Thetownend.com

25% => Players => Topic started by: Saxondale on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 00:04:23



Title: Macnamee
Post by: Saxondale on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 00:04:23
According to the mirror he's close to going to Norwich on loan.  Possibly bollox.

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Norwich-close-in-on-Swindon-transfer-target-article232759.html?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Nemo on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 00:07:13
The ex-Watford trainee, 26, has emerged as one of the Robins’ key performers in League One since joining in January 2008 from Vicarage Road.

It's bollocks.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Barry Scott on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 00:18:25
Well he has though really hasn't he? He's been pretty much the only creative player we had up until lately with JPM coming good.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: flammableBen on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 00:19:51
It's true but only if we get one of our targets.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jonny72 on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 00:46:05
Would seem a bit stupid whilst O'Brien and Macklin are injured, with Marshall out on loan - we're not exactly over run with wingers and wide players at the moment. I'd be sorry to see him go but I'm assuming his contract is up at the end of the season so selling him in January would make sense - he's never going to stay here if Norwich want him.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Chubbs on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 07:39:21
Would seem a bit stupid whilst O'Brien and Macklin are injured, with Marshall out on loan - we're not exactly over run with wingers and wide players at the moment. I'd be sorry to see him go but I'm assuming his contract is up at the end of the season so selling him in January would make sense - he's never going to stay here if Norwich want him.
i forgot we had o'brien


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: china red on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 07:51:34
Did Marshall extend his loan for a further month?  Thought it ended a week or so ago.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Bogus Dave on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 07:53:10
He's been sucked into the abyss


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 08:03:05
Why would Norwich even want him?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Samdy Gray on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 08:27:10
I wouldn't be too disappointed if he went.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 08:29:46
He has beem abscent for pretty much all season, no big loss, Hopefully O'Brien can get fit and Mcnamee will be a distant memory 


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Chubbs on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 08:34:26
I wouldn't be too disappointed if he went.
last season i through he got a bit too much stick, but this season it wouldnt bother me too much if he did go.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: swindon247 on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 08:36:39
Macnamee is one of the trickier players we have got at our club but when watching the match there are heclers in the stadium that put him off.  Real fans would support the player even though he's not have a good match


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Chubbs on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 08:39:39
Macnamee is one of the trickier players we have got at our club but when watching the match there are heclers in the stadium that put him off.  Real fans would support the player even though he's not have a good match
he's a one trick pony though. Teams have caught wind of his stepover. He was shocking against 'udders


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Power to people on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 08:39:58
Macca is a key player for us with his runs and crosses he causes defences problems, yes he can be frustrating sometimes but teams know what he is like and at times pay special attention to him and keep him quiet, he is still young so is obviously not the finished article, and his game does rely on getting the ball to feet so he cna go on a mazy run which at times which it played over the top he isn't going to have a good game

If he left we would be a lot worse off as we do not have anyone anywhere near capable of replacing him and how can you rely on a loan player who may get recalled

Cut him some slack.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Samdy Gray on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 08:49:58
he is still young so is obviously not the finished article

He's 26! For a winger, he should be at the peak of his game.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 08:54:11
He's 26! For a winger, he should be at the peak of his game.

Agreed, Also teams are palying 2 on 1 with Macca now. Macca's crosses are pretty shit to be fair. For every 2 crosses he gets right he gets 10 woefully wrong. If he stopped the daft step overs, which to be fair he looks to have cut back he may be ok. If we sold Macca and brought back Marshall they are similar types of players anyway so no big loss really should Macca go... We would still have a similar option with Marshall.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Chubbs on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 08:55:47
Agreed, Also teams are palying 2 on 1 with Macca now. Macca's crosses are pretty shit to be fair. For every 2 crosses he gets right he gets 10 woefully wrong. If he stopped the daft step overs, which to be fair he looks to have cut back he may be ok. If we sold Macca and brought back Marshall they are similar types of players anyway so no big loss really should Macca go... We would still have a similar option with Marshall.
just wait for o'brien to be fit and we will be ok


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: tans on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 08:58:26
Macnamee is one of the trickier players we have got at our club but when watching the match there are heclers in the stadium that put him off.  Real fans would support the player even though he's not have a good match

If he wasnt so hot/cold he wouldnt get heckled would he? Are you saying if i give him some shit im not a real fan then?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Iffy's Onion Bhaji on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 09:05:03
Agreed, Also teams are palying 2 on 1 with Macca now. Macca's crosses are pretty shit to be fair. For every 2 crosses he gets right he gets 10 woefully wrong. If he stopped the daft step overs, which to be fair he looks to have cut back he may be ok. If we sold Macca and brought back Marshall they are similar types of players anyway so no big loss really should Macca go... We would still have a similar option with Marshall.

Except Marshall is at least 2 or 3 times worse than Macca.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 09:13:17
Except Marshall is at least 2 or 3 times worse than Macca.

In reality both are pretty poor and limited in what they can do. Only difference with Macca is his step overs. Annoys me really if JP fucked up as much as Macca the crowd would crucify him, Macca fucks up he gets a polite round of applause.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Iffy's Onion Bhaji on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 09:29:51
In reality both are pretty poor and limited in what they can do. Only difference with Macca is his step overs. Annoys me really if JP fucked up as much as Macca the crowd would crucify him, Macca fucks up he gets a polite round of applause.

I don't think anyone applauded Macca on Tuesday night at all Gazz to be fair. In fact most were calling for him to be subbed.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 09:34:18
I don't think anyone applauded Macca on Tuesday night at all Gazz to be fair. In fact most were calling for him to be subbed.

For the most part though, most games he gets applauded because its "super Mcnamee" Incredibly over rated player IMO. Ok I don't expect the best players here but McNamee is very limited into what he brings to the team.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: nevillew on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 09:34:49
He has been generally poor in the games I've watched this season, although he has improved his defensive work slightly.

As noted, the fact that teams tend to go 2 on 1 with him means that there is free space elsewhere which presumably would not be the case if he left, unless we had a similar threat to replace him. I haven't seen enough of O'Brien to form an opinion, and Marshall looked awfully raw at times.

He's not such a key influence as we thought he'd be when we signed him.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 09:44:19
Well Marshall is back now. Be interesting to see what role (if any) he will play now......

http://www.herefordunited.co.uk/article/3058749/Marshall-Returns-to-Swindon


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: leefer on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 09:51:43
Macnamee is one of the trickier players we have got at our club but when watching the match there are heclers in the stadium that put him off.  Real fans would support the player even though he's not have a good match

Total rubbish...hes a good player,but when are we going to see it,in my opinion hes been no ware near good enough...DW has totally shown faith in him..he was really dire v Huddersfield and didnt show 100% commitment like the others.
It smacks of him wanting away....personally i would prefer Marshall in,at least your guaranteed a full shift....Swindon fans will always give support to players..but not when they arnt putting the effort in,thats unaceptable when hes one of the big earners at the club.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Jamiesfuturewife on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 09:59:11
His attitude was appalling on Tuesday was almost like he didn't care anymore I wondered if something might be going on behind the scenes


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Panda Paws on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 11:09:49
So long as we bring someone better than him in before the window closes, then I'd be happy to see Macca go. No consistency, generally poor between November and March and clearly doesn't want to be here if Tuesday is anything to go by.

He's a good league 1 winger at best on his day, but his day comes less and less.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: @MacPhlea on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 11:40:37
Marshall couldn't secure a first team spot at Hereford, most games he was an unused sub and most of his appearances were off the bench... hasn't really set the world alight, has he?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Colin Todd on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 11:46:54
Generally he's a passenger during the winter as the pitches and weather get worse.

The biggest problem is when a decent physical full back gets tight to him he ofter just disappears from a game altogether.

He's scored a couple recently (1 was a cross!)  but his shooting is generally dire or non existant

He simply cant defend, which I'm sure dosnt help Lescinel of Kennedy.

On that basis, despite his obvious talent on his day I'd let him go (providing we can replace him) He is too easy for the opposition to stop which means he is often ineffective


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Spy on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 12:39:19
I strongly think we should keep him if he can. He has flaws and much of the criticism on this thread is valid but I think a few people are being too harsh. People are forgetting what he's done for us in the past and he will find form again - hopefully sooner rather than later! I remember last season at one point people were getting worried he was playing too well and we were bound to lose him.

