BlyBlyBabes 0 Posted August 14, 2007 1] How come Celtic got 9m from Sunderland for Craig Gordon from Hearts, and we got only 2m from West Ham for Robert Green? My conclusion - we got turned over by West Ham, putting it politely.2] Compare 2 recent Scottish international goalkeepers - Craig Gordon (9m), David Marshall (1m) - and explain their relative values. My view - seems we got a bargain.3] Now there is only another Scottish international - Paul Gallacher (small change) to explain. Appears we got value for money.Anybody agree?OTBC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCFC_Chris 0 Posted August 14, 2007 1. Gordon - very good keeper but Sunderland paid over the odds as they''re desperate to sign a keeper to keep them up2. Green - i think he only had a year left to run on his contract so not much chance of us getting anymore than we did3. Marshall - bargain, i think his value will rocket now he is playing regular first team football Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlyBlyBabes 0 Posted August 14, 2007 [quote user="NCFC_Chris"]1. Gordon - very good keeper but Sunderland paid over the odds as they''re desperate to sign a keeper to keep them up2. Green - i think he only had a year left to run on his contract so not much chance of us getting anymore than we did3. Marshall - bargain, i think his value will rocket now he is playing regular first team football[/quote]Do you know how long Gordon had remaining on his Hearts contract?OTBC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCFC_Chris 0 Posted August 14, 2007 [quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="NCFC_Chris"] 1. Gordon - very good keeper but Sunderland paid over the odds as they''re desperate to sign a keeper to keep them up2. Green - i think he only had a year left to run on his contract so not much chance of us getting anymore than we did3. Marshall - bargain, i think his value will rocket now he is playing regular first team football[/quote]Do you know how long Gordon had remaining on his Hearts contract?OTBC [/quote]nope but they certainly wouldn''t have been able to negotiate a fee of £9m if it was within the last 18months Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Macca 0 Posted August 14, 2007 Irrelevant how much Marshall''s value will go up... he''ll leave next year for £1.5 million via a ''clause''. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marty 0 Posted August 14, 2007 its all about the supply and demand, although i would have expected to have got more for Green. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gissing canary 2 Posted August 14, 2007 A lot has changed in a year on player values in the top flight, if they are deemed to make a difference, also sunderland are dumb! I mean chopra has gone up 10 fold, we would have taken 500k for etuhu last year. The world has gone crazy, especially sunderland, so dont get too carried away with numbers. And i dont think grant would have allowed a get out clause for a guy he values this highly unless its 5mill plus. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Walking Man 13 Posted August 14, 2007 I think Gordon had recently signed a 5 year deal up there, not sure though. Also Hearts are backed by Romanov which puts them in a strong bargaining position. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0 Posted August 14, 2007 Hearts only conceded 35 and 31 goals in their last two seasons, thats a damn good record. I can only assune Gordon has been a major part of this.Only time will tell, but he kept a clean sheet against Tottenham so has already started to repay Roy Keane''s faith in him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Saint Canary 0 Posted August 14, 2007 [quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]1] How come Celtic got 9m from Sunderland for Craig Gordon from Hearts, and we got only 2m from West Ham for Robert Green? My conclusion - we got turned over by West Ham, putting it politely.2] Compare 2 recent Scottish international goalkeepers - Craig Gordon (9m), David Marshall (1m) - and explain their relative values. My view - seems we got a bargain.3] Now there is only another Scottish international - Paul Gallacher (small change) to explain. Appears we got value for money.Anybody agree?OTBC [/quote]Aston Villa have reportedly paid £2m to loan Scott Carson!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCFC_Chris 0 Posted August 14, 2007 [quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]Hearts only conceded 35 and 31 goals in their last two seasons, thats a damn good record. I can only assune Gordon has been a major part of this.Only time will tell, but he kept a clean sheet against Tottenham so has already started to repay Roy Keane''s faith in him.[/quote]Le Juge helped also Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canaryjock 0 Posted August 14, 2007 [quote user="give it a rest"]I think Gordon had recently signed a 5 year deal up there, not sure though. Also Hearts are backed by Romanov which puts them in a strong bargaining position.[/quote]He signed a new deal a year or so ago from memory, though I can''t remember how long for. Another 3 years I''d guess, though he only signed that because he''s a Hearts fan and wanted to ensure they got a good deal for him when he did choose to leave.Having seen Gordon play several times for club and country, I can confirm that he is top quality but I agree that he surely isn''t 9 times the player David Marshall is. In other words, our much maligned board surely deserve credit for signing him for the purported fee we did. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Le Juge 0 Posted August 14, 2007 [quote user="canaryjock"] [quote user="give it a rest"]I think Gordon had recently signed a 5 year deal up there, not sure though. Also Hearts are backed by Romanov which puts them in a strong bargaining position.[/quote]He signed a new deal a year or so ago from memory, though I can''t remember how long for. Another 3 years I''d guess, though he only signed that because he''s a Hearts fan and wanted to ensure they got a good deal for him when he did choose to leave.Having seen Gordon play several times for club and country, I can confirm that he is top quality but I agree that he surely isn''t 9 times the player David Marshall is. In other words, our much maligned board surely deserve credit for signing him for the purported fee we did.[/quote]Yes but the differing prices of players are not directly relative to the differing ability of the player. A small increase in ability can yield a very large increase in value. Having said that, Gordon for 9m was stupid in my opinion but hey if they stay up it was genius.[quote user="NCFC_Chris"][quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"] Hearts only conceded 35 and 31 goals in their last two seasons, thats a damn good record. I can only assune Gordon has been a major part of this.Only time will tell, but he kept a clean sheet against Tottenham so has already started to repay Roy Keane''s faith in him.[/quote]Le Juge helped also[/quote]I do what I can. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
breaker2 0 Posted August 14, 2007 Gordon is the best keeper of the lot. thats why he was more than Green, Sunderland may have paid over the odds, but british talent is at a premium i.e Bent, Bale, Walcott (especially the younger players). As good as Greeno is, and i''m a real fan of his, Gordon is a much better player.Carson has gone on loan for a fixed fee, but there is also a reported 13m!! buy out clause if Villa wish to make the deaal permanent. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0 Posted August 14, 2007 I think we perhaps saw today why we got Marshall for under a million, he certainly did not impress at all, and didnt react to either goal. Most worryingly his kicking was atrocious. Hopefully just a blip! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlyBlyBabes 0 Posted August 15, 2007 Having given away Greeno for peanuts- I mean he and Tevez kept West Ham up virtually singlehanded last season and Keane obviously hopes that Gordon will do the same for Sunderland - does anybody know if our suits negotiated a significant sell-on clause for him?I mean, things don''t just happen, do they. If Celtic had Gordon tied up long term, why didn''t we have Greeno similarly tied up? Apart from that, Gordon Strachan et al would put our negotiators to shame.And I wonder what Marshall''s sell on clause is?????? Anybody hear anything?Nethercott, Kennon, Keelan, Woods, Gunn, Green, [Marshall? - or might it be Gilkes?]. Let''s hope!OTBC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Saint Canary 0 Posted August 15, 2007 [quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]I think we perhaps saw today why we got Marshall for under a million, he certainly did not impress at all, and didnt react to either goal. Most worryingly his kicking was atrocious. Hopefully just a blip![/quote]I think you are being very generous regarding his kicking. Did you notice he changed his right boot in the second half?Also he didn''t move when Barnet hit the bar either. He did make a good low save early on though and had little protection. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites