What's new

Jay Rodriguez

Gaz_Gammon

Well-Known Member
Apr 16, 2005
16,047
18,013
Would not touch this player with the largest of barge poles with an extension attached. There are far, far better (and injury free) strikers out in Europe. Far too big a risk in my opinion.
 

Dharmabum

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2003
8,274
12,242
Too bad really, as I think he could have been a good addition for Spurs - but far too risky to gamble on him now with his injury record.
 

Ledleys Knee

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2014
1,521
3,760
Too bad really, as I think he could have been a good addition for Spurs - but far too risky to gamble on him now with his injury record.

What if United had said that about RvN (who had a worse injury when they signed him), or Roy Keane (who had the same injury early into his career with them)?
 

Dharmabum

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2003
8,274
12,242
What if United had said that about RvN (who had a worse injury when they signed him), or Roy Keane (who had the same injury early into his career with them)?

Roy Keane had recovered when they signed him and van N is a different class than J-Rod and he was not injured when they signed him (they postponed the signing a year, and then he passed a medical)
If Poch want him and deem him for fight then I got no problems with that though.
 
Last edited:

harry's chin

Active Member
Dec 23, 2011
791
1,850
Roy Keane was past it when they signed him and van Persie is a different class than J-Rod and he was not injured when they signed him.
If Poch want him and deem him for fight then I got no problems with that.

talking about Van Nistelrooy not Van Percy
 

Ledleys Knee

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2014
1,521
3,760
Roy Keane was past it when they signed him and van Persie is a different class than J-Rod and he was not injured when they signed him.
If Poch want him and deem him for fight then I got no problems with that.

Roy Keane was 21 when they signed him - he played 12 more years for them

And van Nistelrooy was very injured when they signed him, and went on to score 2 in every 3 for them for 5 years.
 

Shea

Well-Known Member
Apr 5, 2013
7,711
10,930
Roy Keane was 21 when they signed him - he played 12 more years for them

And van Nistelrooy was very injured when they signed him, and went on to score 2 in every 3 for them for 5 years.
Indeed not just 12 more years but the 12 best years of his career - including some where he was arguably the best CM in the whole World

Roy Keane past his best when he signed for Man Utd is one of the dumbest statements I have ever read on this site
 

Dharmabum

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2003
8,274
12,242
Indeed not just 12 more years but the 12 best years of his career - including some where he was arguably the best CM in the whole World

Roy Keane past his best when he signed for Man Utd is one of the dumbest statements I have ever read on this site



In other words, you expect J-Rod to play for Spurs for 12 years and dominate the EPL like Roy Keane did...
Besides, he was not injued when they signed him.
 
Last edited:

Dharmabum

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2003
8,274
12,242
talking about Van Nistelrooy not Van Percy
My bad (re: van N and van Persie :cool:)
ManU did not sign van N while he was injured: they posted the signed unitl the year after, when he actually passed the medical. Huge difference from signing a player who's sill injured and who's fitness is questioned. Better wait to the summer then to sign him to make sure.
 

Shea

Well-Known Member
Apr 5, 2013
7,711
10,930
In other words, you expect J-Rod to play for Spurs for 12 years and dominate the EPL like Roy Keane did...
Besides, he was not injued when they signed him.
What? I didn't say anything about Jay rod, I was just expressing, my disbelief at the crazy statement I saw suggesting roy Keane was past his best when he signed for Man Utd
 

Dharmabum

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2003
8,274
12,242
What? I didn't say anything about Jay rod, I was just expressing, my disbelief at the crazy statement I saw suggesting roy Keane was past his best when he signed for Man Utd

With "past it" I meant past his injury not past his best :cool:
 

Kendall

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2007
38,502
11,933
Agree with those that say he's too risky. In the summer it was suggested he'd started running and was ahead of schedule, which is what you want to hear if you're interested, but he's had a couple of setbacks now and it's looking like he's going to be some months behind schedule. No way will we gamble on him now.
 

Ledleys Knee

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2014
1,521
3,760
Agree with those that say he's too risky. In the summer it was suggested he'd started running and was ahead of schedule, which is what you want to hear if you're interested, but he's had a couple of setbacks now and it's looking like he's going to be some months behind schedule. No way will we gamble on him now.

We'd still give him a medical and have insurance.

The alternative is trying to snag a Heskey or a Gudjohnsen away from Bolton as a stopgap for 4 months.
 

Kendall

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2007
38,502
11,933
We'd still give him a medical and have insurance.

The alternative is trying to snag a Heskey or a Gudjohnsen away from Bolton as a stopgap for 4 months.

How easy would it be to get insurance on an £18-20m player with the issues he's had/is having? Not sure we'd be able to, which again might be a sticking point.
 

Ledleys Knee

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2014
1,521
3,760
Bringing in Heskey would be an admission of hopelessness.

There won't be any good strikers available in January for less than £30m, which we won't spend


...why the hell is that the alternative?

Because it's what we always do - Booth, Raziack, Gudjohnsen, Saha etc. When we are short of a CF in Jan we loan a has-been and then buy properly in the summer.
 
Top