Vicente

[Easy 10]

Boss Gus Poyet revealed to The Argus: “He was fit to play half-an-hour in both games (Bristol and Southampton) but because of the situation in both games I couldn’t play him, and then he had a different kind of problem in his legs, so I couldn’t really make him travel to Peterborough."

I couldn't help but laugh when I read that.

"A different kind of problem in his legs". Christ.

 

[Screaming J]

I don't necessarily think that he is nailed on 'unfit' for Saturday as I don't believe that is what the Arsegas says (however poor their reporting and print is)

Would love to see him start and perform heroics for the first half and then go for a nice hot bath having left the game with us two up. He has been on the bench recently but GP could not play him under the developing circumstances in those matches.

We did not pay a whopping transfer fee for him and nobody knows what deal he is on so perhaps people should remember that before posting yet more vitriolic abuse.

Sorry, but the way I read it , despite being named as a sub for 2 games and then not being picked in the squad for 2 he is now unfit......again; despite not having kicked a ball in anger since I don't know when. As far as I am concerned on the evidence to date he is either - at best - a crock or - at worst - a skiving git. Just because he is a former Spanish international who allegedly could charm the birds from the trees with his silky ball skills I don't see why his overall levels of fitness and general game - readiness should be any less a matter of concern to us than that of any other player at the club. I am sorry if you think that's vitriolic abuse; but I think he or the club owe us an explanation after all the hoo-hah about his signing.

 

[B.W.]

You must be livid about Will Hoskins then. He's only played 7 games and cost us a fair bit of money.

Not as much as Vicente I suspect... and Hoskins didn't come to us with a history of constant injuries...

 

[B.W.]

So do you know for a fact how much we're paying him? I take it you must do...

I have a good idea from a club source...

 

[B.W.]

Why in God's name would he agree to such an agreement?

Please read my post before responding...

 

[kevtherev]

Boss Gus Poyet revealed to The Argus: “He was fit to play half-an-hour in both games (Bristol and Southampton) but because of the situation in both games I couldn’t play him, and then he had a different kind of problem in his legs, so I couldn’t really make him travel to Peterborough."

I couldn't help but laugh when I read that.

"A different kind of problem in his legs". Christ.

I think I suffer with the "Vicente"..in the evenings.

It's my legs, I just cant be arsed to get out the armchair.

 

[B.W.]

Sorry posted this on another thread which mods may conceivably merge.

I don't necessarily think that he is nailed on 'unfit' for Saturday as I don't believe that is what the Arsegas says (however poor their reporting and print is)

Would love to see him start and perform heroics for the first half and then go for a nice hot bath having left the game with us two up. He has been on the bench recently but GP could not play him under the developing circumstances in those matches.

We did not pay a whopping transfer fee for him and nobody knows what deal he is on so perhaps people should remember that before posting yet more vitriolic abuse.

We are arguably talking about the most talented footballer ever to pull on the blue and white stripes and, on the basis of the above, FFS let's just be delighted that we have him in any shape or form and accept that he may well work wonders !

On what basis would you say he will make a big contribution? The ongoing evidence (he almost never plays / hasn't played for months / had similar problems at Valencia, etc.) suggests otherwise...

 

[B.W.]

Sorry, but the way I read it , despite being named as a sub for 2 games and then not being picked in the squad for 2 he is now unfit......again; despite not having kicked a ball in anger since I don't know when. As far as I am concerned on the evidence to date he is either - at best - a crock or - at worst - a skiving git. Just because he is a former Spanish international who allegedly could charm the birds from the trees with his silky ball skills I don't see why his overall levels of fitness and general game - readiness should be any less a matter of concern to us than that of any other player at the club. I am sorry if you think that's vitriolic abuse; but I think he or the club owe us an explanation after all the hoo-hah about his signing.

Sense at last!

 

[Twinkle Toes]

Boss Gus Poyet revealed to The Argus: “He was fit to play half-an-hour in both games (Bristol and Southampton) but because of the situation in both games I couldn’t play him, and then he had a different kind of problem in his legs, so I couldn’t really make him travel to Peterborough."

I couldn't help but laugh when I read that.

"A different kind of problem in his legs". Christ.

Beat me to it there, Easy. I've been chucklin' like a loon for the last 5 minutes. Marvelous.

 

[Commander]

Not as much as Vicente I suspect... and Hoskins didn't come to us with a history of constant injuries...

We wouldn't have got near a player of Vicente's calibre if he didn't have a history of constant injuries!

A I said earlier, nobody with any sense can say whether this signing was a mistake or not until the end of the season. Unless of course you expected him to play 40 games, in which case you don't understand the situation and aren't worth arguing with anyway.

 

[Yoda]

Not as much as Vicente I suspect... and Hoskins didn't come to us with a history of constant injuries...

Did Hoskins not say, when he joined us, that last season was the first he'd had injury free?

 

[Lord Bamber]

Anyone who has posted a massive ANTI Vicente post here should be embarrased.

We all knew it was a gamble when we signed him. Go back and check all 72 odd pages of the he's coming thread. He is injury prone. So far its a tad disappointing he hasnt played more. Who knows how many games he'll play again for the club but we were all aware of what we were getting and how many of those posters, posting such negative anti Vicente posts were probably the same ones who were creaming their pants when he arrived.

Great signing imho even if it doesnt work out.

 

[SpongebobSquarepants]

 

[Doc Lynam]

Anyone who has posted a massive ANTI Vicente post here should be embarrased.

We all knew it was a gamble when we signed him. Go back and check all 72 odd pages of the he's coming thread. He is injury prone. So far its a tad disappointing he hasnt played more. Who knows how many games he'll play again for the club but we were all aware of what we were getting and how many of those posters, posting such negative anti Vicente posts were probably the same ones who were creaming their pants when he arrived.

Great signing imho even if it doesnt work out.

Agree completely.

 

[aolstudios]

Agree completely.

me too

 

[ferring seagull]

On what basis would you say he will make a big contribution? The ongoing evidence (he almost never plays / hasn't played for months / had similar problems at Valencia, etc.) suggests otherwise...

Don't recall saying he will make a big contribution though perhaps said he may do so.

See also Lord Bamber's comments on this thread as I don't think it worth conversing with you on this as you seem to have a particularly closed viewpoint.

My views vis a vis my previous comments remain.

 

[Brighton247.com]

Agree completely.

could'nt have put it better myself.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Anyone who has posted a massive ANTI Vicente post here should be embarrased.

We all knew it was a gamble when we signed him. Go back and check all 72 odd pages of the he's coming thread. He is injury prone. So far its a tad disappointing he hasnt played more. Who knows how many games he'll play again for the club but we were all aware of what we were getting and how many of those posters, posting such negative anti Vicente posts were probably the same ones who were creaming their pants when he arrived.

Great signing imho even if it doesnt work out.

How on Gods Green Earth is it " a great signing " if it doesn't work ouy ? Less than 3 hours football in 5 months on a decent wage of ? I have heard some strange things but to call this is " a great signing " is gobsmacking.

 

[B.W.]

We wouldn't have got near a player of Vicente's calibre if he didn't have a history of constant injuries!

A I said earlier, nobody with any sense can say whether this signing was a mistake or not until the end of the season. Unless of course you expected him to play 40 games, in which case you don't understand the situation and aren't worth arguing with anyway.

Did I say that? No
Are you talking rubbish? Yes

The fact is that on the evidence of well over half a season the signing looks like a complete and utter fcuk-up... our beloved Chairman thinks so (according to my source, not him directly), and I think he might know a bit more about it than you...

 

[B.W.]

Did Hoskins not say, when he joined us, that last season was the first he'd had injury free?

So what?