Kerrigooney wrote: » Nine times out of ten Johnson goes up the right wing and gives the ball away...THAT doesn't help anyone.
T-K-O wrote: » I'd imagine that's a little high
Kerrigooney wrote: » Figure of speech...but not too far off,I'd say.
K-9 wrote: » Time to update the sig, stuck through Suarez through and through, even a couple of pms saying it was terrible behaviour having him as my sig and me a politics mod!
Super-Rush wrote: » Rafa paid way too much for Johnson at the time. Way too bloody much.
Washington Irving wrote: » Portsmouth owed us money for Crouch, money we never would have got back if not for the Johnson deal.
MD1990 wrote: » So we overpaid for Johnson because they owed us money from Crouch. Doesn't make sense should we not have got Johnson cheaper then?
Pilsbury Doughboy wrote: » Sign me up to the Johnson fan club, well the he's nowhere near as bad as people make out club. It's obviously popular in here to make a harmless joke at GJ's expense, but I hold out hope he might come back next season with a bit of fire in the belly, he seemed to be very lax at times last year, hopefully a good break in the summer and he will get back to near his best form, when he's on form he's a quality player.
OwaynOTT wrote: » Sorry but Moreno is as bad as Johnson and anyone saying otherwise is just being contrary. His concentration is terrible, his touch makes Kuyt look like messi at times, he just doesn't head the ball, strolls back, positionally awol on numerous occasions, shots with his left foot with frequently diminishing returns, steals toilet seats, runs into traffic with the ball and loses it a lot, over plays too often, woeful crossing but gets a few assists to help cover up his faults and doesn't make too many obvious defensive errors which helps mask his decline and he has some pace.
martyos121 wrote: » If everyone here tears into Johnson for being caught out of position and having below average defensive skills, I'm dying to see what ye'll say about Moreno if we sign him. He's great going forward, and has a bit more pace to get back to defend a counter attack, but he's no better than GlenJo defensively.
Washington Irving wrote: » We didn't pay the whole fee for Johnson. £18 million fee agreed, Portsmouth owed us £7 million which they didn't have, so we pay them £11 million and write off the other 7.
5starpool wrote: » Johnson, like Lucas is blamed disproportionately for things. It's lazy analysis mostly I think. Also, he is worse than he was, but not as much as is made out imo.
OwaynOTT wrote: » Yeah I said as much above.
martyos121 wrote: » Well that's odd. I see that you mentioned Moreno in your quote, but he isn't mentioned in the original post that you quoted?
Super-Rush wrote: » Its the same thing though. He was never worth £18, not in a million years. There was a reason that Chelsea let him go.
~Rebel~ wrote: » Some people seem to be missing the point on this - he wasn't 18 million, he was 11. They owed us 7 million, which we were never getting. Noone they owed money to got any money. We wanted a player they had who had a value of 11. It suited both parties to call it 18, write off the 7 owed, and walk away happy. Why would we pay 11 if they owed us 7? Why wouldn't we just pay 4? Because there is 0 incentive for them to take that deal. They were under no obligation to sell to us just because they owed us money. If we wanted to do that, they'd just sell to someone else for 11 or 12 or 13. We struck a deal which suited both parties. We get the player for a pretty fair value, they get to make their disastrous accounts look a little better.
