Posted January 16, 201114 yr Apparently we might give up on Pienaar and instead go over Kranjcar: http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/172239/-6m-Niko-Kranjcar-off-to-Chelsea Views? I thought at Portsmouth he was good for them. He hasnt really done well at Spurs but maybe thats because Modric has been so good. Only 26 but could he change a game for us..........????
January 16, 201114 yr He's way too injury prone for my liking! But his age is much more appealing than pienaar's
January 17, 201114 yr It's from Daily Star. Need I say more? I actually got excited until I saw the link, lol Kranjcar was a player Spurs got for absolutely nothing because of Harry's shady connections. Makes me sick to my stomach because 1.5 million for player is what clubs pay for agents fees alone. I dont really know how I would feel if we pay four times that to Spurs, who I dont think had much intention of using him, and just thought they would take a punt and make a quick buck. On the other hand, I would be glad to have a player like him. Injuries be damned he wouldnt be a starter, so maybe he would stay healthier. I think Spurs honestly trade in players like stock commodities.
January 18, 201114 yr to bring nothing is better than bring Kranjcar he is flop ,we need good player as Ashly Young
January 18, 201114 yr Well anyone know what we are doing? Now we have been linked to Bent! If we were going to grab Pienaar then why not go after Downing or Albrighton, at least they can cross the ball. If we are after 'squad' players this time of year then why not look at teams in the lower part of the league with first team players in their early - mid 20's. Edited January 18, 201114 yr by CFCCAN
January 18, 201114 yr I can't see what Krancjar can really add to the first team. He might give us a bit more cover in central midfield but he would just be taking time from Josh. I'd rather we got a wide right midfielder if anything.
January 22, 201114 yr I think he is too slow for us. Most of us here think Mikel is slow and slowing our game but I think Kranjcar is slower. Modric knows all the tricks and is good passer and has a wicked shot, Kranjcar is worse in every aspect IMO so why would we go for a player like that. Maybe to cover for the time Benayoun is out but not for good.
January 23, 201114 yr Apparently there is a very real chance that Krancjar is going to move to Stamford Bridge. A very good mate of mine who is pretty well connected at Chelsea, and who has been "on the money" in the past regarding transfers and new Managers has told me this evening that Krancjar will be our surprise purchase in January. £3.5m will change hands and he will be straight into the starting line-up, but where ?????
January 23, 201114 yr Author £3.5m is interesting if thats the case. He is 26 so I guess could be a good utility player in midfield? I cant see him going straight in the first 11 though the article link above by Hutch says he doesnt like playing right and prefers left. Malouda seems poor at the moment so will Carlo drop him and stick him on the left while benayoun and zhirkov are injured?
January 23, 201114 yr Wow..Spurs grab a player for next to nothing, stick him on the bench & we are paying £3m for him. In my opinion that is scraping the bottom of the barrel.
January 23, 201114 yr I actually think Krancjar is a very unerrated player. Mate is a spuds season ticket holder and he said last season ever time Krancjar played he looked another level, better the modric. In the few games he has played this season he hasnt looked the same player apparently. He's not quik in terms of leg speed but a great paser of the ball and picks those deffence spiltting passes. I actually think at that price (he's only 26) he could be an absaloute steel and deffinatly worth the money if we can get the best out of him. Lampard is are only eshtablished foward thinking midfielder (if you count malouda as a forward now) we despratly need another.
January 24, 201114 yr He was an excellent player for Pompey and plays fairly well for Croatia, and for that kind of money, he would be a better investment then Benayoun (a younger one at that). If he's ready to play as a squad player, why not take the risk?
January 24, 201114 yr I think Benayoun is better player than Kranjcar. Kranjcar is younger but he is slow and not that strong, this is my impression of him. He has good vision but the best Chelsea I have seen is very fast on attack and turning the game around fast. Lampard isn't the fastest player there is but his long balls are accurate and he can deliver fast. If Harry thought Kranjcar was that good he wouldn't have bought VDV and now Pienaar. That tells a lot IMO. If we are bringing him in for peanuts and just to cover Benayoun till he is back I think that is okay... Here's a question: Can Kranjcar do a better job than Josh backing up our midfield?
January 25, 201114 yr Wow, well, I really hope Coombsie's mate is right. Is it perhaps the case that we pulled out of the Pienaar deal contingent on this getting done? I think Benayoun is better player than Kranjcar. Kranjcar is younger but he is slow and not that strong, this is my impression of him. He has good vision but the best Chelsea I have seen is very fast on attack and turning the game around fast. Lampard isn't the fastest player there is but his long balls are accurate and he can deliver fast. If Harry thought Kranjcar was that good he wouldn't have bought VDV and now Pienaar. That tells a lot IMO. If we are bringing him in for peanuts and just to cover Benayoun till he is back I think that is okay... Here's a question: Can Kranjcar do a better job than Josh backing up our midfield? I dont really think the question is about backing up our midfield. Krankjar is not like the CM's we have. Yes he is creative, but he can be deployed behind the strikers or out wide from where I have seen him used. ANd he is very quick and tricky at times. The guy has pulled out a few pretty brilliant moments and goals in his day. He gives us something different and that is an attacking pivot player that Benayoun was supposed to be. Only he is just 26 and could give us a few seasons. People seem to think he would somehow come here and start. A signing like this wouldnt be as a starter, he would be coming off the bench and giving us depth. Wow..Spurs grab a player for next to nothing, stick him on the bench & we are paying £3m for him. In my opinion that is scraping the bottom of the barrel. They only got him for nothing because of HArry's shady connections and his bung fund. The Pompey fans hate him because of his quick exit, and then all the leeching he did after he left when they were stuck in the sh*t. Kranjcar's buy was a perfect example of this. And as it stands, 3.5 million is practically nothing. More than 1.5 but still practically nothing, he could give us a good couple of years service and if he performs well a club like Fulham or Villa would probably take him on for double that. Get him on form and 3.5m will be a steal. Is exactly right. No, he isnt better than van der Vaart. But who gives a damn? We have a better starting 11 than SPurs, and getitng a quality bench player will keep them fresher for more of the season. Edited January 25, 201114 yr by TheWestwayWonder
January 25, 201114 yr Don't see us getting him for 3.5 million. They just signed him last year, surely he has a few years left on his deal? Again, same as with City, another team who are competing with us for a champions league place. Why would they give us a player who would improve our squad on the cheap? As for Kranjcar, I think he's a good player but with a terrible work-rate. He looks good at times, but mostly drifts in and out of games. Would have been a decent backup though.
