Webster

[Tommy Wiseau]

At the end of the day, whether his injuries are real or psychosomatic, I don't see the point playing handsome money to someone who'll miss more games than he'll play.

 

Webster will be on good money, of that I have no doubt.

 

So I'd say the money would be better use paying the wages of another centre half who will play more games than he'll miss. This has nothing to do with the way he mercilessly shafted our club the first time, I just don't see why we should be paying through the nose for someone who'll just form an assprint on the treatment table.

 

 

 

This is exactly the point, which the thread seems to have gone off on a tangent from. Arguing semantics about "he has played more than half our games", "he is injured/he isn't injured" is kind of irrelevant. The issue is, he cannae play enough games for us, and it leaves us short and without a settled defence. If he's not going to get fit enough to play regularly, he's not much use to us.

 

It's starting to become a bit of a concern with so little back up available. We've let a competent enough CB go because there weren't the wages available for him - no comparison in terms of ability, none whatsoever, but the guy showed up every week and played 90 minutes. That's really what we need from Webster now, or we have to start looking at someone who can give us that.

[269miles]

It;s good to know our manager and owner are so out of touch that Peter Houston can basically trash Webster in the media by saying the guy has a serious attitude problem,

 

And now we're stuck with him.

 

Never wanted him back at Hearts and now Vlad has given us the Scottish version of 'Sicknote'.

 

A wasteof time and money.

 

As if we didn't already know after his total disappearance at Wigan and Rangers.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

So, for the people saying he's physically fit, how come he passed his medical yet Diamond failed his?