Snodgrass overpriced - Bruce

[mrs miggins 0]

on the other hand, perhaps Bruce doesn''t know what he''s getting.

Bruce on Snodgrass;

"There’s a natural ability to beat a player and he’s got great deliveries."

Snodgrass has a worse crossing ratio than Redmond (who everyone was saying he''s lacking his final ball).

His positives are his work rate/mentality, free kicks when shooting not crossing, and the fact that he''s played in the prem before.

[FourFourTwo 0]

The surprise isn''t the price paid for Snodgrass it''s the fact that a Premier League side wanted him at all. The fact that we built the team around him got us relegated. Too slow, doesn''t link well, the lack of goals scored when Snodgrass was supposed to be the main man says it all.

[lake district canary 4,531]

Clubs like ours have historically taken advantage of the madness in transfer fees over the years, selling on as with Reeves and Sutton etc etc.  We''ve done it again.    £7/8 million is a still a lot of money to a club like ours and frankly, on this one we are laughing all the way to the bank.   The fact is we didn''t need to sell Snodgrass - but we did and got a damn good price.    Bruce may or may not know what he is ultimately getting and whether that amount will be seen as justified depends on how Snoddy does at Hull - but we are winners all the way on a player who frustrates so much, as well as delights - on the odd occasion.  

Onwards and upwards.

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="lake district canary"]a player who frustrates so much, as well as delights - on the odd occasion.[/quote]Can''t wait to see who your scapegoat will be this season Lakey....especially as there won''t be many streams. [:$]

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="lake district canary"]a player who frustrates so much, as well as delights - on the odd occasion.[/quote]Can''t wait to see who your scapegoat will be this season Lakey....especially as there won''t be many streams. [:$][/quote]I''ve been criticising Snodgrass ever since he arrived and if that''s scapegoating so be it.  Anyway well done - again - for ignoring the main point of my post and of this thread, which is to do with his value. 

[FourFourTwo 0]

The frustration for me last season was having signed a high quality ''6 yard box'' striker we weren''t set up to deliver the ball into the 6 yard box.

Snodgrass was central to that failure, while he scored a handful of goals his play nullified half of the rest of the side.

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="lake district canary"]a player who frustrates so much, as well as delights - on the odd occasion.[/quote]Can''t wait to see who your scapegoat will be this season Lakey....especially as there won''t be many streams. [:$][/quote]I''ve been criticising Snodgrass ever since he arrived and if that''s scapegoating so be it.  Anyway well done - again - for ignoring the main point of my post and of this thread, which is to do with his value.[/quote]Alrighty then, but even with that you''re completely wrong.......[quote user="lake district canary"]Clubs like ours have historically

taken advantage of the madness in transfer fees over the years, selling

on as with Reeves and Sutton etc etc.  We''ve done it again.[/quote]Reeves and Sutton we HAD to sell to survive, the Snoddy sale was totally different so we haven''t "done it again".

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="lake district canary"]a player who frustrates so much, as well as delights - on the odd occasion.[/quote]Can''t wait to see who your scapegoat will be this season Lakey....especially as there won''t be many streams. [:$][/quote]I''ve been criticising Snodgrass ever since he arrived and if that''s scapegoating so be it.  Anyway well done - again - for ignoring the main point of my post and of this thread, which is to do with his value.[/quote]Alrighty then, but even with that you''re completely wrong.......[quote user="lake district canary"]Clubs like ours have historically

taken advantage of the madness in transfer fees over the years, selling

on as with Reeves and Sutton etc etc.  We''ve done it again.[/quote]Reeves and Sutton we HAD to sell to survive, the Snoddy sale was totally different so we haven''t "done it again".[/quote]

What?  We haven''t cashed in on the player and got a good profit?  That is good business, whatever spin you put on it.

 

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="lappinitup"]Reeves and Sutton we HAD to sell to survive, the Snoddy sale was totally different so we haven''t "done it again".[/quote]

What?  We haven''t cashed in on the player and got a good profit?  That is good business, whatever spin you put on it.[/quote]Jeeze! We sold the two players you named to survive, then said we''ve done it again (with Snoddy). What part of "we didn''t need to sell him " don''t you understand?  I never mentioned profit.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="lappinitup"]Reeves and Sutton we HAD to sell to survive, the Snoddy sale was totally different so we haven''t "done it again".[/quote]

What?  We haven''t cashed in on the player and got a good profit?  That is good business, whatever spin you put on it.[/quote]Jeeze! We sold the two players you named to survive, then said we''ve done it again (with Snoddy). What part of "we didn''t need to sell him " don''t you understand?  I never mentioned profit.[/quote]I mentioned profit in my first post and you ignored it - but keep trying.   I am fully aware we used to need to sell and I''m fully aware that we don''t need to sell now.  The point I made was that we are used to as a club, selling players for a profit. With Snodgrass WE''VE DONE IT AGAIN.  Its simple, but you try and make more of it if you can. 

[morty 0]

I don''t know why you''re even bothering Lapps...

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="morty"]I don''t know why you''re even bothering Lapps...[/quote]He''s bothering because he wants to catch me out, but if anyone follows what I have said accurately, you can''t.

 

[morty 0]

Lol, he likely misunderstood what you said. Again.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="morty"]Lol, he likely misunderstood what you said. Again.[/quote]Not at all.  Lapps whole history of posting is designed to wind up, spoil threads and generally be a nuisance.  Its what he enjoys.

[morty 0]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="morty"]Lol, he likely misunderstood what you said. Again.[/quote]Not at all.  Lapps whole history of posting is designed to wind up, spoil threads and generally be a nuisance.  Its what he enjoys.

[/quote]Always someone else at fault, isn''t?

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="morty"]Lol, he likely misunderstood what you said. Again.[/quote]Not at all.  Lapps whole history of posting is designed to wind up, spoil threads and generally be a nuisance.  Its what he enjoys. [/quote]Always someone else at fault, isn''t?[/quote]There is no fault. There is only what has been discussed.  The evidence is there for anyone to see if they are bothered enough to read it.

[morty 0]

[URL=http://s869.photobucket.com/user/mortymccarthy/media/bored-baby_zps2c9ac364.png.html][IMG]http://i869.photobucket.com/albums/ab257/mortymccarthy/bored-baby_zps2c9ac364.png[/IMG][/URL]