Jump to content

Gonzalez Signs

vanderark14

By vanderark14,
in AFC and Scottish Football

Recommended Posts


K-9 Newbie

K-9

Posted
Posted

I hope he fancies playing up north, and we sign him permanently. Man City have heaps of dough, surely they can allow him to go for free.

Problem being he is on huge wage there and Man City paying almost it all to enable him to come here and get games.

Link to comment
oilcat Newbie

oilcat

Posted
Posted

Thing is, whos to say Langfield will actually play again...its all very well docs saying he will be clear to play....its another thing altogether to get back on the field and put your heed where the boots are flying

 

I would think that there will be an option of extending Gonzalez's loan if things dont work out for Jamie

Link to comment
Sonoftherock Proficient

Sonoftherock

Posted
Posted

Thing is, whos to say Langfield will actually play again...its all very well docs saying he will be clear to play....its another thing altogether to get back on the field and put your heed where the boots are flying

 

I would think that there will be an option of extending Gonzalez's loan if things dont work out for Jamie

 

Even if Langfield is okay to come back, I'd like to see Gonzo stay all season, with Langfield as back-up - hopefully he wouldn't be needed. We could then just reassess the goalkeeping situation at the end of the season.

Link to comment
K-9 Newbie

K-9

Posted
Posted

2 caps for Columbia, won the league in Argentina and reached the South Amrican equivalent of the Chumpions League.

 

Fair to say boy is of decent pedigree and a more than adequate keeper for us.

 

Rock on, welcome aboard Gonzo :thumbup1:

Just hope he still has it as not played competitive game it looks like since early 2008.

Link to comment
Tord31 Grand Master

Tord31

Posted
Posted

Very hopeful that he turns out to be great and can stay longer. He is out of contract next summer so hopefully he is so good that he's good enough for us but not so so good that he's away to a championship team and he can stay as our keeper for seasons to come.

Link to comment
tup Newbie

tup

Posted
Posted

based PURELY on him being from man city, or have you seen the guy play?

 

Based on his footballing pedigree FFS min, hardly because he 'came from Man City' so he must be good.

 

There are two types of players you can recruit.

 

Serious, first team players, who have played a lot of top level football, and who, even without having seem them play, you know will fit in well and apply themselves correctly to their employer.

 

And then you have drifters, or youth players released by other clubs, first lot, beloved of McGhee, average nobodies rattling about in sh*t leagues, there for the taking, because nobody else is interested, or have turned them down already. Second lot, you might find the odd gem now and again but players are generally released not because of lack of ability but because their attitude and approach is wrong and cannot be corrected.

 

This guy is very firmly in the first group.

Link to comment
K-9 Newbie

K-9

Posted
Posted

Mitigating circumstances I believe, and nowt to do with ony mafia or owt.

 

Married a European burd, bought out his contract and left SA to come here and be with her. Looking for a club since.

Left South America in 2007 went to Turkey (where played last game in 2008) before went to Argentina on loan then to England in 2009. Had a club the whole time.

Link to comment
Tord31 Grand Master

Tord31

Posted
Posted

Left South America in 2007 went to Turkey (where played last game in 2008) before went to Argentina on loan then to England in 2009. Had a club the whole time.

 

Still seems pretty decent CV despite not playing laterly. If Man City gave him a three year deal and he's been capped at full international level then be a fair assumption that he is going to be a good shout for us. Got very good reviews playing for Man City reserves and am sure Brown will have used his contacts like Fulham reserve coach Billy McKinlay or Moyes at Everton to check he was an adequate goalie as well as requesting footage from agent etc.

 

I'm very hopeful he is gonna be a better standard than our last umpteen goalies in the first team, certainly won't be hard.

Link to comment
K-9 Newbie

K-9

Posted
Posted

Still seems pretty decent CV despite not playing laterly. If Man City gave him a three year deal and he's been capped at full international level then be a fair assumption that he is going to be a good shout for us. Got very good reviews playing for Man City reserves and am sure Brown will have used his contacts like Fulham reserve coach Billy McKinlay or Moyes at Everton to check he was an adequate goalie as well as requesting footage from agent etc.

