Now in talks with Snodgrass?

[YellowLittle1 0]

Would be a top signing, I''d prefer Gradel though, and I think Gradel would be a bit cheaper.

[chicken 0]

Gradel would not be cheaper! He is a very direct winger who can play up front, has buckets of pace and scored buckets of goals from the wing last season.

No way could you say he would be cheaper than Snodgrass?!!! In terms of importance they are both huge for Leeds. Just in different ways, but at the end of the day a large goal tally will demand a high fee in its own right, not to mention pace as well.

[YellowLittle1 0]

I think Gradel is a better player, but Snodgrass is an upcoming British player, the British factor adds a lot to his value and catches more teams eye.

I agree with the fact Gradel is better but I think we could get him cheaper as he also has one season left on his contract.

[Morisons Prozac 0]

Has the Duston Hall guy said who was staying in the room yet? According to WOTB, it''s Nicky Maynard (really hope it is).

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

Surprised not mention on waccoe if there is much substance to the link

[chicken 0]

[quote user="YellowLittle1"]I think Gradel is a better player, but Snodgrass is an upcoming British player, the British factor adds a lot to his value and catches more teams eye.

I agree with the fact Gradel is better but I think we could get him cheaper as he also has one season left on his contract.[/quote]

It''s not a matter of who is the better player, it''s how they play, where they play and goals.

Snodgrass is a ball playing midfielder who can be creative. He is as good a player as Gradel in terms of influence on a team etc.

But the reality is attacking players that score goals will always be able to demand a higher fee.

If you look up from back to front on the average transfer fee of players through a team in any league you will often find the strikers are the most expensive and keepers on average the least most expensive.

Purely on that basis and with the fact that Gradel puts in more eye-catching performances I would say Leeds could demand a higher price for him.

[Mr. Bump 0]

[quote user="Yorkshire Canary"]Surprised not mention on waccoe if there is much substance to the link[/quote]It has been. They linked to this thread and the reaction on there is..''Why the fuck would he wanna go to them 6 fingered cunts.shite club, coming back down spectacularly when Lambert fucks off to better things mid next season.And

that contract he has just signed isn''t worth the paper it''s written on.

If anything, its a price bumper for when he goes. They know he is off

within about 8 months"

Like it how Norwich fans seem to think they can bully us now they

are in the prem on the crest of a bit of luck and a manager too good for

them

Johnson was down at norwich having talks at the start of the week. A

norwich supporting friend thought they were getting Snodgrass but it

was Johnson.

I''m 95% sure he''ll be a Leeds player next season.Throw what accusations you want a Bates, but under contract players rarely leave Leeds, let alone move, "up".

[Bill 1,788]

They don''t appear too bright, you could almost be forgiven for thinking they were from suffolk;

Apparently the contact is worthless, except it will cause the compensation to be higher, so it seems.

95% certain, eh ? Perhaps they could remind us how certain they were that we would not catch them the season before, or beat them at Carrow Road, or go on to win the title.

As to ''under contract ''players leaving and moving up, maybe that suggests a lack of interest from those above and the lack of quality in their squad.

Perhaps they could do as the rustics down the A140 have done and book their local hall so they can drag down a few sepia tinted pictures of their glory years and delude theirselves that they are anything more than a sad, time forgetten has been of a club.

ps apparently the binners are taking their tin pot replica to the local agricultural show and putting it on display with a handful of veterans of yesteryear - perhaps they''ll even have Vera Bynn to knock out a few verses of " We''ll meet again"

[First Wizard 0]

Its gonna happen, just believe it.

 

http://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/leeds_reported_to_have_rejected_3_5m_bid_for_snodgrass_from_norwich_city_1_910815

[pete_norw 0]

[quote user="First Wizard"]

Its gonna happen, just believe it.

 

http://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/leeds_reported_to_have_rejected_3_5m_bid_for_snodgrass_from_norwich_city_1_910815

[/quote]

Yes thats what I thought but the bid has''nt beed accepted yet, or have I been out to long this morning and missed it

[Bill 1,788]

But wiz told us previously that not only were talks happening but that Snodgrass was at the training ground.

Now correct me if I am wrong but talks ARE NOT allowed to happen until the club who holds the players registration agrees to those talks - otherwise it is blatant tapping up. Therefore any reports of Snodgrass at City''s training ground were also false.

