John Boubepo 0 Posted October 1, 2003 I think we should also remember - it''s not just a case of what Huckerby can offer us, it''s also a case of what we can offer him.i.e. being a family man like myself and having stayed in Manchester for a short period of time[in fact I made it as short as was humanly possible] I found the place as bleak and depressing as anywhere I have ever seen, the weather was always grey, the buildings were grey, it was totally unsafe for kids or women to be out after dark, [but at least the dark made a change from the grey] and the only thing to keep you amused was thinking up ways of stopping Liam Gallagher look-alikes from stealing your car of breaking into your house. So if moving to a fine city like Norwich with it''s clean safe environment and occasional blue skies isn''t worth at least a thought, then getting the chance of playing week in week out AND playing a free role must! After all what''s his alternative - return to Gotham City and sit on the bench, that''s if he''s lucky!! I don''t know about you but I''d gladly take a pay cut just for the chance to improve my life. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
a1canary 0 Posted October 1, 2003 it''s no coincidence that virtually every player sings the praises of the area and how pleasant a place it is to live. i agree there is a lot to be said for that. someone said in another post that his mrs may want to go back but if they''ve got two little''uns then i can''t believe she isn''t impressed with the place-far better environment to bring up a family. just depends if she''s actually from manc land or not ''cos if she is then she will want to go back - the natives are mostly inbred and narrow minded and get a nose bleed if they get beyond oldham! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chicken 0 Posted October 1, 2003 John Boubepo you are ofcourse right, but you missed one factor that could be a deciding one. If we succeed this season, after signing Huckerby, to get promotion he knows what the deal is. We have little money and will surely clear our debts before splashing out on money just like West Brom. Chances are he would be our number one striker when we get there. He is also already a hero.I think all of these factors that we have mentioned are very true and probably in his mind. But Worthington is right, it may not be down to him or us, it could be down to Man City. If they suddenly loose two strikers to injury then they might not let him go untill the summer, when all the other clubs have money to spend. We have been lucky in that there was not a lot of money spent on transfers this season and if Iwan does hang up his boots we will also have a reported £500k a year to play with, even if he doesnt he will be offered a new contract and surely and lower waged one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trickydicky 0 Posted October 1, 2003 Quality of life is important, and if Huickerby really likes it here a deal might just be able to be done. On a different note and just going back a couple of games to the game with Stoke I noticed that in each half their goalkeeper pulled off a good save from a clearance/deflection from his own defender''s feet, once in each half. I was surprised that no appeal was made for a penalty for a pass back as there was a good case in both instances for saying this is what it was. The Sky commentators heralded the saves from their own defenders clearance but surely there was a case for saying these were pass-backs to the keeper. Did we miss out on two penaltys? Did anyone else see this? I recall a similar situation once with England when Micahel Owen immediately appealed for a penalty and was given one in similar circumstances when the defender had a deflection saved by their own keeper. Just wonder if I am out of order here or did anyone notice what i was referring to? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Swiss 0 Posted October 2, 2003 They weren''t backpasses, they were misplaced clearances. And you don''t get a penalty for a backpass. Have you ever played football? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BH0201 0 Posted October 2, 2003 Don''t exactly think that footballers with families live in the middle of Moss Side. Take Alderley Edge for example. More millionaires per square mile then anywhere else in the country. They can''t all be wrong!Don''t think he''s going to be hard up to buy somewher nice.....Craig Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trickydicky 0 Posted October 2, 2003 You do get a penalty if the goalkeeper handles a backpass from his own player rather than kicks it. This happend twice, although I do accept they coudl be interpreted as clearances. Surely htough this is a grey area and we could have appealed for a penalty as on both occasions their defenders kicked the ball for their own keeper to handle it. I do distinctlyl recall England getting a penalty in similar circumstances when Owen was sharp enough to immediately appeal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tumbleweed 106 Posted October 2, 2003 I thought you got an indirect free kick for a back pass to the goalie. I am sure I recall instances (even when in the penalty area) of massed defenders on the line trying to block the touch back or lay off for someone else to blast. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karl Pilkington 0 Posted October 2, 2003 I also think/know indirect free kick.This season we conceded one. About 8 players lined up on the goal line with Greeno standing in front of them!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chip20 69 Posted October 2, 2003 Yes, a free kick should be awarded if a player deliberately passes the ball to his own defender and he touches it with his hand(s), regardless of whether the offence took place in the penalty box or not. Deflections and mis-kicked clearances don''t count; it has to be an intentional pass. I think the rule was introduced to cut down on timewasting by the goalie and the defenders playing the ball amongst themselves. The goalie could waste a lot of time by picking the ball up, where players aren''t allowed to challenge him. He sure as hell won''t hang around if he isn''t aloowed to hold the ball and attackers can charge in at him!!Am pretty sure it has to be an indirect free kick (most players will simply tap it an inch or two for a team mate to belt it one) and all teams will defend this by covering the goal mouth (and their vital organs!!). The ten yard rule only applies if the free kick can physically be taken ten yards from the goal line.I am also fairly sure (although not 100% certain) that the kick takes place from where the goalie handles the ball, rather than from where the defender kicked it to him.Anybody wish to clarify any of the above? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
John Boubepo 0 Posted October 2, 2003 Granted - most footballers wouldn''t live in Moss Side but then, neither did I, living close to Alderley Edge myself was my saving grace, as most catburglars would travel from Moss Side, bypass my place and make for the richer pickings of Alderley Edge. And unless I''m mistaken it''s the same grey sky which hangs over Moss Side which hangs over Alderley, or do those clever millionaires know something I don''t!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Robert911 0 Posted July 17, 2013 So this was the oldest post on here. I commented on it and now it''s on the top. Crazy that it was written 10 years ago. Funny what the hot topic of the day was back then.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birchfest 397 Posted July 17, 2013 Not sure why you bothered, though it''s certainly ironic with regards to what''s happening at the club now. hucks probably wouldn''t be getting a pay cut that''s for sure... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
