The Gooner Forum

donaldo wrote:If he did go to the Spuds just wait for all the Gooners to come out and say he has only gone there for the money and we never wanted him anyway and we got Walcott .Losing Cole to the Spuds would be a real kick in the teeth for us and a real sign of the lack of ambition at the club when we even cant sign a player on a free transfer

I agree with you with the exception of a lack of Ambition.

Providing we are actually in for him we can't make him sign. It literally looks like for Cole it's a choice between us and them.
Agree it would be a kick in the teeth for whichever team he turns down and of course if it were us, we'd make our excusses.

26392 views and counting. Got to be some sort of record?!?

transfer thread has more, im not impressed

If he does go to the spuds, he'll hv played for all of the 3 most hated teams, and him being an Islington boy as well

RNTGOONER wrote:transfer thread has more, im not impressed

Apart from the Transfer thread.......

rigsby wrote:If he does go to the spuds, he'll hv played for all of the 3 most hated teams, and him being an Islington boy as well

I believe he went to Islington Green (now COLA-I)

Boomer wrote:

donaldo wrote:If he did go to the Spuds just wait for all the Gooners to come out and say he has only gone there for the money and we never wanted him anyway and we got Walcott .Losing Cole to the Spuds would be a real kick in the teeth for us and a real sign of the lack of ambition at the club when we even cant sign a player on a free transfer

I agree with you with the exception of a lack of Ambition.

Providing we are actually in for him we can't make him sign. It literally looks like for Cole it's a choice between us and them.
Agree it would be a kick in the teeth for whichever team he turns down and of course if it were us, we'd make our excusses.

Why do you disagree about a lack of ambition? I mean what is our ambition anyway?

USMartin wrote:

Boomer wrote:

donaldo wrote:If he did go to the Spuds just wait for all the Gooners to come out and say he has only gone there for the money and we never wanted him anyway and we got Walcott .Losing Cole to the Spuds would be a real kick in the teeth for us and a real sign of the lack of ambition at the club when we even cant sign a player on a free transfer

I agree with you with the exception of a lack of Ambition.

Providing we are actually in for him we can't make him sign. It literally looks like for Cole it's a choice between us and them.
Agree it would be a kick in the teeth for whichever team he turns down and of course if it were us, we'd make our excusses.

Why do you disagree about a lack of ambition? I mean what is our ambition anyway?

Regardless where Cole goes it doesn't show a lack of ambition providing we have actually offered him a contract.

If he has 2 or more similar contacts on the table its for him to decide which club to choose.

Boomer wrote:

USMartin wrote:

Boomer wrote:

donaldo wrote:If he did go to the Spuds just wait for all the Gooners to come out and say he has only gone there for the money and we never wanted him anyway and we got Walcott .Losing Cole to the Spuds would be a real kick in the teeth for us and a real sign of the lack of ambition at the club when we even cant sign a player on a free transfer

I agree with you with the exception of a lack of Ambition.

Providing we are actually in for him we can't make him sign. It literally looks like for Cole it's a choice between us and them.
Agree it would be a kick in the teeth for whichever team he turns down and of course if it were us, we'd make our excusses.

Why do you disagree about a lack of ambition? I mean what is our ambition anyway?

Regardless where Cole goes it doesn't show a lack of ambition providing we have actually offered him a contract.

If he has 2 or more similar contacts on the table its for him to decide which club to choose.

No -that's not really an answer why does our deliberate policy of not investing in offering more competitive wages to veteran players or not competing with more investment in the transfer market not show a lack of ambtion, and what is our ambtion then?

Are you really satisfied knowing our Board doesn't give a damn apparently about winning trophies as long as the numbers add up they way they want each year?

USMartin wrote:

Boomer wrote:

USMartin wrote:

Boomer wrote:

donaldo wrote:If he did go to the Spuds just wait for all the Gooners to come out and say he has only gone there for the money and we never wanted him anyway and we got Walcott .Losing Cole to the Spuds would be a real kick in the teeth for us and a real sign of the lack of ambition at the club when we even cant sign a player on a free transfer

I agree with you with the exception of a lack of Ambition.

Providing we are actually in for him we can't make him sign. It literally looks like for Cole it's a choice between us and them.
Agree it would be a kick in the teeth for whichever team he turns down and of course if it were us, we'd make our excusses.

Why do you disagree about a lack of ambition? I mean what is our ambition anyway?

Regardless where Cole goes it doesn't show a lack of ambition providing we have actually offered him a contract.

If he has 2 or more similar contacts on the table its for him to decide which club to choose.

No -that's not really an answer why does our deliberate policy of not investing in offering more competitive wages to veteran players or not competing with more investment in the transfer market not show a lack of ambtion, and what is our ambtion then?

Are you really satisfied knowing our Board doesn't give a damn apparently about winning trophies as long as the numbers add up they way they want each year?

Is this a fact or your belief?

It's Wenger that chooses who to buy and sell and who picks the team not the board. Wenger is accountable to the board which arguably could be there crime.

Boomer wrote:

USMartin wrote:

Boomer wrote:

USMartin wrote:

Boomer wrote: I agree with you with the exception of a lack of Ambition.

Providing we are actually in for him we can't make him sign. It literally looks like for Cole it's a choice between us and them.
Agree it would be a kick in the teeth for whichever team he turns down and of course if it were us, we'd make our excusses.

Why do you disagree about a lack of ambition? I mean what is our ambition anyway?

Regardless where Cole goes it doesn't show a lack of ambition providing we have actually offered him a contract.

If he has 2 or more similar contacts on the table its for him to decide which club to choose.

No -that's not really an answer why does our deliberate policy of not investing in offering more competitive wages to veteran players or not competing with more investment in the transfer market not show a lack of ambtion, and what is our ambtion then?

Are you really satisfied knowing our Board doesn't give a damn apparently about winning trophies as long as the numbers add up they way they want each year?

Is this a fact or your belief?

It's Wenger that chooses who to buy and sell and who picks the team not the board. Wenger is accountable to the board which arguably could be there crime.

Are you sure?

Have you ever read the Premier League Report on Ashley Cole? I agree Mr. Wenger chooses the team but I also believe the Board has handicapped him in that regard by undermining his ability to pursue players who require higher salaries since 2005. So have you read the report?

But even if that were the case why has the Board not only not fired Mr. Wenger but their publicly stated position is they want him to extend his contract and continue doing this?

So to sum up, have we signed him or
Not?

BournemouthRED wrote:So to sum up, have we signed him or
Not?

Who?

RaM wrote:

BournemouthRED wrote:So to sum up, have we signed him or
Not?

Who?

I'm not sure now even

Tottenham are currently favourites to sign the diminutive midfielder at 8/11 with skybet, Arsenal are currently 6/5 to grab the player with Manchester United at 10/1.

starting to worry now