As for the suggestion Marshall is an adequate replacement for McNamee then I think that's bollocks. Especially if you compare Marshall to an in-form Macca, Macca is clearly much more of an attacking threat.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Dazzza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 12:44:38
It would be a bit short sighted if we did let him go.  I know he's not had the best of seasons but an in form Macca is head and shoulders above anyone else on the wing in the division.

If we're serious about the playoffs I don’t think we should be loaning rivals some of our better players.

I wonder if the story is a nonsense though and cobbled together off their failed bid in the summer and a loan signing being imminent.


 


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 12:45:56

As for the suggestion Marshall is an adequate replacement for McNamee then I think that's bollocks. Especially if you compare Marshall to an in-form Macca, Macca is clearly much more of an attacking threat.

Wasn't so much the idea of a replacement, more the fact they are similar players and Marshall will be cheaper. Clearly an in-form Macca is a lot better than Marshall but if you do fuck all for 3 quarters of the season whats the point? Macca clearly has the talent but he doesnt seem to be up for the cause really. He (much like if Parkin was to come back) is living on past good displays. Overall he is pretty poor now. If we can get 50k for him I say take it really.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:06:43
Usually when players are out of form they get dropped until they can work their way back into the side, like Payner and he is back on form. We cant drop Macca due to lack of options so getting rid of him is stupid unless we get a replacement.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:09:22
I also think he is a good attacking option and with 2 strikers in form he will provide goals. Plus he scored the other week. Did one shit game cost us? No, we won.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Cookie on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:17:13
Macca is the best winger at the club and it would be folly to get rid. When on form he is the most exciting player 1 on 1 I've seen at the CG for years. There's not much better than watching him make full backs look very silly.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Spy on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:18:32
Wasn't so much the idea of a replacement, more the fact they are similar players and Marshall will be cheaper. Clearly an in-form Macca is a lot better than Marshall but if you do fuck all for 3 quarters of the season whats the point? Macca clearly has the talent but he doesnt seem to be up for the cause really. He (much like if Parkin was to come back) is living on past good displays. Overall he is pretty poor now. If we can get 50k for him I say take it really.

I would be pissed off if he went for that much! We all wish Macca was more consistent but even performing very well in a minority of games that can contribute significantly to whether we can win or draw a match. Even being inconsistent his performance could translate into anywhere up 5 or perhaps even 10 points come the end of the season.

I would agree its hard to estimate stuff in that way but in theory without Macca we might have been relegated last season.

Am I saying he's been so good for us in the past we should hang on to him through his dip in form? Yes I am.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Spy on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:19:44
Macca is the best winger at the club and it would be folly to get rid. When on form he is the most exciting player 1 on 1 I've seen at the CG for years. There's not much better than watching him make full backs look very silly.

Agreed.

Also agree with both your posts Si.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: flammableBen on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:20:13
A half arsed Macca > Marshal giving 110%.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: mexico red on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:26:16
im just waiting for adjes contribution


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Chubbs on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:28:46
Macca is the best winger at the club and it would be folly to get rid. When on form he is the most exciting player 1 on 1 I've seen at the CG for years. There's not much better than watching him make full backs look very silly.
zaaboub? shakes? eh?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: SCM on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:33:04
Wouldn't surprise me if we swapped him for Whaley in Jan.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Chubbs on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:37:17
didnt turn up for training today


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Spy on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:40:00
http://www.thisisswindontownfc.co.uk/news/headlines/4762392.BREAKING_NEWS__McNamee_missing_from_Town_training/

FFS I don't want him to go.  :cry:


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Phil_S on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:40:12
Occasionally I drag along mates who support other clubs. The one player they remember & talk about is Mac Namee.
True he messes up sometimes, but even against Heddersfield (which was a poor game for him) he put in one wicked early cross (no step over) which could well have led to a goal if someone had got on the end of it.
Reminds me at times of mark Walters. He used to disapear as well, but they only have to get it right a few times to cause damage & if he tneeds two to mark him he is worth playing just for that.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: RJack on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:42:45
Macca's off for sure which makes me think they have someone line up or Timlin will come back on the left


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Iffy's Onion Bhaji on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:45:45
I'll be a little dissapointed if Macca goes and we don't sign a replacement by 5pm.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFCere on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:47:36
macca is rubbish - too lightweight, floats in n out of the game, and has only one decent skill - crossing, which hasnt been great recently. if we are serious about the playoffs we need a better winger. norwich must be mad !


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: pride_of_wilts on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:48:19
Really hope we have a replacement, Would hate to see Timlin on the left, He's shite!


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Samdy Gray on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:53:22
There could be any number of reasons why he didn't turn up for training, but if he is leaving I can't imagine for one second that Wilson would let him go without already having agreed a deal for a replacement.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: horlock07 on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 13:56:55
I haven't seen enough of O'Brien to form an opinion, and Marshall looked awfully raw at times.


O'Brien is incredibly fast and if he could cross a football would probably be a premiership player - but his crossing is poor.

From speaking to some Newcastle supporting friends when we acquired him they said that was why he didn't suceed there and from his few performances to date it doesnt seem to have improved greatly in the intervening years.

Hope I am wrong though!


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: bobby on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 14:20:26
he will be at Norwich by 5pm, http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/Sport/story.aspx?brand=ENOnline&category=Sport&tBrand=ENOnline&tCategory=Sport&itemid=NOED26%20Nov%202009%2013%3A28%3A56%3A890


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 14:24:19
Alan Sheehan to replace? or O'Brien back to match fitness. No loss really.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 14:31:44
Are Norwich paying us money for him?

Its well know I dont rate McNamee as much as most do on here. Whoever said the crowd get on his back was talking rubbish. Tuesday night was the first time I heard McNamee get any sort of abuser thrown his way despite having played many games as poor as that.

He can do step overs and 1 in 10 he can put in a decent cross. He doesnt track and offers nothing defensivly.

Also, teams doubling up on him?! surely thats what any decent defensive team unit does? the wingers track back to help the full back. Its not some tactic specific to McNamee

My only worry is, we seem short on wingers as it is. With McNamee off that would leave JPM, Marshall (out on loan?) Macklin (injured) O'Brien (always injured) and Henshall (still at school)

I see we've bought Sheehan in but never heard of him being played on the left wing.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Iffy's Onion Bhaji on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 14:35:07
Are Norwich paying us money for him?

Its well know I dont rate McNamee as much as most do on here. Whoever said the crowd get on his back was talking rubbish. Tuesday night was the first time I heard McNamee get any sort of abuser thrown his way despite having played many games as poor as that.

He can do step overs and 1 in 10 he can put in a decent cross. He doesnt track and offers nothing defensivly.

Also, teams doubling up on him?! surely thats what any decent defensive team unit does? the wingers track back to help the full back. Its not some tactic specific to McNamee

My only worry is, we seem short on wingers as it is. With McNamee off that would leave JPM, Marshall (out on loan?) Macklin (injured) O'Brien (always injured) and Henshall (still at school)

I see we've bought Sheehan in but never heard of him being played on the left wing.

I don't think Sheehan will play LM tbh. Marshall is back apparently and you forgot Matty Barnes.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 14:37:26
Are Norwich paying us money for him?

Its well know I dont rate McNamee as much as most do on here. Whoever said the crowd get on his back was talking rubbish. Tuesday night was the first time I heard McNamee get any sort of abuser thrown his way despite having played many games as poor as that.

He can do step overs and 1 in 10 he can put in a decent cross. He doesnt track and offers nothing defensivly.

Also, teams doubling up on him?! surely thats what any decent defensive team unit does? the wingers track back to help the full back. Its not some tactic specific to McNamee

My only worry is, we seem short on wingers as it is. With McNamee off that would leave JPM, Marshall (out on loan?) Macklin (injured) O'Brien (always injured) and Henshall (still at school)

I see we've bought Sheehan in but never heard of him being played on the left wing.