 

I'm very hopeful he is gonna be a better standard than our last umpteen goalies in the first team, certainly won't be hard.

Absolutely - and loving fact City demanded he was first team keeper even if Langfield gets back fit as condition of the deal. 6 months with no Langfield selling the shirts is one of the few big positives for the coming season as things stand.

Link to comment
vanderark14 Contributor

vanderark14

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Absolutely - and loving fact City demanded he was first team keeper even if Langfield gets back fit as condition of the deal. 6 months with no Langfield selling the shirts is one of the few big positives for the coming season as things stand.

 

I didn't know that. good news

Link to comment
K-9 Newbie

K-9

Posted
Posted

Where you read that K-9?

 

Surely the parent club can't dictate who plays?

Brown said it end of last week. Was on Northsound so assume will be on RedTV for those with that. Did finish by saying that of course it is unless he gets injured or is seriously off form but he is number one for his spell here and that was reason only took for 6 months instead of the full year which City offered him for.

Link to comment
K-9 Newbie

K-9

Posted
Posted

Where you read that K-9?

 

Surely the parent club can't dictate who plays?

City had other options for putting lad out on loan and although we were biggest club City wanted him to be playing first team football and not sitting on bench as understudy or be aswell sitting on bench in Manchester.

Link to comment
King Street Loon Grand Master

King Street Loon

Posted
Posted

Problem being he is on huge wage there and Man City paying almost it all to enable him to come here and get games.

Where have you seen what his wage is?

He was clubless before he came to these shores and had his agent punt his DVD around clubs.

Might be a cheap option for Citeh and be on peanuts.

 

Where you read that K-9?

 

Surely the parent club can't dictate who plays?

Horse mouth.

Brown said it on Redtv.

 

I'm really pleased with this signing and if he impresses the board should do all on their power to keep him.

But we all know that's unlikely.

Link to comment
K-9 Newbie

K-9

Posted
Posted

Where have you seen what his wage is?

He was clubless before he came to these shores and had his agent punt his DVD around clubs.

Might be a cheap option for Citeh and be on peanuts.

City heavily subsidised his wages when went on loan to Leeds as Leeds said they couldn't afford his wage at that point!!

 

Guesswork from me but safe to assume same will be happening here, especially since City are calling the shots about being first choice pick whilst here.

Link to comment
muttonhumper Veteran

muttonhumper

Posted
Posted

Absolutely - and loving fact City demanded he was first team keeper even if Langfield gets back fit as condition of the deal. 6 months with no Langfield selling the shirts is one of the few big positives for the coming season as things stand.

 

Indeed.

 

Only negative thing about the deal is that we didn't take him for the year.

Out of respect to Langfield according to Brown.

 

Poor decision.

No room for sympathetic claptrap in this game.

What happens if he performs solidly, we get ourselves into a strong position by the turn of the year, then he has to go back to City?

What happens is we have a goalkeeper come in for the rest of the season with an even more dubious and shaky mentality than the one which proved a liability before.

Or we have to go out and get another keeper if Langfield can't continue at all.

 

Like I say. I think we have called this one badly.

The season lasts til May, not December.

Link to comment
Tord31 Grand Master

Tord31

Posted
Posted

Indeed.

 

Only negative thing about the deal is that we didn't take him for the year.

Out of respect to Langfield according to Brown.

 

Poor decision.

No room for sympathetic claptrap in this game.

What happens if he performs solidly, we get ourselves into a strong position by the turn of the year, then he has to go back to City?

What happens is we have a goalkeeper come in for the rest of the season with an even more dubious and shaky mentality than the one which proved a liability before.

Or we have to go out and get another keeper if Langfield can't continue at all.

 

Like I say. I think we have called this one badly.

The season lasts til May, not December.

 

He's signed until end of January.

 

If he performs so well that City won't do same deal again if we want it then you'd assume it's because they are selling him given he's out of contract at the end of the season. If he's worked his way into a position where someone wants to buy him then think we'll be pretty chuffed anyway that we've had him for six months. But given things like the anthony stokes loan just don't happen to us I very much doubt they'll want him back to sell him and if we want him again on same or similar terms it'll probably be fine to do so.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...