Robbie Loving Posted May 14, 2005 Share Posted May 14, 2005 Originally posted by tosh13 "We've retained Phil Barnes for another couple of years. I've been pleased with his contribution since his loan spell at Torquay. all 90 mins of the season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.B.Yaffle Posted May 14, 2005 Share Posted May 14, 2005 Now Watford have decided not to keep Cullip, does that mean we may not be able to sign Webber.. or is it a seperate deal? Ideally, if Cullip can get on with the other players and with the manager I would like to keep him and also sign Webber. Cullip played very well in the games I saw him play, and he even scored a good goal for us against Arsenal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie Loving Posted May 14, 2005 Share Posted May 14, 2005 Originally posted by Patchy Now Watford have decided not to keep Cullip, does that mean we may not be able to sign Webber.. or is it a seperate deal? Ideally, if Cullip can get on with the other players and with the manager I would like to keep him and also sign Webber. Cullip played very well in the games I saw him play, and he even scored a good goal for us against Arsenal! tottally different deal, we only let them have cullip as a sweetener in the loan deal. he was never intended for the full transfer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosh13 Posted May 14, 2005 Author Share Posted May 14, 2005 Have we got Webber or is the deal dead?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duffman Posted May 14, 2005 Share Posted May 14, 2005 Originally posted by tosh13 Have we got Webber or is the deal dead?? As I posted on the last page, we have signed Webber for £500,000 and we have also ended up with Cullip coming back, Watford did not want to keep him but it hasn't scuppered the deal. Robbie_Lovin Warnock himself said both sides of the loan deals had a view to a permanent move, the valuation for cullip was £300,000 and we would pay the £500,000 for webber which would have been a bargin for us. But it seems that hasn't gone through and we have both players, reminds me of the Peschisolido/McCleod deal last season. As for the keeper situation, Warnock let danny Haystead go as he wanted more experience, however I can't see us getting a big name keeper as he will just play Kenny all the time with no sub as per usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosh13 Posted May 14, 2005 Author Share Posted May 14, 2005 Glad to here about Webber, I saw your post but I looked on the Utd website & chip buttie ,but I have found no reference to Cullip or Webber,the only thing I saw on the Utd website was Cullip no longer on loan in the squad stats but Webber's name had gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie Loving Posted May 14, 2005 Share Posted May 14, 2005 Originally posted by tosh13 Glad to here about Webber, I saw your post but I looked on the Utd website & chip buttie ,but I have found no reference to Cullip or Webber,the only thing I saw on the Utd website was Cullip no longer on loan in the squad stats but Webber's name had gone. weber wont be put on till we have actually signed the contract, we can sign him till early june i believe it is, but it is a foregone conclusion that we have him. i think we shud al write to warnock like we used to write to santa when we was little with players we would like down atthe lane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duffman Posted May 14, 2005 Share Posted May 14, 2005 Originally posted by Robbie_Lovin weber wont be put on till we have actually signed the contract, we can sign him till early june i believe it is, but it is a foregone conclusion that we have him. i think we shud al write to warnock like we used to write to santa when we was little with players we would like down atthe lane. Dear Warnocklause I would like at the lane.....Insert players names We have webber unless somene like L**ds jump in and sign him to spite us like they seem to do with everyone else we are named with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie Loving Posted May 14, 2005 Share Posted May 14, 2005 Originally posted by duffman We have webber unless somene like L**ds jump in and sign him to spite us like they seem to do with everyone else we are named with. i think this season has shown really how inexperienced blackwell is though, there was 27 debuts for leeds last season, more than any other club. yes i realise there a club in transition, but this surely is going to far, we have a lot of striers, but seemed blackwell was trying to fill his sticker book up. he needed a few shiny stickers, so he bought the players instead. they are spending 1.1 million on hulse, but i think we have a better signing out of webber for 600k less. leeds though.... with the money they have sent, and the players they still have, shud have been in the play offs at least. and as i recall, we was promised a player on loan for season when blackwell joined them..... i think we shud chose sullivan he he. and we never got the pre-season friendly they promised us, they went one better and got relegated so they could play us twice, how nice :-) LEEDS UNITED the MANCHESTER UNITED of yorkshire ha ha ha ha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuPeRbLaDe Posted May 15, 2005 Share Posted May 15, 2005 did anybody see goals on sunday? apparently michael brown was on it, only caught the last bit but he said that jags had just had a baby girl!! if anyone saw it can you please fill me in on what was said cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.