Marshall is back mate, O'Brien hopefully is regaining fitness, Macklin returns to training, so I at a guess would say Sheehan to play on the wing. Macca leaving was probably based on the Sheehan deal going through.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Samdy Gray on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 14:58:46
Kennedy at LM maybe?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 14:59:50
Kennedy at LM maybe?

Amankwaah on the wing? didn't he play there last year?

And have Sheehan, Greer, Cuthbert, Jean-Francois at the back?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Samdy Gray on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 15:01:53
No, because a) he's not a left sided player and b) we don't have another RB.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 15:03:06
No, because a) he's not a left sided player and b) we don't have another RB.

True but Wilson has had a reputation for playing players out of position.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DUNSWORTHY on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 15:12:42
Still reckon theres more to come.... heres hoping!! a left back would have been quite high on his agenda as kennedy doesn't seem ready yet though.
On his day Macca was a match for anyone but as many have said a handfull of times a season isn't enough.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 15:14:38
1:45 mins to go!!!!


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Samdy Gray on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 15:16:22
Gaz, I'll bet you absolutely anything that Amankwaah will never be a regular left winger for us. Get real FFS!


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 15:19:30
Gaz, I'll bet you absolutely anything that Amankwaah will never be a regular left winger for us. Get real FFS!

Didn't say regular, perhaps until O'Brien is fit, or maybe he is.... Macklin is back soon as well I think?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jonny72 on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 15:22:22
Kennedy at LM maybe?

I'm surprised Wilson hasn't tried Kennedy on the left of midfield more (I think he did for a bit in one game). He's got the pace and a good left foot so it must be worth a try. Plus I like having a LB and LM that can swap over and over lap well, which JFL and Kennedy should be able to do with ease.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: stfctownenda on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 15:44:12
I'm surprised Wilson hasn't tried Kennedy on the left of midfield more (I think he did for a bit in one game). He's got the pace and a good left foot so it must be worth a try. Plus I like having a LB and LM that can swap over and over lap well, which JFL and Kennedy should be able to do with ease.

Don't like the thought of that, would rather see Macklin played regular out there than Kennedy whos not ready for left back let alone left wing.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Barry Scott on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 16:00:05
I've always really rated Macca. I swear some people expect him to cross like Becks for whole match, because as a crosser of the ball i think he's been in a league of his own.

What people are saying pisses me off quite a lot actually. He's been superb with the ball at his feet on a regular basis. He's caused more problems for opposition teams than the rest of the team combined for 2 seasons. (Excusing Coxy of course.)

I have heard him abused many, many times, so it wouldn't take much encouragement for him to want to move. Also, what makes people guess about how O'Brien plays? How many times has he played for us? It's Casalitus all over again: Don't witness him much, but join in negative criticism off the back of what his other people/other clubs have said. (Ok so Casal clearly is cack, but no one's seen enough of O'Brien.)

People have got to except we're league one at the very least.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Arriba on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 16:03:14
get monkhouse instead


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DUNSWORTHY on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 16:04:44
casalitus!!! :Ride On Fatbury's Lovestick: :Ride On Fatbury's Lovestick:


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: suttonred on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 16:09:29
I'll be sorry to see macca go , he can destroy sides on his day. Be intersting to see him up against manky though, i know who my moneys on who lands in the stands!


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 16:24:23
McNamee did cause quite a few problems when he arrived, granted, But this season he has been gash. Teams have now figuered him out so he has been fairly ineffective, will we be weaker without him? time will tell but this season I haven't even noticed he has been playing most of the time....


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: tans on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 16:25:24
time will tell but this season I haven't even noticed he has been playing most of the time....

thats what gettting a bird does for you Gazza ;)


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: suttonred on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 16:48:40
McNamee did cause quite a few problems when he arrived, granted, But this season he has been gash. Teams have now figuered him out so he has been fairly ineffective, will we be weaker without him? time will tell but this season I haven't even noticed he has been playing most of the time....

Did well at Carlisle Saturday.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Crozzer on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:05:01

It's probably a good move for everyone involved.  Danny, the man with the plan.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Red Frog on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:22:53
Norwich official site has a live webchat with their Chief Exec today (interesting idea we should copy, incidentally)

http://www.canaries.co.uk/page/CanaryChat/0,,10355~1886908,00.html (http://www.canaries.co.uk/page/CanaryChat/0,,10355~1886908,00.html)

at which he said "We were delighted to be able to support the arrival of Russell Martin and we hope to have news of another addition to the squad later today."


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:23:37
McNamee did cause quite a few problems when he arrived, granted, But this season he has been gash. Teams have now figuered him out so he has been fairly ineffective, will we be weaker without him? time will tell but this season I haven't even noticed he has been playing most of the time....
Which is why the leagues in form team want him then? Macca in a attacking team like Norwich will do very very well if he joins.His defensive game this year has improved which for us has been good but for himself it is not his game.Alan obrien is fit now so thats one good thing.

You ask any fan in this league if they could have 3 of our players i can bet you anything you like macca would be in that list



Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: adje on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:24:59
If McNamee goes,I go.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Red Frog on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:26:52
A six-figure fee would ease all my regrets.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jayohaitchenn on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:27:10
Cheerio adje!


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:31:43
You ask any fan in this league if they could have 3 of our players i can bet you anything you like macca would be in that list



More so because most of them would have heard of McNamee more so than someone like Scott Cuthbert.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jonny72 on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:32:59
He's gone.

http://www.canaries.co.uk/page/NewsDetails/0,,10355~1887351,00.html


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: blinkpip on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:34:42
cunts


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:35:05
SWINDON REJECT, SWINDON REJECT


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Batch on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:36:45
Fucking wank decision. I guess the player wanted to go but even so.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: adje on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:37:27
Fucking speechless!


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: blinkpip on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:38:49
Fee already agreed for January then.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jonny72 on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:39:27
I'm guessing they've agreed a fee and it will be permanent in January. With his contract up at the end of the season, surely its better taking something half decent in January as opposed to fuck all in the summer?

I'm still hoping we've signed another better winger to replace him and it just hasn't been announced yet.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Reg Smeeton on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:40:08
If McNamee goes,I go.

Wilson is a bit of a roundhead..I too have a soft spot for inconsistent if occasionally brilliant players.

Hey ho...it's what happens when people get carried away with a bit of good news, we should know that shit is waiting round the next corner, just a matter of time.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Batch on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:40:18
Seems so Vile V.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: adje on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:40:30
Im getting decreasingly excited about loan signings


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Batch on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:42:31
Its sods law we finally get a proper left back in that could free Macca up to attack, only to ship the latter out.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Ardiles on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:47:07
If he wanted to leave (as rumours seem to be suggesting) there's little we can do to keep him.  Disappointing, but I'm thinking this may simply be the beginning of the squad reshaping that needs to take place in January.  Macca leaving is just a part of the picture, so I'll reserve judgement for a few months I think.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Bogus Dave on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:47:35
So long, and thanks for all the fish


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Reg Smeeton on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 17:50:02
 Of course we do have the wonderkid Henshall who plays out there.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Bogus Dave on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 18:06:23
How many of our goals came from mcnamee last season?? quite a lot irrc

In a way its a pity he was so awesome when he first joined. It raised expectations to an unrealistic level. Added to the fact most of our fans are utter retards who get on a players back at the first sign of trouble, it was never going to end well.

Although a friendly, his performance against portsmouth last season was one of the finest i have ever seen


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: pumbaa on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 18:08:41
That'll piss my missus off. She loves Macca. Brilliant on his day, but unfortunately a one trick pony, too lightweight for the cut and thrust of L1 and a liability at times. Just hope we get some money from Norwich and get a decent replacement.

And we've signed Alan Sheehan? Not bad.......


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 18:09:43
Of course we do have the wonderkid Henshall who plays out there.
Ah yes Henshall who Wilson seems good enough for his first team squad but Bodin does not see fit for his starting 11 in the youths :)


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Langers on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 18:11:11
Shame to see him go - he could be a threat but was also very liable to have an off game


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Power to people on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 19:20:06
Strengthen our rivals squad and at the same time weaken ours

I suppose technically it is only just over a month until we can sign a proper replacement.

Sad to see him go.



Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: michael on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 19:22:52
Good luck Anthony.

On his day, arguably the most exciting Town player since Mark Walters.

We move on.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Rich Pullen on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 19:24:42
No point him being here if he doesn't want to be.

I think the club have showed ambition under Danny Wilson so I put this down to a bigger club coming in and trying to get his way back into the Championship with them. We were always a stepping stone for him but his sporadic form has meant it's taken far longer for anyone to show genuine interest. Oh and there's no guarentee that Norwich will go up.

I wish him well.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: michael on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 19:26:12
For the record, Norwich have been watching him almost since we signed him.

I feel that it is a good move for all parties involved.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Chubbs on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 19:31:01
i have a lot of patience for macca and always thought he was a good player but in recent times an esp. agains hudders he didnt seem himself (im guessing he wasnt settled) so its best for both parties hes gone.

Good luck macca.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Langers on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 19:34:47
I wish him luck at Norwich but i still dont see why they are so desperate to sign him...


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jonny72 on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 19:45:32
I had a look on one of their forums and they were all creaming themselves over signing him. They also reckoned people on this forum were only slagging him off as he was leaving us, if they'd read back a bit further they'd see that 50% of posters here think he's useless.

Its all a bit strange, but who knows, maybe he'll fit in with their style of play a lot better than here.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Langers on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 19:47:21
I was just about to post the exact same thing - On the Norwich Forum they were saying that he is a brilliant signing and that hes a very good player - i think i even saw someone call hin consistent, strange.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: adje on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 19:50:49
I had a look on one of their forums and they were all creaming themselves over signing him. They also reckoned people on this forum were only slagging him off as he was leaving us, if they'd read back a bit further they'd see that 50% of posters here think he's useless.

Its all a bit strange, but who knows, maybe he'll fit in with their style of play a lot better than here.

I guess its because he's fucking brilliant and will probably do very well for them


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC Bart on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:06:57
Definately not consistent!

To be honest- not a big loss. Yes brilliant when he turns it on but it doesnt happen often enough and a club our size cannot afford such luxury players. His goalscoring record tells the story- very poor return for a winger.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: BANGKOK RED on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:20:18
Bart is becoming more like a person with each post that he makes.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: santasdead on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:21:44
Fucking bullshit if you ask me. I don't see many games, but mcnamee creates goals, end of. Having a defensive minded player in his place (as sheehan pretty much is) will ruin any form of attack that we have.

Why let someone go out on loan to one of our rivals if he is starting EVERY game for us, and if people havn't noticed, we are winning games at the moment.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: BANGKOK RED on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:25:52
In Wilson, I trust.

Disclaimer: I reserve the right to be fickle.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:33:49
I'd like to see Lescinel at left midfield and see how he does.

A bit concerning that O'Brien is our only recognised left midfielder and he has spent most of his town career injured.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:34:14
Fucking bullshit if you ask me. I don't see many games, but mcnamee creates goals, end of. Having a defensive minded player in his place (as sheehan pretty much is) will ruin any form of attack that we have.

Why let someone go out on loan to one of our rivals if he is starting EVERY game for us, and if people havn't noticed, we are winning games at the moment.

Whose to say Macklin, Marshall, or O'Brien won't play on the wing and they are attacking minded players, fuck knows even Revell with his pace may do.....


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jonny72 on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:37:12
I'd imagine the bottom line is that McNamee made it clear he wouldn't be signing a new contract in the summer and that he wanted to go sooner rather than later. Norwich must have made an offer that was acceptable to Fitton, for the loan period and for a permanent move in January. End of story.

Its not just a case of hoping Wilson has got a plan and he probably has. I just hope its not a shit one.

Maybe its Henshall. More likely Macklin and O'Brien, outside chance its Marshall.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:38:52
I'd imagine the bottom line is that McNamee made it clear he wouldn't be signing a new contract in the summer and that he wanted to go sooner rather than later. Norwich must have made an offer that was acceptable to Fitton, for the loan period and for a permanent move in January. End of story.

Its not just a case of hoping Wilson has got a plan and he probably has. I just hope its not a shit one.

Maybe its Henshall. More likely Macklin and O'Brien, outside chance its Marshall.

Reality says Marshall is likely gone, Macklin is the future and O'Brien is the present if he gets fit. All in all Macca has been shit this season, perhaps gutted he never got to move to Norwich earlier in the year in any case was good when he got here, got found out and has been pants, wish him luck but no loss IMO.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:39:29
Whose to say Macklin, or O'Brien won't play on the wing and they are attacking minded players, fuck knows even Revell with his pace may do.....

I think I've played more football than O'Brien this season.

Macklin I think will do the business for us, shame he got injured as he was showing good form. Still, isn't he a right winger?

I hope Wilson has an adequate replacement lined up and we'll get him. PLaying Revell left wing would be like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: ronnie21 on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:41:25
Sadly Macca's work ethic did not match those expected of him by DW.  He's gone, let's move on.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Spencer_White on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:41:35
I think hes never really hit it off properly here. Had the odd good game. To be honest I thought he had a poor mentality and struggled to motivate himself.

There were games where he was like a fart in the wind, and to be honest I wont miss him.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: santasdead on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:44:19
Whose to say Macklin, Marshall, or O'Brien won't play on the wing and they are attacking minded players, fuck knows even Revell with his pace may do.....

Macklin right winger, marshall hasnt cut it at this level..yet but we've all seen austin has made it (so far). O'brien is the only recognised LM we have but hasnt played much first team yet, so how do we know he can create like mcnamee created all last year.

Kennedy would probably do ok with sheehan covering behind, but that would be harsh on LJF seeing as so far he's done okay in the LB slot.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:47:36
Macklin right winger, marshall hasnt cut it at this level..yet but we've all seen austin has made it (so far). O'brien is the only recognised LM we have but hasnt played much first team yet, so how do we know he can create like mcnamee created all last year.

Kennedy would probably do ok with sheehan covering behind, but that would be harsh on LJF seeing as so far he's done okay in the LB slot.


Wilson is hoping for more goals from midfield. What's Sheehan's record like? Clearly Macklin knows where the goal is if his reserve form is anything to go by? Perhaps Wilson has sacrificed the pace of Macca for more goals from the middle of the park? AS i SAID Previously Wilson has played players out of position before (Kanyuka from defender to midfielder) so wouldn't be surprised to see Revell or Amankwaah play on the wing. Interesting one for sure though.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:49:27
The more I think about it, the more I want to see Jean-Francois Van Lescinel playing at left wing. Maybe give it a go against Wrexham.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:49:48
The more I think about it, the more I want to see Jean-Francois Van Lescinel playing at left wing. Maybe give it a go against Wrexham.

Well if his cross to Austin is anythign to go by... worth a shout?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Bob's Orange on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:50:33
Ah yes Henshall who Wilson seems good enough for his first team squad but Bodin does not see fit for his starting 11 in the youths :)

He's in the squad for this under 18 game against Scotland on the telly tonight/now.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: BANGKOK RED on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 20:59:57
I am now getting confused as to who our fullbacks and wingers are and who plays left or right. Diversity can't be a bad thing.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 21:03:26
They were fucking awesome on Britains Got Talent and won me some dosh as well.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Dr Pierre Chang on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 21:10:36
Whose to say Macklin, Marshall, or O'Brien won't play on the wing and they are attacking minded players, fuck knows even Revell with his pace may do.....
One of the msot laughable comments I have read on this forum.

Superb.  :D

As for Macca, I'm not sure about his depature, say what you like but he was our most creative player by some distance, who we going to put out there now?

Complete lack of pace throughout the side now aswell.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 21:15:53
I did some statto collecting earlier.

So far this season and all of last season McNamee played 60 league games and got 10 assists last season which put him 10th overall in the division and 2 so far this season.

In the same time frame Jon-Paul McGovern has played 44 league games and got 3 assists last season and is joint top of the divisions assist table this season with 7


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Iffy's Onion Bhaji on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 21:18:21
The more I think about it, the more I want to see Jean-Francois Van Lescinel playing at left wing. Maybe give it a go against Wrexham.

