magic legs Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 If Leeds only want ?1m for him then I think we should be interested. He plays far better for Norn Iron than Leeds so there must be something we can do for him. Fair enough he might have some attachement to Sanchez but Fulham are doomed next season.
jules_darby Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 If Leeds only want ?1m for him then I think we should be interested. He plays far better for Norn Iron than Leeds so there must be something we can do for him. Fair enough he might have some attachement to Sanchez but Fulham are doomed next season. Healy was a 99% done deal to City before Pearce got the boot...
bwfcy2k Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 If Leeds only want ?1m for him then I think we should be interested. He plays far better for Norn Iron than Leeds so there must be something we can do for him. Fair enough he might have some attachement to Sanchez but Fulham are doomed next season. He's not good enough and would offer us nothing we haven't already got
YATESY Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 If Leeds only want ?1m for him then I think we should be interested. He plays far better for Norn Iron than Leeds so there must be something we can do for him. Fair enough he might have some attachement to Sanchez but Fulham are doomed next season. I would say that the worry is that he hasn't done much for Leeds. He is Northern Irelands main only striker and their whole attacking game plan is based around him. That would not happen at Bolton. There again, for 'just' ?1M he could be worth a gamble. Part Exchange for Vaz Te...anyone?
jimmyjoojar Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 I would say that the worry is that he hasn't done much for Leeds.He is Northern Irelands main only striker and their whole attacking game plan is based around him. That would not happen at Bolton. There again, for 'just' ?1M he could be worth a gamble. Part Exchange for Vaz Te...anyone? Healy is a goal scorer, i'm not sure how good he is. However there seems to be very little to his game other than sniffing. Given that, he is no use to use in our present system. Nevermind the fact he hasn't played anywhere near the level of football we are talking about.
Ani Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 for ?1m as an option to come off the bench when we need to chase a game. i say yes !! this is based on some leeds fans who say he is a decent player, far too good for them..
Whites man Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 No better than Henrik. He's a Championship player at best and as Fulham have booked their place there for 2008/09 perhaps they are planning ahead.
cbwfcd Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 There again, for 'just' ?1M he could be worth a gamble.Part Exchange for Vaz Te...anyone? Why not part-ex and ?999,999.95
Eddie Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 For ?1m yes. I don't care how bad he has played for Leeds, I have seen how good he can play for Northern Ireland. There is no reason why he can only play that well for Northern Ireland and nobody else. For ?1m he is well worth the gamble. But it won't happen because he will follow Sanchez to Fulham.
bwfcy2k Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 For ?1m yes. I don't care how bad he has played for Leeds, I have seen how good he can play for Northern Ireland. There is no reason why he can only play that well for Northern Ireland and nobody else. For ?1m he is well worth the gamble. But it won't happen because he will follow Sanchez to Fulham. Don't agree - very average IMO. He's lightweight, not the quickest and can't see him hacking it in the Prem. Think it would be a waste of ?1m that could be spent better elsewhere
White79 Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 (edited) For ?1m yes. I don't care how bad he has played for Leeds, I have seen how good he can play for Northern Ireland. There is no reason why he can only play that well for Northern Ireland and nobody else. For ?1m he is well worth the gamble. But it won't happen because he will follow Sanchez to Fulham. I disagree, do you remember our man from Mexico 'Borgetti' he's there top goal scorer but couldnt hack it in the prem! Edited May 31, 2007 by White79
enzo gambaro Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 I disagree, do you remember our man from Mexico 'Borgetti' he's there top goal scorer but couldnt hack it in the prem! 7 goals from 12 starts in all competitions, 2 goals from 5 starts in the Premiership. Rubbish return, that.
jimmyjoojar Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 7 goals from 12 starts in all competitions, 2 goals from 5 starts in the Premiership. Rubbish return, that. The Borg had his work cut out from the moment he touched down from Mexico. He was in the twilight of his career, having played in a very different footballing environment for his whole life. A younger man might have adpated better given more time. The fact remains that the Borg could stick the ball away, but "us" Bolton fans wanted more from him, al la Davies but with the goals. Wasn't ever going to happen was it. Still his record does make good reading....
Eddie Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 I disagree, do you remember our man from Mexico 'Borgetti' he's there top goal scorer but couldnt hack it in the prem! Borgetti wasn't given enough of a chance. As somebody has already said the amount of goals he scored, from the amount of games he played is pretty good. He did what we wanted, he scored goals, but Allardyce wasn't happy with that. I think this was one of Allardyce's biggest mistakes, he wanted Borgetti to run all match, track back and tackle, like Davies, but this wasn't what Borgetti was about. I know for a fact that throughout his time at Bolton he wasn't treated fairly at all and he just wanted a chance to prove what he could do. He was a very nice guy and talented footballer but he simply wasn't given enough of a chance. As for Healy I do think from watching him play for Northern Ireland, that he could do a job in the premiership, and for ?1m I don't think it is a very big risk.