So wiz, were you either making something up (again) or peddling rumour that you must have known was false ?

[Harry 0]

Didn''t you know Wizards can see into the future?

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="City1st"]But wiz told us previously that not only were talks happening but that Snodgrass was at the training ground. Now correct me if I am wrong but talks ARE NOT allowed to happen until the club who holds the players registration agrees to those talks - otherwise it is blatant tapping up. Therefore any reports of Snodgrass at City''s training ground were also false. So wiz, were you either making something up (again) or peddling rumour that you must have known was false ?[/quote]

 

Look at the thread title 1st, I clearly used a question mark in the title and my OP clearly asked if anyone could confirm this?

 

Instead of reading it properly you took it to be a fact because you, and a few others, couldn''t wait to dive in feet first...........use your brains next time.

[Bill 1,788]

"you took it to be a fact " wiz

Yes wiz, I and others took it to be a fact - otherwise why did you gleefully claim later "silence from City 1st who took the pee at me weeks ago"

because originally what you stated about Snodgrass was -"well he is at our training ground, that''s my understanding" wiz

Again that''s why so many were taking the pee. You knew that was a lie as you would know that Snodgrass could not be at Colney in talks UNLESS Leeds had agreed to that. They had not. So it was more of your ''diving in '' with one foot as usual. Posting up attention seeking misinformation that you hoped would allow you to escape any responsibility if it turned out to be just that - attention seeking misinformation. But claim some prior knowledge if anything were to come of it.So wiz, did you state on 25th May that Snodgrass was already at Colney, or not ?

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="City1st"]"you took it to be a fact " wiz


Yes wiz, I and others took it to be a fact - otherwise why did you gleefully claim later "silence from City 1st who took the pee at me weeks ago"


because originally what you stated about Snodgrass was -

"well he is at our training ground, that''s my understanding" wiz


Again that''s why so many were taking the pee. You knew that was a lie as you would know that Snodgrass could not be at Colney in talks UNLESS Leeds had agreed to that. They had not. So it was more of your ''diving in '' with one foot as usual. Posting up attention seeking misinformation that you hoped would allow you to escape any responsibility if it turned out to be just that - attention seeking misinformation. But claim some prior knowledge if anything were to come of it.


So wiz, did you state on 25th May that Snodgrass was already at Colney, or not ?


[/quote]

 

OH this is a doddle.

 

As stated early, what I said on LEEDS MAD was a wind up for them, it was I believe, not repeated as such on here.

 

And of course I''m an attention seeker, as are you and all who post on here!

 

Simple.

 

 

[Bill 1,788]

okSo wiz, did you state on 25th May on this forum (in this thread) that Snodgrass was already at Colney, or not ?

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="City1st"]ok

So wiz, did you state on 25th May on this forum (in this thread) that Snodgrass was already at Colney, or not ?


[/quote]

 

I refer the honourable poster to the answer I gave earlier. [:|]

[Bill 1,788]

In that reply you claimed that you didn''t post anything about Snodgrass being at Colneyas in your claim " it was I believe, not repeated as such on here"Whereas in reality you did claim Snodgrass was at Colney - because a few posts in to the thread you started, you cliamed "he is at our training ground"''that is my understanding"

So should we post this one up with the all the other rumours/lies then, wiz ?

[sonyc 5,511]

Well I know that the player is having negotiations. And that could be with us or with two of the other clubs mentioned on forums. But I know no more than that. Pls don''t ask for source or criticise. I''ve never posted before on such issues.

It seems to me though that as Lambert has talked so highly of him in the past, played alongside him and the press coverage of bids being rejected that there may well be something to these rumours. We will find out by midweek I reckon. If it is correct he will represent our biggest signing ever money-wise.

[York Canary 28]

[quote user="sonyc"]Well I know that the player is having negotiations. And that could be with us or with two of the other clubs mentioned on forums. But I know no more than that. Pls don''t ask for source or criticise. I''ve never posted before on such issues. It seems to me though that as Lambert has talked so highly of him in the past, played alongside him and the press coverage of bids being rejected that there may well be something to these rumours. We will find out by midweek I reckon. If it is correct he will represent our biggest signing ever money-wise.[/quote]

I certainly hope it''s us. Excited by the possibility of getting him in our team

[By Heck It's Fleck 10]

according to this low budget looking website we''re upping our bid to 5 millionhttp://www.fansfc.com/story/32794.html