See i'd like to see Kennedy at left wing. He's got a great cross on him and when at LB he's looked a little dodgy but when moved to LM he's been alright. Either that or Sheehan. Sheehan apparently has a good cross on him as well.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Crozzer on Thursday, November 26, 2009, 21:19:08
Fucking bullshit if you ask me. I don't see many games, but mcnamee creates goals, end of. Having a defensive minded player in his place (as sheehan pretty much is) will ruin any form of attack that we have.

Why let someone go out on loan to one of our rivals if he is starting EVERY game for us, and if people havn't noticed, we are winning games at the moment.


Macca probably wasn't going to sign a new contract, so what is the point of getting nothing for a player at the end of the season.  Of course Macca is talented, otherwise Norwich wouldn't want to sign him.  Macca doesn't seem to be the type of player to fit into the Wilson-Shirtliff gritty give nothing away mould.  If O'Brien and Macklin had not been injured, what would have been the team selection? From Wilson's comments about lack of directness from midfield, I don't think it would always have been Macca.  


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Power to people on Friday, November 27, 2009, 08:48:50
Why has there been nothing on the OS about Macca leaving, plenty about the new boys....


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: herthab on Friday, November 27, 2009, 08:53:31
Macca was one of the most exciting players we've had for years. He was also one of the most frustrating.

I think he wanted to go to Norwich ages ago and that's one of the reasons his form has dipped.

Not really that sorry to see him go, I think the way DW sets up the team calls for someone that can combine flair with a good rate and the ability to tackle, neither of which are strong points in Maccas game.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Friday, November 27, 2009, 08:56:03
Why has there been nothing on the OS about Macca leaving, plenty about the new boys....

I dare say something will crop up today. Supposedly being introduced to the media today so I dare say DW will be asked about Macca etc..


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Cookie on Friday, November 27, 2009, 08:57:50
Even more gutted today, I'm more upset about this than coxy.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Riddick on Friday, November 27, 2009, 09:00:44
No loss, We've been playing with 10 men for ages now. Not sure Sheehan is really the right replacement though for left mid. Wait and see i guess.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: herthab on Friday, November 27, 2009, 09:01:59
Even more gutted today, I'm more upset about this than coxy.

Then you are clearly mental.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Cookie on Friday, November 27, 2009, 09:05:34
Then you are clearly mental.

Fair point.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: juddie on Friday, November 27, 2009, 09:57:27
Not fussed by this. He offers nothing defensively and had one good game in three = passenger. Shame, he had potential, but he's not good enough IMO.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: tans on Friday, November 27, 2009, 10:52:03
I had a look on one of their forums and they were all creaming themselves over signing him. They also reckoned people on this forum were only slagging him off as he was leaving us, if they'd read back a bit further they'd see that 50% of posters here think he's useless.

Its all a bit strange, but who knows, maybe he'll fit in with their style of play a lot better than here.

Even Crewe fans said he was shit when he was on loan there.

FWIW i wont miss him, at least my heart rate during games will go down during games now  :D


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: dell boy on Friday, November 27, 2009, 10:56:49
Not read all this thread so not sure if this has posted earlier.

Whats he worth? £250,000? £300,000? Less?

Lambert has tried to sign him a couple of times so there must be a good fee in January, and we need the money.



Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Anteater on Friday, November 27, 2009, 11:27:20
Certainly not bothered by him going. Macnamee has flattered to deceive for ages now. Always wondered why people have thought he has genuine pace and has been our main creator. His leg speed is quick but for whatever reason (probably his size) he does not cover the ground quickly and never beats his full back for genuine pace, I also agree with most that his supply of crosses are pretty inconsistent regarding their quality. I would far sooner have a fit Macklin than Macnamee, and had it not been for his injury at Brentford I think Macklin would have been first in the pecking order. Norwich will soon realise that he is a luxury player, maybe one that they can afford but we certainly cannot.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: magicroundabout on Friday, November 27, 2009, 11:31:22
Not read all this thread so not sure if this has posted earlier.

Whats he worth? £250,000? £300,000? Less?

Lambert has tried to sign him a couple of times so there must be a good fee in January, and we need the money.



why do we need the money?

i wouldn't rate him at £250k + but then again it depends how much Norwich want him


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: RobertT on Friday, November 27, 2009, 11:34:38
Because we are losing around £2.5m-£3m a year.  Our MO is to develop and sell young talent for profit, while imporving the overall squad.  We are working on 1 or 2 sales per year like this being the norm to help us improve as a club.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jayohaitchenn on Friday, November 27, 2009, 11:36:26
I doubt we got much more than £100k for him. Only 6 months left on his contract.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: pauld on Friday, November 27, 2009, 11:39:35
I'm kind of halfway between hertha and juddie on this. On his day and in form he can be an exciting, creative attacking threat (although even on his best days, he doesn't track back and leaves you weak defensively). But when he has an off day he's just a waste of space - against Huddersfield, he wasn't even taking away one of theirs to mark him as he was just wandering around. And those off days have become increasingly frequent as the good days have dwindled. Whether that's because Norwich have turned his head, or he just doesn't fancy it here any more or he's actually got worse, I don't know, but it amounts to the same thing - he isn't producing for us often enough to merit a starting slot. And if someone else is prepared to offer money for him, all well and good. But I wish him the best of luck at Norwich, maybe there he can find the consistency to produce at a level we all hoped he would here.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: strooood on Friday, November 27, 2009, 11:55:40
I bet he turns out to be absolutely quality for Norwich and will be the next Brian Howard in terms of "remind us why everyone got on his back so much?" in 18 months.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: tans on Friday, November 27, 2009, 11:57:16
I bet he turns out to be absolutely quality for Norwich and will be the next Brian Howard in terms of "remind us why everyone got on his back so much?" in 18 months.

Ten quid says he goes Grant Smith style mate. Up for that?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: herthab on Friday, November 27, 2009, 12:11:57
I'm kind of halfway between hertha and juddie on this. On his day and in form he can be an exciting, creative attacking threat (although even on his best days, he doesn't track back and leaves you weak defensively). But when he has an off day he's just a waste of space - against Huddersfield, he wasn't even taking away one of theirs to mark him as he was just wandering around. And those off days have become increasingly frequent as the good days have dwindled. Whether that's because Norwich have turned his head, or he just doesn't fancy it here any more or he's actually got worse, I don't know, but it amounts to the same thing - he isn't producing for us often enough to merit a starting slot. And if someone else is prepared to offer money for him, all well and good. But I wish him the best of luck at Norwich, maybe there he can find the consistency to produce at a level we all hoped he would here.

To be fair, that is exactly what I was trying to say.

You just use more words, you wordsmith you.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: pauld on Friday, November 27, 2009, 12:38:18
To be fair, that is exactly what I was trying to say.

You just use more words, you wordsmith you.
Or I just didn't read what you said properly, fuckwit that I am :)


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: juddie on Friday, November 27, 2009, 12:43:35
good points, Paul. I wish him well.

But if by seeling him we buy Ferry, then that's great business IMO.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: The Artist Billy Paynter on Friday, November 27, 2009, 13:45:56
Ferry's crossing needs to improve though. :D


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: land_of_bo on Friday, November 27, 2009, 13:46:40
Ferry's crossing needs to improve though. :D

It'll be fine once the weather calms down


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: nevillew on Friday, November 27, 2009, 13:59:41
It'll be fine once the weather calms down

Nice work !


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Arriba on Friday, November 27, 2009, 14:05:33
macnamee has his flaws, but its another asset flogged.
we seem a bit quick to let the promising or players of value leave.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Colin Todd on Friday, November 27, 2009, 14:06:18
quick like before their contracts run out?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Arriba on Friday, November 27, 2009, 14:07:32
can always offer them another one


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Friday, November 27, 2009, 14:38:42
McNamee was neither promising (he's too old surely) or of any value because he can leave for a free at the end of the season.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: pauld on Friday, November 27, 2009, 14:47:33
No we should keep hold of every player who's ever crossed our threshold and once had a decent half-season, we could be like some kind of journeyman's graveyard


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: stfctownenda on Friday, November 27, 2009, 14:53:59
can always offer them another one

I believe Wilson said on Radio he turned a contract down.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jayohaitchenn on Friday, November 27, 2009, 15:24:35
Apparently he has turned down numerous contract offers. It looks to me like the club did everything they could to keep him.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Colin Todd on Friday, November 27, 2009, 15:26:10
can always offer them another one

And when they refuse?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Batch on Friday, November 27, 2009, 15:35:13
Much as I am pissed off with him going, if he isn't going to sign a contract extension then he needs to go.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Dr Pierre Chang on Friday, November 27, 2009, 15:43:41
We missed out on Hal Robson Kanu on a loan deal, seems as though that was a done deal untill his performance last weekend, which is a shame.

