To be fair to them, they had quite a bit of bad luck as well. I feel a bit sorry for Birmingham, they did so well in their first season back up everyone expected more of the same. Weak areas of the squad were never quite addressed (and indeed some were weakened further still) and maybe fighting on two fronts finally pushed them over the edge.
Frankly, if you're going to sack a manager who got you relegated, why not sack Holloway?
---------- Post added at 10:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:57 PM ----------
But not in pride and historical terms. There's a lot to be said for that...
Not talking about the guy but about his team - watching Blackpool was enjoyable, a lot more enjoyable than watching Brum, West Ham or Stoke, for instance.Pfft, not this football fan. Whining ****...
I see where your coming from, but surely with the financial gains of staying in the premier league, they could have pushed onto further things. I don't think their squad was poor, a squad IMO that could have easily stayed up. IMO, it's about there here and now and what can be achieved next season.
Birmingham had one massive flaw, no goalscorer.
Signing Zigic instead of a top goalscorer was the worst move ever. He cost what, £8-9 million? How many goals did he score? Poor decisions, and when Dann got injured they looked much, much worse.
Gervinho deal set to be completed in next 48 hours. Fee around €12m. A step in the right direction for Arsenal.
(YoungGuns)
I think he'll come good. Not too expensive, versatile, and proven in Ligue 1 - 16 goals, 10 assists from AMR/L.
Think this one's been thought out, not just spending for the sake of it. Long term interest in him, and finally making firm move.
Good point made on twitter that we're effectively going for 2nd best here. Hazard is the better player, but Gervinho is cheaper. Still looks good, though.
Good point made on twitter that we're effectively going for 2nd best here. Hazard is the better player, but Gervinho is cheaper. Still looks good, though.
I personally think either would move to us. Gervinho saw it as an opportunity to move into, I believe, his desired league and made public he wanted to join Arsenal. Paving a way to the club, knowing the club were already interested in him and that Lille would sell only one to us. Thus giving us in a way no choice but to sign him. In many ways, he was the first to act out of the two and had it been the other way round, then perhaps we would have signed Hazard. I don't think it was typical Arsene's go for the cheaper option here, surprisingly.
Hazard is much more focal to their play, they would asked for double
---------- Post added at 12:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 AM ----------
Hazard had no major intention of moving. Gervinho on the other hand did
True, he didn't. But I think if Arsenal decided to move for Hazard and agreed a deal with Lille for him, double, possible almost triple Gervinho, he possibly may have joined and expressed his desire too. Only he knows I guess. Gervinho is a good second, though.
Good point made on twitter that we're effectively going for 2nd best here. Hazard is the better player, but Gervinho is cheaper. Still looks good, though.
Not as much a rumour, but Arda Turan suggests a desire to play for Liverpool, if he ever moved from Turkey, and said they're 'close to his heart'.
Arda stronger and wiser ? UEFA.com
Why would L'pool need Arda Turan ?
In other news.
The reported 150M move for Ronaldo? That's ridiculous. 400k a week?
I mean 87 goals in 89 appearances for Madrid is incredibly impressive but that's beyond a joke.