Loughborough Canary 0 Posted December 16, 2004 According to the Mirror we are hoping to buy him in January, due to missing out on Crouchy. Dont know if he is the answer, any thoughts? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Francesco Volpe<P><BR><EM><FONT size=3><STRONG>A<STRONG><FONT>wesome<STRONG><FONT size=3>S<FONT><STRONG>ublime<STRONG><FONT size=3>H<FONT><STRONG>onest pro<EM><EM><FONT size=3><STRONG>T<STRONG><FONT>alented<STRONG><FONT size 0 Posted December 16, 2004 I''d rather see Jason Euell or mark De Vries ( is that how you spell it?) ahead of him, but if we can''t get either of them then i''d settle with him. I think Euell would be cheaper, but i think palace are said to be after him aswell. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Northern Canary 0 Posted December 16, 2004 Euell would be better. He a premiership striker that has shown he can score goals Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DumbleDelia is Magic 0 Posted December 16, 2004 I agree that Euell would be better but we couldn''t afford him. Harewood would do for me Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bird Table 0 Posted December 16, 2004 I''d rather see Euell here too! But I wouldn''t complain about Harewood, he scored a great goal at Carrow Road last season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DumbleDelia is Magic 0 Posted December 16, 2004 Sorry, 2 points which I didn''t put in my first post:Would we actually be able to afford him? Personally I don''t think so. West Ham certainly wouldn''t sell him for £1.2M!Also, Harewood was the BEST player that played at Carrow Road last year for an away side. He came in off the right wing and did absolutely superbly. Whether he''d do the same job upfront is another question though Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smudge 0 Posted December 16, 2004 Pardew "But there has been no contact with any club at this stage regarding a bid." What he actually means is.....Nigel has called and I have told him what we want, he''s gone away to ask to Delia for the money. Harewood in the line up against the Hammers in the cup anyone??  lets hope so Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meeky 0 Posted December 16, 2004 [quote]Sorry, 2 points which I didn''t put in my first post: Would we actually be able to afford him? Personally I don''t think so. West Ham certainly wouldn''t sell him for £1.2M! Also, Harewood was the B...[/quote]He''s going no where according to this! http://skysports.planetfootball.com/list.asp?hlid=244564&cpid=10&CLID=45&lid=&title=Hammers+nail+Harewood+rumours&channel=Football_Home Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shardy 0 Posted December 16, 2004 I''m sorry dumble delia, but if you think he was the best player to come here last season you are sadley mistaken. I think you must have been distracted by his superb goal, but the rest of his game was pretty average to say the least. If we pay over 2m for Harewood I''d be gutted, it''d be a complete waste of money. I know a lot of west ham fans and none of them rate him that highly and they would know don''t you think. Personally I think that young Dean Ashton must be worth a go 1.5m - 2m maybe tall quick good control and an eye for goal.Have Faith Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Saint Canary 0 Posted December 16, 2004 Not wanting to upset anyone who rates Harewood and he may well do a job for us but I really think that in January we will have no time to bring in a player and wait for them to adjust to the PL. I would prefer it if we bought someone who has played in the PL.There is no reason why someone couldn''t come in and adapt straight away but I think it''s an icreased risk. We need someone to come in and make an immediate impact. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dean Coneys boots 1,531 Posted December 16, 2004 I have said it before and will again. The Hammers fans (who all seem to live in this part of Essex) do NOT rate Harewood and would be glad to see him go. They ALL have said that he has:a) an attitude problemb) a tendency to be lazyc) not proved Prem class Share this post Link to post Share on other sites