Would have been a decent replacement for Mcnamee.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: pumbaa on Friday, November 27, 2009, 16:25:17
Even more gutted today, I'm more upset about this than coxy.

What did I do to upset you?

 :unsure:


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Arriba on Friday, November 27, 2009, 16:49:36
if he wanted out then he should have gone.
i dont dispute that at all.but we dont know what he was offered do we?
the club may have wanted to shift him on.
macnamee is valuable as other clubs wanted him.
just like morrison who has been put out on loan.coincidence?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Friday, November 27, 2009, 17:10:03
No.

One is on loan to get games the other one is being shipped out because he's poor and doesnt want to be here.



Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Arriba on Friday, November 27, 2009, 17:11:44
i hope you are right dv.i have my doubts though


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: alanmayes on Friday, November 27, 2009, 17:18:48
He hasn't been settled for sometime and was still commuting from London.The interest from
Norwich back in august,has undoubtedly played on his mind and with his contract up at the
end of season,it's likely that he was wanting to move on.Players these days can force the
issue,so please bear that in mind.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Arriba on Friday, November 27, 2009, 17:27:56
of course players can force the issue,but so can the clubs.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: walrus on Friday, November 27, 2009, 17:52:30
See ya...  don't let the door hit you on the arse on the way out.  He can fuck off for all I care, I'm confident we can get someone of the same standard if not better for peanuts...


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: adje on Friday, November 27, 2009, 22:35:04
I bet he turns out to be absolutely quality for Norwich and will be the next Brian Howard in terms of "remind us why everyone got on his back so much?" in 18 months.

Agreed


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: magicroundabout on Friday, November 27, 2009, 22:41:08
trouble is if nowrich have been chasing him for as long as reported/speculated then his heart has never really been in it as he's probably always wanted the bigger club. Hence mixed performances

nice to see he's moved now we're in the same division


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: chalkies_shorts on Saturday, November 28, 2009, 00:19:02
Its a shame but bye bye Macca. His perofrmance in the friendly v Portsmouth was jaw droppingly brilliant. Its probably best for all concerned for him to move on - if there's a fee involved even better. He's old enough now to be more consistent than he is. He's no Sir Don or David Moss is he? 


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Saturday, November 28, 2009, 08:13:04
What exactly has Brian Howard done since leaving here?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Simon Pieman on Saturday, November 28, 2009, 10:26:48
What exactly has Brian Howard done since leaving here?

Well he's playing in a higher division than all of our current crop i.e. he's done alright since leaving us.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Lumps on Saturday, November 28, 2009, 10:30:39

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/n/norwich/8382607.stm

"Norwich boss Paul Lambert said McNamee and defender Russell Martin, who has joined on loan from Peterborough, will provide the added cover he has been looking for."

Doesn't sound like he's going straight into the first 11 to me. If they go up this season we'll have him back on loan come next September.

Anyway, everything I've read and seen from highlights suggests he had his head turned when they came in for him in the summer, and he's not been the same player since. If he was on a longer contract we might have been able to force the issue but as it is fuck him, if he wants bench time at Carrow Road on more money he can have it.

And the comparisons with Walters - Bollocks! No where near the same class, and Wally was at the dog-end of his career when he was with us, not coming into his prime.





Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: leefer on Saturday, November 28, 2009, 11:30:46
Its a shame but bye bye Macca. His perofrmance in the friendly v Portsmouth was jaw droppingly brilliant. Its probably best for all concerned for him to move on - if there's a fee involved even better. He's old enough now to be more consistent than he is. He's no Sir Don or David Moss is he? 

Good post....people will laugh but Macca will be playing non lge footy within a couple of years...he had loads of chances in the team while others (Easton) who put more into the cause have been very dissapointed and left out...his performance v Huddersfield was a disgrace.....cant remember him having three good matches on the trot unlike Greer,Cuthbert,Douglas and Lucas....Good luck to him lifes too short for bitterness and we move on forward.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Arriba on Saturday, November 28, 2009, 15:08:26
hahahaha


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Ardiles on Saturday, November 28, 2009, 15:16:09
...if he wants bench time at Carrow Road on more money he can have it.

To be fair, if you offered most people more money for less work, they would probably take it.  Time will tell with Macca.  He will need to improve is consistency if he wants to move up a league.  Our division is full of players who could cut it in the Championship if only they would produce their best form week after week.  That's the difference between a Championship player and one from the lower leagues.  We all know what Macca can do.  Unless he starts doing it on a more regular basis, he'll be going nowhere (other than Norfolk).


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: adje on Saturday, November 28, 2009, 15:22:02
What exactly has Brian Howard done since leaving here?

scored the winner against Liverpool?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DMR on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 04:13:35
Some of the people who posted in this thread need a fucking CAT scan asap.

A bigger loss than Cox?
Fucking brilliant player?

Jesus cunting Christ.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: suttonred on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 09:06:59
I was thinking he's unlucky also. How many players have to travel to Carlisle succesive weekends?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Bob's Orange on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 09:39:20
I was thinking he's unlucky also. How many players have to travel to Carlisle succesive weekends?

The Carlisle players?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: suttonred on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 10:00:28
Shut up, clever balls.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: ronnie21 on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 10:21:40
I was thinking he's unlucky also. How many players have to travel to Carlisle succesive weekends?
As he was ineligible to play I doubt he left the comforts of his own home.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Summerof69 on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 15:45:15
Some of the people who posted in this thread need a fucking CAT scan asap.

A bigger loss than Cox?
Fucking brilliant player?

Jesus cunting Christ.

After watching the goal highlights of the '89-90 season, David Kerslake was putting more dangerous crosses that Macca ever did, as Kerslake was prepared to try and beat the opposing full back and get to the byline, which Macca hardly ever did. Yes the front two at the time were shear class in comparison now, but the supply of crosses which MacNamee did were, on the whole, poor. I cannot remember him beating at opposition full back and getting to the byline for over a year.

Good riddance.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: donkey on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 15:51:56
meh


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: adje on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 16:20:08
After watching the goal highlights of the '89-90 season, David Kerslake was putting more dangerous crosses that Macca ever did, as Kerslake was prepared to try and beat the opposing full back and get to the byline, which Macca hardly ever did. Yes the front two at the time were shear class in comparison now, but the supply of crosses which MacNamee did were, on the whole, poor. I cannot remember him beating at opposition full back and getting to the byline for over a year.

Good riddance.

bit like Beckham then!


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 16:23:14
did you just compare McNamee to Beckham?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: adje on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 16:28:41
I didnt-Summer of 69 did!


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DMR on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 17:10:59
I used to think adje knew his stuff but he's becoming more and more wrong!


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: adje on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 17:14:30
When has anyone seen Beckham beating the full back and getting to the by line?-thats the point I was trying to make


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Saxondale on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 17:16:35
Kersy was class though.  Good defensively but a load of little flicks and tricks as well.  I remember him doing a lovely little behind the leg flick against newcastle in 93 and a nice little stab flick over an on rushing fullback around that time.  Really was good football in those days.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: alanmayes on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 17:21:12
Kers was a class signing by Ossie.To convert him to fullback/wing back was even more of
a masterstroke.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jonny72 on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 17:21:38
I've always been a big fan of McNamee, but I'm surprisingly not bothered by him leaving. He doesn't seem to be having the same effect on games this season that he did last. Not sure why, maybe its down to our style of play changing?

We seem to be more defence minded this season, perhaps just due to the fact we've got a solid defence who are confident on the ball and we can build from the back more - especially as we've got a very solid defensive midfielder in Douglas to hold things together.

