Lovecraft Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/r/rangers/7444234.stm I know it's been done to death but wtf? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Do The Dance Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/r/rangers/7444234.stm I know it's been done to death but wtf? I know, why would you give a 2 yr contract to Nacho Novo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaps Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 I think something stinks about this deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovecraft Posted June 28, 2008 Author Share Posted June 28, 2008 I know, why would you give a 2 yr contract to Nacho Novo? Just so you could make him sit in the corner and eat Doritos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulyjambo Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/r/rangers/7444234.stm I know it's been done to death but wtf? 1M is a bargain, he was banging in the goals for us in a 4-5-1 formation with very little creative players around him, now that ranagers want to adopt a 4-4-2 I am convinced he will be a 20 goal a season striker for them. TBH we are lucky he stayed as long as he did, he was being paid peanuts compaired to some of the dross we have. Jose is on 10k a week and Velicka was on less than 1K. Good luck to him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Future's Maroon Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 I'm sure I seen somewhere that Miller/Boyd is Smith's likley front two next season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambojim52 Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Am I missing something? The article is dated 16th June. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambof3tornado Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Velicka wont get 20 goals a season off the bench and I really dont imagine him becoming 1st choice striker so he has gone there to get splinters IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bordeaux 03 Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 I think something stinks about this deal. Rangers have now twice been involved in a transfer where a Hearts player moves to another club for a short space of time then transfers to Rangers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlo2 Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Rangers have now twice been involved in a transfer where a Hearts player moves to another club for a short space of time then transfers to Rangers. Not quite. Velika was on loan to Hearts from Kaunas and an agreed transfer fee was paid. Paranoia is setting in if you can spot a conspiracy theory in that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.N.T.H. Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 I can't believe that deal either. As much as Velicka done a job for us he was hardly very good, IMO. Unbelievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bordeaux 03 Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Not quite. Velika was on loan to Hearts from Kaunas and an agreed transfer fee was paid. Paranoia is setting in if you can spot a conspiracy theory in that one. What club would buy a player for ?1m then sell him after a few months, Velicka was never that bad that the club would feel they have to do that. Along with the Ostenstad link i don't like how that transfer occured. Your right he was not technically a Hearts player but who do you think agrees the transfers at Kaunas? Still can't understand why he needed to sell him there and then in January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Grimes Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 What club would buy a player for ?1m then sell him after a few months, Velicka was never that bad that the club would feel they have to do that. Along with the Ostenstad link i don't like how that transfer occured. they paid ?600k with the rest in potential add-ons. he'll clearly no reach any of those now, so they've made ?400k in quick time. there's no conspiracy in this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibrahim Tall Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 they paid ?600k with the rest in potential add-ons. he'll clearly no reach any of those now, so they've made ?400k in quick time. there's no conspiracy in this one. Or else the "add ons" were all part of the plan, why pay a ?1m upfront when you can knock ?400k off in add ons you know he'll never reach? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlo2 Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 What club would buy a player for ?1m then sell him after a few months, Velicka was never that bad that the club would feel they have to do that. Along with the Ostenstad link i don't like how that transfer occured. Your right he was not technically a Hearts player but who do you think agrees the transfers at Kaunas? Still can't understand why he needed to sell him there and then in January. I agree that not much makes sense about the whole issue. This applies to both Hearts/Kaunas/Romanov selling and to Rangers buying. Why sell a top scorer in January for a comparatively small sum? But if you tried to apply logic to Romanovs arrivals and departures you would end up with a sore brain. Why would Rangers want Velika? But on the same issue, why did they sign and not play Alan Gow? Even more puzzling, why did the sign and play Craig Broadfoot? I can see that there could be plenty of reasons why the Norwegians might have been prepared to sell on at a profit. The collusion issue doesn't really stack up in this case. I can see how it would in the Webster case. The same thing was suggested at the time of the Bosman ruling when the Englaish and Scottish Authorities tried to ignore the ruling and retain transfer fees for out-out contract players in domestic transfers. It was suggested that one chairman would buy up an Irish Club and then sign out of contract players on Bosmans from English/Scottish teams before selling them back to other English/Scottish clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviefrailspants Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 I'm afraid as much as this is a good opportunity for a conspiracy theory, this deal would never have happened if Hearts didn't punt the player in the first instance. As much as I dislike Rangers I simply believe they were opportunistic on this occassion and capitalised on (yet another) ridiculous actions of our owner. What I fail to understand is that by all accounts Hearts were so keen to ge rid of Velicka when they could arguably have held out for more yet they apparently keep knocking back big money moves for Goncalves who cleary is not half the player Velicka was. When Velicka comes to town he should not be castigated. We should be saving that abuse for our madcap leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rods Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 I'm afraid as much as this is a good opportunity for a conspiracy theory, this deal would never have happened if Hearts didn't punt the player in the first instance. As much as I dislike Rangers I simply believe they were opportunistic on this occassion and capitalised on (yet another) ridiculous actions of our owner. What I fail to understand is that by all accounts Hearts were so keen to ge rid of Velicka when they could arguably have held out for more yet they apparently keep knocking back big money moves for Goncalves who cleary is not half the player Velicka was. When Velicka comes to town he should not be castigated. We should be saving that abuse for our madcap leader. He will come back to haunt us, its a dead cert. Its all our own fault as well, well mad vlads anyway. Velicka still should get castigated, like any other OF player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cosanostra Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 I'm afraid as much as this is a good opportunity for a conspiracy theory, this deal would never have happened if Hearts didn't punt the player in the first instance. As much as I dislike Rangers I simply believe they were opportunistic on this occassion and capitalised on (yet another) ridiculous actions of our owner. What I fail to understand is that by all accounts Hearts were so keen to ge rid of Velicka when they could arguably have held out for more yet they apparently keep knocking back big money moves for Goncalves who cleary is not half the player Velicka was. When Velicka comes to town he should not be castigated. We should be saving that abuse for our madcap leader. Hearts didn't sell the player though, Kaunas did. Good point re Jose G though, i'd accept 100k for him, he's absolutely garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviefrailspants Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Hearts didn't sell the player though, Kaunas did. Good point re Jose G though, i'd accept 100k for him, he's absolutely garbage. I don't mean to be disrespectful mate but if you think that there is a distinction between Kaunas and Hearts in terms of where the money goes then I think your being incredibly naive. Kaunas and Hearts are in the same boat.... they are no longer football clubs with their own identities... unfortunately we're just 'shop windows' for the UBIG business. Neither club will see any of the cash made on transfers re-invested heavily back into the playing side of the business. Unfortunately this is how Romanov operates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.