Henry Posted January 23, 2008 Report Share Posted January 23, 2008 Really wouldnt be surprised to see him be revealed tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted January 23, 2008 Report Share Posted January 23, 2008 He's been playing regularly for Rangers all season albeit in a wide position - and they paid about £1.8m for him in the summer if memory serves. On that basis it seems unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_BCFC Posted January 23, 2008 Report Share Posted January 23, 2008 He's been playing regularly for Rangers all season albeit in a wide position - and they paid about £1.8m for him in the summer if memory serves. On that basis it seems unlikely.Doesn't seem likely at all! Does seem like it is a Scottish striker though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted January 23, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2008 Oh my bad, thought he was out of the side.I didnt want to say I heard it from a source, because I've never had any info from him before. Sadly doesnt appear to be true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozo Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 He's been playing regularly for Rangers all season albeit in a wide position - and they paid about £1.8m for him in the summer if memory serves. On that basis it seems unlikely.Rangers are in the market for a new striker, Naismith has been a bench player, City have confirmed their interest (Landsdown ages ago).He basically has 'done a Riordan' - joined one of the biggies despite limited chance for selection.He needs to be kept busy, needs football, but Rangers don't want to make a loss on him.City reiterated their interest and have agreed a loan move until the end of the season with an option to sign permanently for a fee that recoups Rangers initial expenditure. Everybody wins. Gawd, nearly convinced myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 Rangers are in the market for a new striker, Naismith has been a bench player, City have confirmed their interest (Landsdown ages ago).He basically has 'done a Riordan' - joined one of the biggies despite limited chance for selection.He needs to be kept busy, needs football, but Rangers don't want to make a loss on him.City reiterated their interest and have agreed a loan move until the end of the season with an option to sign permanently for a fee that recoups Rangers initial expenditure. Everybody wins. Gawd, nearly convinced myself.Unfortunately he's not been a bench player, he's been a first team starter for the last two months to the extent they rested him for a 6-0 thrashing of a lower league side in the cup tonight. He threw his toys out of his pram massively to get his move to Rangers and commented publicly very much against moving to England in the summer. Ain't going to be him I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozo Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 Unfortunately he's not been a bench player at all, he's been a first team starter to the extent they rested him for a 6-0 thrashing of a lower league side in the cup tonight. He threw his toys out of his pram massively to get his move to Rangers and commented publicly very much against moving to England in the summer. Ain't going to be him I'm afraid.If it's a Scottish based striker, I'm low on ideas, Nibor. Any hunches? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 If it's a Scottish based striker, I'm low on ideas, Nibor. Any hunches?To be honest I'm still hanging on to the idea of Riordan despite what yessir says. Might have more to do with a river in Egypt than any rational sense though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhatWill Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 I'm thinking outside the box and don't think it's a) a Scottish striker or b) a striker based in Scotland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red84 Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 I'm thinking outside the box and don't think it's a) a Scottish striker or b) a striker based in Scotland.Do you think it's going to be Garner from Carlisle then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhatWill Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 Do you think it's going to be Garner from Carlisle then?NO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red as fcuk Posted January 24, 2008 Report Share Posted January 24, 2008 I'm thinking outside the box and don't think it's a) a Scottish striker or b) a striker based in Scotland."Thinking outside the box"? Do you have some sauce by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.