I'm sure the loss of Cox has got a lot to do with it as well as they linked up well last season. At least, McNamee could put a ball in to the box and know there was a good chance of someone who can score being on the end of it.

I could be talking total shit of course, but as I said, I don't think the loss of this seasons McNamee is anywhere near as bad as losing him last season would have been.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Spencer_White on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 18:51:36
Beckham has done a lot of damage to the old style of British wingers. Because of him so many wingers dont try and beat the full backs and end up basically wacking the ball into the defender.

Beckham can do it, but most players do need to make the space to cross.

Lets have O'Brien and Macklin on the wings, beating the opposition for pace, that will give the crowd some real excitement.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Reg Smeeton on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 18:58:33
Beckham has done a lot of damage to the old style of British wingers. Because of him so many wingers dont try and beat the full backs and end up basically wacking the ball into the defender.

Beckham can do it, but most players do need to make the space to cross.

Lets have O'Brien and Macklin on the wings, beating the opposition for pace, that will give the crowd some real excitement.

I'm not sure O'Brien or Macklin are in the mould of classic British wingers, both look a bit like runners who are not great with the ball...the best English winger atm is James Milner, not particularly quick but always delivers a cross.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Spencer_White on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 19:00:40
For me Giggs is the King of British wingers.

Skidding across the turf and hurdling legs like a gazelle.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Sunday, November 29, 2009, 21:16:02
you need a mix dont you.

Villa have Milner on one side and Young on the other - two of the best wingers about but both with pretty different styles.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Cookie on Monday, November 30, 2009, 09:20:24
And we've got the white Ricky Shakes


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Rustle on Sunday, December 6, 2009, 12:00:42
It seems this norwich fan was not impressed.

McNamee 5 On for hoolahan,  with Lappin going central and Daley Holt up front as we went 442.   Disappointed that he did not take his chance to show us his reputed pace - and for me the contrast between him and Daley - both late game subs when the match was over - was stark - one full of energy and committment looking to impress,  McNamee looking nervous and not wanting to be there. In added time had the chance to impress with is crossing,  bags of time to set a good cross if he had looked up to see that our strikers were on the edge of the 18 yard box but proceeded to cross to the 6 yard box between their keeper and back 4 - looked dangerous but was the same as passing 10 yards ahead of a city player - poor.

 


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Bob's Orange on Sunday, December 6, 2009, 12:07:07
It seems this norwich fan was not impressed.

McNamee 5 On for hoolahan,  with Lappin going central and Daley Holt up front as we went 442.   Disappointed that he did not take his chance to show us his reputed pace - and for me the contrast between him and Daley - both late game subs when the match was over - was stark - one full of energy and committment looking to impress,  McNamee looking nervous and not wanting to be there. In added time had the chance to impress with is crossing,  bags of time to set a good cross if he had looked up to see that our strikers were on the edge of the 18 yard box but proceeded to cross to the 6 yard box between their keeper and back 4 - looked dangerous but was the same as passing 10 yards ahead of a city player - poor.

 

Sounds like he thought Charlie Austin was playing for Norwich. Sounds like he would have scored from that cross!


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Sunday, December 6, 2009, 12:51:35
  McNamee looking nervous and not wanting to be there. 

Probably had a big club like Chelsea or Man United watching him which took his mind off the job in hand.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Barry Scott on Sunday, December 6, 2009, 12:55:51
I was a big fan of McNamee and was one of those who defended him when others rubbished him earlier in the thread. It's early days, but not having him in the team seems to have improved us a great deal.

Comments slating him are starting to look correct, so i take my hat off and admit i was wrong. I am now starting to hope he doesn't come back and that we sign Sheehan on a permanent basis. (I didn't realise he was 23, i thought he was about 27/28.)


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Sunday, December 6, 2009, 13:37:00
I agree Barry i was the same although he has only played 8 mins for them so it's good to see Norwich have a NCFCbart


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Simon Pieman on Sunday, December 6, 2009, 13:38:48
Not sure about that. There was a stage in the game where we were crying out for a more attacking option down the left. Not syaing McNamee would have been the answer though.

Saying that, I liked it when Lescinel went forward but you could tell he was knackered by the end.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Saturday, December 19, 2009, 22:09:06
unused sub again :)


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Barry Scott on Saturday, December 19, 2009, 23:11:27
Coming back in Jan to be released at the end of the season?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Arriba on Saturday, December 19, 2009, 23:13:43
unused sub again :)

so was cox alot until recently


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Sunday, December 20, 2009, 11:45:15
Cox left for a team who have flirted with the premier league recently and are pushing to be in the premier league again.

Macca has left us to sit on the bench and play 8 minutes for a team 3 places above us.Understand the draw of joining them but concidering how long they have tracked him it is strange he has not played more.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: dell boy on Sunday, December 20, 2009, 12:02:09
Cox left for a team who have flirted with the premier league recently and are pushing to be in the premier league again.

Macca has left us to sit on the bench and play 8 minutes for a team 3 places above us.Understand the draw of joining them but concidering how long they have tracked him it is strange he has not played more.

Maybe it keeps the price down when they sign him January. Once he is a Norwich player he will probably play every week.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Sunday, December 20, 2009, 13:11:46
Norwich dont even play with wingers. Diamond with Hoolahan at the point


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jonny72 on Sunday, December 20, 2009, 13:26:40
He was always only going to be a squad player at Norwich though, their manager said he wanted him to give them additional attacking options which they didn't already have. I really can't see him coming back though, I'm sure the deal is already done and its just a matter of waiting until January for the paperwork to be completed.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: doomster on Thursday, December 31, 2009, 23:26:23
I reckon we will end up with a Norwich cast off as part of the deal........
Whaley, Cureton or Tudor Jones are names which come to mind.  Not long before all is revealed


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: flammableBen on Friday, January 1, 2010, 02:07:09
Hopefully we don't have to pay them too much to make them take him.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Iffy's Onion Bhaji on Friday, January 1, 2010, 11:00:08
Norwich dont even play with wingers. Diamond with Hoolahan at the point

I think they signed Macca to replace Hoolahan when he goes this month.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: phelpsieboy on Friday, January 1, 2010, 11:40:32
Hopefully Macca won't come back and we sign someone like Albert Adomah who would probably excel under DW


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Peter Venkman on Friday, January 1, 2010, 12:31:13
Hopefully Macca won't come back and we sign someone like Albert Adomah who would probably excel under DW

Adomah is out of our price range, rumoured to be going to Blackpool for £250k+


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jonny72 on Friday, January 1, 2010, 15:19:15
I reckon we will end up with a Norwich cast off as part of the deal........
Whaley, Cureton or Tudor Jones are names which come to mind.  Not long before all is revealed

I didn't realise Tudor Jones wasn't getting any games at Norwich - no league games for four months or so.

I'd be more than happy with a straight swap, McNamee for Tudor Jones. He would provide some cover in the middle for Douglas and give us the option of playing a strong 3 man central midfield.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Rich Pullen on Friday, January 1, 2010, 17:38:51
Looks as though Tudur Jones is a bit of a scapegoat of the Gunn era. As mentioned, the guy hasn't played League football since August - which is bad for Norwich considering they paid £250,000 for his services.

I wouldn't be surprised if OTJ was part of the McNamee deal in some way.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Spencer_White on Friday, January 1, 2010, 17:47:29
He wouldnt get in our team at the moment.

Got to be careful they dont end up effectively paying a lot of money for him. Always thought he was a league 1 player. He doesnt have the potential to really step it up like Ferry does.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Friday, January 1, 2010, 18:47:55
Tudor Jones would be a big earner to just sit on the bench.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: jonny72 on Friday, January 1, 2010, 18:55:51
When we lost Douglas for a few games we really missed him, especially as we didn't have anyone to play the same role. Tudor Jones would be excellent cover and competition for Douglas. The salary could be an issue though.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Bogus Dave on Friday, January 1, 2010, 18:58:47
Tudor-Jones is not fit to lace douglas's boots


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Friday, January 1, 2010, 19:00:28
No where near as good as Douglas but did play a big role in keeping us up last year.Bigger part than he gets credit for anyway


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Summerof69 on Friday, January 1, 2010, 19:01:15
Fitton has said he only wants players that want to play for us. Tudur-Jones has his opportunity in the summer...and he chose Norwich.

