alexscottislegend 2,090 Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 Calscot - you may have a point about Buffel but don't forget he wasn't played because it would have triggered a release clause in his contract - I think �£400,000 to Feyenoord - and we didn't want to part with our hard-earned that easily. Nothing to do with him not wanting to fight for his place. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 743 Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 The reason we can't get shot of Buffel is that we were silly enough to pay him far more than he's worth and even without appearances money and bonuses, he's obviously earning far more at Rangers than any other club in the world is willing to pay him. The Belgian obviously has no ambition, character or fight in him at all. He prefers to sit around and take the money instead of either getting his arse in gear and impressing the management to fight his way back into the team, or take a pay cut and show what he can do elsewhere and maybe make the big time again when he get's noticed. . I dont believe that we cant get shot of him. The likes of Hamburg wanted him a few months ago. Im sure he and his agent are on holiday and will pick up on it later. But to say he has no ambition, character or fight plus sit around and take the money is bollocks and totally nonsense!! He has showed up week in week out in a reserve team at Clyde etc to try and get back into the first team and we havent heard a peep from him complaining. He has shown what lots of Rangers fans ask for "Dig in and keep trying" but has simply not been played due to the 400k payment due to Feyenoord. but to say he lacks ambition, character or fight is nonsense 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 Er, the evidence for not being able to get shot of him is that he's still here... Maybe you don't believe that, but there is no evidence to the contrary. Clubs may be interested but they are obviously not interested in paying him a similar wage to what he is on. If they are so my clubs interested, then why has a player who can't get more than a couple of games in three years, not left? I turn up at a few different places to play football and it's not even my job and I actually pay to do it. Therefore I must be one of the most ambitious players around... I think if he didn't turn up to play the odd reserve game (from what I've seen on Setanta, he RARELY plays), he might not get paid. Besides if he's a footballer there's a good chance he likes a good kick-around. Could it be he's not complaining because he doesn't mind doing bugger all for 1M a year? Sorry, but you've a bit of a cheek to go on about "bollocks and nonesense" after those points. If it's nonsense to think that a guy has no ambition for turning down a move to the likes of Hamburg two years ago from a team, where he was not in the manager's plans for the sake of a bit of a wage cut, then please explain the word for me, as it doesn't seem to mean what I think. Playing about three competitive games in two years must be the height of ambition... The 400k to Feyenoord is a factor I forgot about but it still doesn't really come to bear. For a start, it's a rumour that has never been confirmed. Secondly, if a supposedly great player seemingly can't show he's worth 400k then what it wrong with him? Besides, I read he had about 14 league games to play before triggering the payment. If it's true, it's obvious to me that Rangers don't want to pay an extra 400k for a player they think is just not good enough for the team. Why pay 1M for Velica if you can have a supposedly better player for 400K? Buffel may turn out to be a great player elsewhere, but he's been one of Rangers biggest failures of all time. Latent talent and potential count for nothing. It's all about getting in the team and doing it on the park. Buffel has pretty much done neither - and remember he's had three different managers so it can hardly be a clash of personalities. You only have to look to the appearances and number of goals for Boyd and Buffel over the last two years to see who what is bollocks and nonsense. Against those figures, hailing Buffel as a hero and slating Boyd as useless becomes totally mystifying - and just doesn't correlate with my idea of reality. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexscottislegend 2,090 Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 See that Faddy has asked to leave Brum. Swap deal with Boyd? Could this solve our creative midfielder problem? I know he's a Tim but C****c don't seem to want him. Not advocating this, just flying a kite. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyk 158 Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 I hate the disloyalty players have these days for their clubs....birmingham gave faddy a great chance to play every week in the EPL, and bar injury he was but never really done anything special and was inconsistent as usual. now as soon as they get relegated he wants out..... i would never pay the money they would want for him....... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter 0 Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 I'd love to sign him. Reckon he'll end up at the piggery though. Shame as he could indeed be the answer to our long standing no.10 problem. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 743 Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Would love to see us get McFadden. He has that bit of magic that some players cant do. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ascender 352 Posted June 22, 2008 Author Share Posted June 22, 2008 Has Buffel not played a few times since he was supposedly frozen out because of that clause? So what was the point of not playing him unless he'd reached the total -1 I guess? Like Gow, I think its just that he's not impressed Smith in training and the reserves. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyk 158 Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Has Buffel not played a few times since he was supposedly frozen out because of that clause? So what was the point of not playing him unless he'd reached the total -1 I guess? Like Gow, I think its just that he's not impressed Smith in training and the reserves. that is probably the answer m8 but that doesn't suit some people on here 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,461 Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 I'd love to sign him. Reckon he'll end up at the piggery though. Shame as he could indeed be the answer to our long standing no.10 problem. You never know,he might fancy playing for WS as he did with Scotland,like KM !!!!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.