Fernandes or Sissoko

Choose your worst?

  • Sissoko

    Votes: 9 27.3%

  • Manuel Fernandes

    Votes: 24 72.7%
  • Total voters
    33
Status
Not open for further replies.
Have the guys voting for Sissoko seen him play since his eye injury he is [Poor language removed] and after the way he joined the r/s not to be trusted also if the board had moved quicker the deal for Fernandes would have been complete before any other team came in(y)
 

coyney said:
Have the guys voting for Sissoko seen him play since his eye injury he is [Poor language removed] and after the way he joined the r/s not to be trusted also if the board had moved quicker the deal for Fernandes would have been complete before any other team came in(y)
Click to expand...

Cant blame the board- as far as they were concerned the deal was done. Thats what everton thought, hell thats what fernandes thought...
 
coyney said:
Have the guys voting for Sissoko seen him play since his eye injury he is [Poor language removed] and after the way he joined the r/s not to be trusted also if the board had moved quicker the deal for Fernandes would have been complete before any other team came in(y)
Click to expand...

If they hadn't tried to hold us to ransom more like Coyney, they only offered him to us at a lower price when they found no one else wanted him until Valencia bit at the last minute. From seasons end up to when we agreed a deal the price had dropped by nearly £7 mil. We had shook hands on the deal with people who had plane tickets in their arse pockets ready to fly out to Valencia who paid about £5 mil more than we would, it has porved to be money down the drain because he is lazy, he belives his own publicity and he isn't that good.

Question for all of you, who would you rather have, the Yak or Fernandes. This is a question I can ask as I wanted neither although the Yak has shown me to be spectacularly wrong as he has lots of blues. We only have so much money to go round
 

Gazdalf said:
I love the TW theme running through this post.

The deal was done apart from the unveiling. All was prepared for his signature then he changed his mind and signed for Valencia. Blame who you want, but NOT the board.
Click to expand...

Completely wrong mate. He was seen in a nightclub, the week before the deadline, and told anyone who was willing to listen, that the deal was done. All that was needed was for Kenwright/Wyness to sort out the third party ownership deal, which failed because they could not agree a payment fee. Valencia came in for him 2 days before the deadline, a deal was agreed with both Benfica and the third party owners. Simple as that. So yes mate, i can blame the board, and i will blame the board. They had up to 3 weeks or so to conclude the deal, Valencia did it in 1 day. Who do you think we should blame ?

As i said, the lad was desperate to quit Benfica, and was very keen on joining Everton. The minute he realised the deal with Everton was not going to happen, he flew to Valencia, who could offer him, more money, CL football, and the chance to play for one of the top teams in the country ( not by this season though ). The lad made the right choice.
 
this is an erroneous stance in my opinion.

It is not the boards fault that part ownership is frowned upon in the premiership.

In spain it doesn't matter.

Valencia simply offered what we were offering to fernandes' club. For part ownership. We offered it to get complete ownership as moyes was, quite rightly concerned about what happened vis a vis the tevez west ham affair.

you can't blame the board for FA rules.

why are you looking to blame the board anyway? honestly, I think you have misinterpreted this mate. but I've been wrong before.
 
but yes, what you say is true, in that we could have paid twice what valenica paid (11 million) in order to secure the player.

I think fernandes is a class act, but I'd be [Poor language removed] to see us paying double what another team can pay for him.

So I think in this case the board, and more importantly our parsimonious manager have been vindicated from your accusations.
 
I'd take both of them really. I don't think The [Poor language removed] have got the best out of Sissoko, and Valencia haven't got the best out of Fernandes. Both could possibly be a very good player for us, although i may choose Sissoko over Fernandes because he is tall, which would help our mini-midfield :) I'd prefer someone else though, don't particularly enjoy the sight of either of em.
 
None for me fernandes had a few good games but lacks stamina greatly and sissoko is overated i,d much rather appiah he is class
 

leonbil said:
but yes, what you say is true, in that we could have paid twice what valenica paid (11 million) in order to secure the player.

I think fernandes is a class act, but I'd be [Poor language removed] to see us paying double what another team can pay for him.

So I think in this case the board, and more importantly our parsimonious manager have been vindicated from your accusations.
Click to expand...

sorry mate. we were to pay £12m for both Benfica's 50% and GSA's 50%. The deal with Valencia was Benfica only. what they paid for him had nothing to do with Everton's dealings.

Kenwright took far too long to agree a deal with the FA, GSA, and Benfica. That is why it fell apart. If i remember right, he said a deal had been agreed on the Friday before the Blackburn game, yet come Saturday night, he still hadn't been signed despite passing his physical and all other tests. Someone was lying, and i'm pretty sure it's not Fernandes.
 
modfather said:
sorry mate. we were to pay £12m for both Benfica's 50% and GSA's 50%. The deal with Valencia was Benfica only. what they paid for him had nothing to do with Everton's dealings.

Kenwright took far too long to agree a deal with the FA, GSA, and Benfica. That is why it fell apart. If i remember right, he said a deal had been agreed on the Friday before the Blackburn game, yet come Saturday night, he still hadn't been signed despite passing his physical and all other tests. Someone was lying, and i'm pretty sure it's not Fernandes.
Click to expand...

how is it our manager or the boards fault that there is a rule against part ownership in England? You are right, 12 million was for both parts. Valenica offered 12 to Benfica as there is no rule against part ownership. effectively they could bid double what we could. Was the board meant to match that? Frankly that's risible. If the player hadn't still signed it was because his agents were doing what all these scumbags do, treading water until they get the best deals for themselves. They saw the 50% ownership thing and used it as leverage in spain. This part ownership thing will continue to see players sign for continental clubs instead of premiership clubs, as they can offer the price of 50% what we offer for 100% as it doesn't matter one jot to continental clubs.

Personally, I think 24 million is a little steep for a player, even of fernandes' rare abilities.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top