Thanks...but no thanks.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Arriba on Friday, January 1, 2010, 19:03:23
times change.
some sort of swap for macca would do i reckon.wages permitting of course


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Friday, January 1, 2010, 19:56:56
I dont reckon Norwich will even want McNamee, he's crap.

Wouldnt be surprised if they send him back. I expect it might already be agreed though but then I said the same thing about Revell.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Simon Pieman on Friday, January 1, 2010, 20:19:45
I don't think McNamee is crap, he just doesn't want to play for us anymore. So he's not much use to us I expect.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Lash_sumthin on Monday, January 4, 2010, 12:02:20
undisclosed fee then


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: magicroundabout on Monday, January 4, 2010, 12:11:59
good


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Summerof69 on Monday, January 4, 2010, 12:19:21
bench warmer


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Sippo on Monday, January 4, 2010, 12:24:55
Good riddance.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Batch on Monday, January 4, 2010, 12:28:21
Better player than people give him credit for. But a luxury player that is often a passenger in games. And if he wanted out the so be it.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Monday, January 4, 2010, 12:29:33
Quite a strange deal really, 2 and a half year deal for a player who has played 12 minutes for them and has shown that championship is not really his level.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Sippo on Monday, January 4, 2010, 12:33:21
Better player than people give him credit for. But a luxury player that is often a passenger in games. And if he wanted out the so be it.

Good player but very very arrogant. Thought he was better than STFC. Don't need or want players like that.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: iffy on Monday, January 4, 2010, 12:46:46
Better player than people give him credit for. But a luxury player that is often a passenger in games. And if he wanted out the so be it.

I agree. Last season there were games where he looked like our only outlet, but he disappeared too often. You get the feeling that Wilson wants hard workers and isn't prepared to carry people like Macca.

It's as if McGovern and Macca got the same 'shape up or ship out' speech from Wilson at the start of the season. McGovern responded and Macca sulked.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Monday, January 4, 2010, 13:31:05
McGovern responded and Macca sulked.

Both are out of contract at end of this season, JP wants a new deal here, and Macca didn't simple as really.  Hope I am wrong and JP does well next season (assuming he re-signs ofcourse). Macca I couldn't give a shit and think he was very over-rated anyway.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: magicroundabout on Monday, January 4, 2010, 13:34:15
I agree. Last season there were games where he looked like our only outlet, but he disappeared too often. You get the feeling that Wilson wants hard workers and isn't prepared to carry people like Macca.

It's as if McGovern and Macca got the same 'shape up or ship out' speech from Wilson at the start of the season. McGovern responded and Macca sulked.

we were saying before the game that out of the crop of players wilson inherited last season JPM would have been one of those we wouldn't have minded if he left but now, i hope he signs a new deal and continues to play how he has been.

but as you say i think wilson had a quiet word to them and Macca responded like a spoilt brat and wanted out. Yeah imagine having to work hard for your money eh Macca


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Power to people on Monday, January 4, 2010, 13:45:10
Yet another undisclosed fee I see, what is the problem with revealing how much a player was sold for ?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Simon Pieman on Monday, January 4, 2010, 13:50:38
Yet another undisclosed fee I see, what is the problem with revealing how much a player was sold for ?

Part of the deal terms? Presumably we're also shopping for players this month and don't want to raise price tags on the basis we've offloaded someone.

In reality it probably means we got fuck all but he's off our wage bill.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Batch on Monday, January 4, 2010, 14:14:00
JP wants a new deal here,

Is that fact or speculation. Not having a go, would be delighted if he said this.  But as things stand I have this horrible feeling about him and Douglas being wanted by other clubs if we don't go up.

I am of course paranoid.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Monday, January 4, 2010, 14:16:23
Douglas is under contrat so not that worries it's mcgovern that worries me


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Batch on Monday, January 4, 2010, 14:17:32
Everyone has a price DRS!


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Simon Pieman on Monday, January 4, 2010, 14:25:15
McGovern is interesting. Before this season he was worse than McNamee, by quite a long way.

This year so far has been the best of his English league career which shows the turnaround.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Arriba on Monday, January 4, 2010, 14:30:16
i hope some money can go on a box to box centre mid with an eye for goal.i like ferry but he'd be the one i'd sacrifice in the first 11 for the right player.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: adje on Monday, January 4, 2010, 17:19:22
I dont reckon Norwich will even want McNamee, he's crap.

Wouldnt be surprised if they send him back. I expect it might already be agreed though but then I said the same thing about Revell.
:oops:


or is it :fishing:


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Sippo on Monday, January 4, 2010, 17:28:49
I remember JPM was immense last time he wanted a new contract, then it went down hill. Hope it doesn't happen again.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: reeves4england on Monday, January 4, 2010, 17:32:23
Interesting that Macca has only made 2 appearances for them, both off the bench. Also, the Norwich manager has come out and said that Macca is finding it hard to settle there because of the way they play. Yet he has signed a two-and-a-half year deal. Just shows what Macca's priorities are I suppose! Given that we got a fee for him I'd say it's no great loss, and I was a big fan of him once upon a time.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Monday, January 4, 2010, 17:45:33
Where has he said that reeves


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: reeves4england on Monday, January 4, 2010, 17:50:15
Where has he said that reeves
'And Lambert added: "Anthony is finding it a bit difficult at the minute just because of the way the team is going, but his time will come." '

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/n/norwich/8439544.stm


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Simon Pieman on Monday, January 4, 2010, 17:52:35
I remember JPM was immense last time he wanted a new contract, then it went down hill. Hope it doesn't happen again.
He played ok, not immense


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Samdy Gray on Monday, January 4, 2010, 18:27:30
Given that we got a fee for him I'd say it's no great loss

Did we? I thought we paid and undisclosed fee for him?


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Monday, January 4, 2010, 18:31:42
Did we? I thought we paid and undisclosed fee for him?
Read it again dopey bollocks


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Samdy Gray on Monday, January 4, 2010, 18:33:46
Duh. :doh:

Long day at work.

I read it as "got him for free".


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: DiV on Monday, January 4, 2010, 19:51:10
I remember JPM was immense last time he wanted a new contract, then it went down hill. Hope it doesn't happen again.

You remember wrongly then.

JPM signed a 3 year deal when Sturrock signed him, so is still under his original contract.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Batch on Monday, January 4, 2010, 20:03:08
He was also quite handy at the Dongs as well. It just didn't happen here until this season.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: strooood on Tuesday, January 5, 2010, 10:47:10
Interesting that Macca has only made 2 appearances for them, both off the bench. Also, the Norwich manager has come out and said that Macca is finding it hard to settle there because of the way they play. Yet he has signed a two-and-a-half year deal. Just shows what Macca's priorities are I suppose! Given that we got a fee for him I'd say it's no great loss, and I was a big fan of him once upon a time.

Perhaps Lambert has been a bit cute with this one.

Maybe he knows how good Macca is, and, if he had played every game for them earning rave reviews they would have had to pay through the nose.

As it is, they probably got him for about 50k.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: herthab on Tuesday, January 5, 2010, 10:51:58
Macca wasn't that good though, was he? He looked good in a few games last season, but that was in a poor side.

He did a job for us, but would struggle to get in our side now. The team ethic is there for all to see, unfortunately Macca either couldn't, or wouldn't, buy into it.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: westcountry on Tuesday, January 5, 2010, 11:18:06
He said he wanted to play infront of 25,000 every week.. Didn't know Norwich reserves get that much, or does he enjoy sitting on the bench infront of 25,00

 :bye:


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Berniman on Tuesday, January 5, 2010, 11:46:48
I did hear that a six figure sum was recieved, not sure how reliable that info is though!  £100k was what was being said, not all necessarily paid up front though, probably reliant on promotion.


Title: Re: Macnamee
Post by: Spencer_White on Tuesday, January 5, 2010, 12:30:25
Does anyone think it might be one of these transfers where Swindon got a bit more cash because Norwich basically tapped him up and unsettled him?