Crewe after Rivers

[kennyfoggo 0]

Canaries block Rivers Crewe move

Crewe have had an approach to take Norwich winger Mark Rivers on loan rejected by the Division One leaders.

The club wanted cover for striker Luke Varney, who is out for two-to-three weeks with a shoulder injury, and saw former favourite Rivers as the ideal replacement.

But Norwich manager Nigel Worthington decided Rivers, who has not played since November, was still needed for the promotion push at Carrow Road.

A Crewe spokesman said: "The manager made an approach about Mark Rivers but Norwich rejected it. They weren''t prepared to let him go. The manager might have someone else in mind."

Source Teamtalk

[Windy 0]

Have funny feeling this little situation is about to get a lot more kinky. Rivers LOAN rejected by bigwigs at Sexy Football HQ and yet he''s 3rd choice on the right hand side....! He must have done something pretty bad to old NW!

[First Wizard 0]

I''ve heard of an alleged tunnel ''bust up'' or scrap, between NW and Rivers after a home game, anyone else heard this strange rumor?.

[DumbleDelia is Magic 0]

Why not let him go? He''s obviously really out of favour here and his wages could be used on a big target man

[kennyfoggo 0]

I personally think we should have let him go for the 3 month period, with the option to call him back if needed. It would have given him some first team football and get his fitness levels up again....might have done him a bit of good

[Saint Canary 0]

I think I would fall out with Rivers! I get frustrated with him because he has lots of talent, he can run past people and cross the ball, only problem with him though he doesn''t seem to be bothered for 60 mins of a match.

[FatboySlimfast 0]

Exaxtly right 1stwizard. I replied to a thread by diane after the watford game regarding worthingtons team selection (holt at right back if you remember). After the game i went to the club shop and when i came out, i joined the cue for the burger bar. This is where i overheard 2 stewards talking about rivers and worthy having a bust up in the tunnel after the game. Apparantly other stewards were involved in keeping the pair of them apart. As no-one else had any knowledge of this i put it down to a wind-up on behalf of the stewards, and as the weeks passed and the huckerby saga gained momentum i forgot all about it. Untill now. Perhaps what i heard was true. If my memory serves me correct rivers came on as sub in this game for the last 10 minutes or so. I cant recall seeing him since, not even as a substitute.

[Windy 0]

I''m thinking Worthington is holding back Rivers on purpose, as punishment for something. I bet he doesn''t play again this season (unless they kiss and make up, which of course we won''t know anything about, so ruining my bet!)

[Kent 0]

I work at UCi in Norwich, and Mark came in on sunday, and I asked him when we''d see him back on the right hand side? His reply "When he stops being in a grump with me" I said "so that''s what it is then?" and he looked at me solemnly and nodded his head. I told him I''d have him in the team, and he said he''s trying hard to get back in. So there you have it folks.

[Bring-on-Flecky 1]

Since Mathias Svensson has an imminent knee op, NW needs more striker
cover. So he won''t let Rivers go simple as that.

[natalie 0]

yes i have heard the rumour 2 it was bust up

[As my login causes problems [ :o) ] 0]

Funny "sister" only hearing rumours? Don''t you talk?