Woody the Woodpecker

[abramovich]

Apparently Woodgate announced that he is still undecided about his future and will make his choice in the summer.

I know he is injury prone and has a baggage, but he is also English,quality and in his prime.

Considering that we lost Gallas and Huth and brought only Boula....

What say you?

[loz]

My opinion is well documented - he would be a bargain buy and well worth the risk

[BlueBeard]

He's about as reliable as Michael Owen - and I wouldn't want him at Chelsea either. I'd much rather we brought in a promising youngster, or better still, gave Michael Mancienne a chance.

[german-blue]

He's about as reliable as Michael Owen - and I wouldn't want him at Chelsea either. I'd much rather we brought in a promising youngster, or better still, gave Michael Mancienne a chance.

Agree. You cant say more about it

[Valerie]

Nah, don't want him. I can't decypher his accent

[Chippy]

If it were now and the rest of this season I would jump at the chance of him helping out but as far as a permanent move for him, I think with his injury record we could certainly do better.

a great player though when he's fit.

[MHedges]

I think the fact that he is English should play a role in this. Though we do not have to purchase more English players, Its always nice from the fans perspective to have players playing who are from that country. He is a class act, and I think the pricetag is fair enough.

PS: I am not English

[loz]

Just out of interest does anyone actually think he isn't that good a player? i.e are all the 'No' votes because of his injury record (which is understandable) or are some actually baed on his ability?

[abramovich]

I think he is one of the most talented central defenders in the country, along with Terry and Rio.

If i knew he'd stay healthy, i'd take him in a second.

[g3.7]

don't give one f*ck about his nationality.

he is a top quality player. I'd take him striaght away.

trouble is, with all his injuries, he probably wants first team football guaranteed for the rest of his career. with carvalho here, that is something we can't assure him of.

[Makelele]

don't give one f*ck about his nationality.

he is a top quality player. I'd take him striaght away.

trouble is, with all his injuries, he probably wants first team football guaranteed for the rest of his career. with carvalho here, that is something we can't assure him of.

true, very true...offtopic a slight bit...did u see carvys goal against brazil today...not bad!!!

[g3.7]

I'm looking for it- the one posted somewhere else was a link to his goal against united last season.

[abramovich]

Here it is Gullit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAg_ePdncTA

[g3.7]

thanks!

[mad_mac]

nice goal! Back to topic I said No, and I see the vote is split exactly at 50-50, for the reason of his injury proneness (is that a word?) Anyway, I think that he is a great player, and like G4 I don't care about his nationality, but the fact he is English is a plus. However, I do think that he is a bit of a liability, but if he was made aware he was 2nd fiddle to terry and carvs, I would gladly have him warm our bench. But that would be a waste of talent

Scott

[just]

The add-on is here the cost involved with hiring another seven or eight fully qualified physios.

With Robben and Woodgate in the same squad our current medical staff would be unable to cope.

[MHedges]

On a serious note, I believe I heard on Chelsea TV that we just hired a new physio

[Guest]

and like G4 I don't care about his nationality, but the fact he is English is a plus.

Oxymoron?

[loz]

On a serious note, I believe I heard on Chelsea TV that we just hired a new physio

If it is specifically for Robben then it better be this fella

[BlueBeard]

Just out of interest does anyone actually think he isn't that good a player? i.e are all the 'No' votes because of his injury record (which is understandable) or are some actually baed on his ability?

The only reason I wouldn't take him is his injury record. I think he's a good player, though not a great one - maybe he'd become a great one if he played more often and stayed injury free?

[boulderbollocks]

On a serious note, I believe I heard on Chelsea TV that we just hired a new physio

A Leeds fan was complaining about it, as apparently the physio was theirs.

[sergeyMS]

On a serious note, I believe I heard on Chelsea TV that we just hired a new physio

If it is specifically for Robben then it better be this fella

I think even this bloke and protective suit for diving (was posted some time ago) together cann`t help Robben. Confused.

[yorkleyblue]

I voted no, but not for the inadequate musculature or whatever it is that means he is unable to play for huge amounts of the season.

I voted no because

a) He is vastly over-rated in my opinion

B) He has a stupid haircut

c) He's Leeds (scum)

d) He's one of the ugliest muhfuhs in the world game (and that's saying something given some of the ugly bar stewards there are!), and

e) He's nowhere near GEFC

Kev

[Elliott]

If we could sign him on a 'pay as you play basis' then YES.

Without doubt, a quality player.

[matt_hill_01]

He's about as reliable as Michael Owen - and I wouldn't want him at Chelsea either. I'd much rather we brought in a promising youngster, or better still, gave Michael Mancienne a chance.

I agree he's a quality player.. but he is far too injury prone for my liking.

I'd like Mancienne, but I also like the look of Richards. We could have England's back 4 should Johnson sort himself out !!