BWFC_LOVE Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 I'm still absolutely gutted for Borgetti. Given the chance, I know it sounds a bit outrageous, but I see no reason why he couldn't have achieved 15-20 goals had he started all 38 games. I don't know of many better predators that we've ever had. He was clinical to say the very least. I don't care that he was lightweight, not great on the ball and didn't do much other than score, he certainly knew where the goal was from what I saw of him.
TravellingWanderer Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 A mate of mine is a Leeds season ticket holder and back in January when I mentioned to him that he was being linked to other clubs he said he would offer to take a day off work and drive him there. Good player but tends to be lacking in effort. As for Borgetti, I do feel that if he had been given enough of a run in the side as Anelka he would have scored more than 12 goals. His face just didn't fit, he wasn't the first though with Sam. A player's fate was decided within a couple of weeks.
exiledwhite2 Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 Borgetti could finish but didn't do enough else...and he wasn't a Van Nistellroy or Owen who would score enough to justify his place Anelka is on a different level altogether from him
enzo gambaro Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 Borgetti could finish but didn't do enough else...and he wasn't a Van Nistellroy or Owen who would score enough to justify his place Anelka is on a different level altogether from him That's true, but 12 goals from 39 starts is nothing to shout from the rooftops about, is it? Particularly when you've cost ?8m+ and a bucketload in wages.
jimmyjoojar Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 That's true, but 12 goals from 39 starts is nothing to shout from the rooftops about, is it? Particularly when you've cost ?8m+ and a bucketload in wages. If you have a player capable of sticking the ball in the net on a regualr basis then "most" teams would play to that players strengths. Anelka has done well in a team that gave him very little service, the same applies to the Borg. If we had played to his strengths then we would have seen a great deal more from the lad. However under Sam there seemed to be a reluctance to deviate from his percentage football approach. Fingers crossed the Elk can do more if Sammy does tweak our football style a little.
YATESY Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 Amazing what happens to people on WW in time. I do recall that I was fighting a very one sided battle when I protested about the quantity of opportunities Anelka was being given when he was not scoring goals compared to the number of games Borgetti got. I got slated by many on WW. And now here we are and I am reading support for Borgetti and the number of goals he could have scored given the same number of games as Anelka. You two faced lot!
exiledwhite2 Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 Amazing what happens to people on WW in time. I do recall that I was fighting a very one sided battle when I protested about the quantity of opportunities Anelka was being given when he was not scoring goals compared to the number of games Borgetti got. I got slated by many on WW. And now here we are and I am reading support for Borgetti and the number of goals he could have scored given the same number of games as Anelka. You two faced lot! Yatesy, let's clear this up. Borgetti was sh?t. Anelka is class. And most importantly, you were wrong
jimmyjoojar Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 Amazing what happens to people on WW in time. I do recall that I was fighting a very one sided battle when I protested about the quantity of opportunities Anelka was being given when he was not scoring goals compared to the number of games Borgetti got. I got slated by many on WW. And now here we are and I am reading support for Borgetti and the number of goals he could have scored given the same number of games as Anelka. You two faced lot! With regards to the Borg, there was v little chance of us changing our footballing style, which meant that our Mexican looked like a fish out of water. Hence he was critcised (with hindsight wrongly), by myself included. However with the change of manager comes the real opportunity for the (successful) percentage football we currently play to be tweaked to a more fluent style. Something which would be of real benefit to the Elk. I'm not comparing the two players as they are miles apart and of course Anelka is a much better player, but the Borg could have done a job for us if the circumstances had been different.
HomerJay Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 cant believe were even comparing borgetti with anelka...
YATESY Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 I have never hidden my liking for the class that Anelka brings to the team. My arguement all those months ago (that I still standby) is given the same number of games in a season, Borgetti would have at least matched the goals total of Anelka and IMO beaten it. Borgetti would have died for the opportunity to have played the 11 consecutive Premiership games that Anelka took before scoring his first league goal.
exiledwhite2 Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 I have never hidden my liking for the class that Anelka brings to the team.My arguement all those months ago (that I still standby) is given the same number of games in a season, Borgetti would have at least matched the goals total of Anelka and IMO beaten it. Borgetti would have died for the opportunity to have played the 11 consecutive Premiership games that Anelka took before scoring his first league goal. Let it go !!!
Recommended Posts