starts rattling it! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy_Bones 441 Posted September 3, 2016 What you need to remember about RvW....J/K, thought I''d better show up and make an effort at rattling at least a small part of my cage [;)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Katie Borkins 1 Posted September 3, 2016 You pay someone 35k a week to score goals.You get the same number of goals by spending 0k a week.That''s why. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syteanric 1 Posted September 3, 2016 because he was Sh*t.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jezzard 16 Posted September 4, 2016 OP proposed keeping RVW as insurance if we ended up in this very situation instead of Lafferty who demonstratively doesn’t want to be here, or b) keep both and avoid having to barrel scrape and probably not even get Chamakh who we’ll lose out on to a Prem club or injury. What we know about RVW was it didn’t work out for a struggling club in the prem, 1 goal in 25 games. Jerome for contrast scored 3 in 34 last year, including that one that Joe Hart had moreorless thrown in to the back of the net. Not significantly different I wouldn’t say, but we’ve seen Jerome can do it at a lower level when playing for about the best team in the division. Early signs are that RVW can do it at a lower level in the Eredivisie and has previously done it at a higher level when playing for Sporting. Lafferty is not very good. Neither will be whoever we end up with, if anyone. I’d just rather have RVW third choice than Lafferty. I’d rather have Loza than Lafferty. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Katie Borkins 1 Posted September 5, 2016 I''d rather have Cat AIDS than Lafferty. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Van wink 2,994 Posted September 5, 2016 Katie Borkins wrote the following post at 05/09/2016 4:43 AM:"I''d rather have Cat AIDS than Lafferty"So you woke up in the middle of the night and decided to post that👍Must be living the dream Katie👌 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ron obvious 1,502 Posted September 5, 2016 For whatever reason, RvW didn''t work for us, & showed no sign of ever doing so. He had to go. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Katie Borkins 1 Posted September 5, 2016 VanWink, your self indulgent wankery mimics your avatars self indulgent jazz rock noodling. And like his music, nobody is listening. Now go and compose a witty post in 5/8 time, there''s a good bellend. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
? 0 Posted September 5, 2016 Interesting that both VW and Katie posted at the same time, be it 12 hours difference, serendipitous perhaps! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Felixfan 53 Posted September 5, 2016 Cannot believe that anyone thinks we should have kept one of the worst players to have worn the shirt. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barbe bleu 826 Posted September 5, 2016 [quote user="Felixfan"]Cannot believe that anyone thinks we should have kept one of the worst players to have worn the shirt.[/quote]Least effective, certainly. Worst, I wouldn''t say that. Here he was a square peg when we had a round hole, but he might fit other holes better. I''d probably still have him though as I''m not sure anyone else we have or likely to have is capable of filling our round hole. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites