Who got stung the most in the transfer window?

Now that another transfer window has closed now is the time for reflection.

Which club(s) do you think paid well over the odds for their player(s)?

I am going with QPR and Shaun Wright-Phillips who according to some media reports cost a staggering 6.5 million which is 1.5 million nuggets more than Scot Parker cost Spurs. In no way is SWP going to make any difference whatsoever in the Hoops' season in regards of them surviving or not. If they wanted a limited wideman with a terrible first touch and a more often than not wasted cross then surely they could have got the like at a much better price? Madness!

Also Peter Crouch to Stoke, at 30 years old, for 12 million is also just plain crazy in my opinion unless they going are to get three steady seasons out of him which I very much doubt.

Over to you guys.

Cheers.

I think Crouch will give Stoke 2/3 very steady seasons, at £10m it's not the worst, I think playing week in week out he'll get 12-14 league goals a season, especially the way Stoke play

I'll say David de Gea might be the stinger, British football is very different for keepers, far more shots from range and far more crosses into the box, its very unorthadox and he might justbe to young to get to grips with it, that said I don't see it stopping Utd from retaining even if I would love to see Liverpool win the title

I agree with the-gaffer that I think De Gea won't have a good season, it's possible he might improve with a bit more experience.

I heard the fee was only £2 million for SWP.

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:I agree with the-gaffer that I think De Gea won't have a good season, it's possible he might improve with a bit more experience.

I heard the fee was only £2 million for SWP.

That's still too much Leak.

Could be Spurs , only brought in Parker and Adebayor really and lost 5 - 6 ? yes they kept Modric but they have to stop him sulking and get him playing

KingKenny7Heaven wrote:Could be Spurs , only brought in Parker and Adebayor really and lost 5 - 6 ? yes they kept Modric but they have to stop him sulking and get him playing

They should have taken the 40 million quid and moved on.

I agree , they should of bought Cahill aswell ...haggling over 3 million doesn't make sense

KingKenny7Heaven wrote:I agree , they should of bought Cahill aswell ...haggling over 3 million doesn't make sense

He does only have one year left on his contract. Considering Phil Jones went for £16.5 and was tied down for a few years.

Can't see what Bolton will gain from keeping him for a season and letting him go for nothing. Probs should have cashed in and improved there squad

Yep Spurs got stung by loaning, or was it selling? Crouchy... just look at his England goals record to see how underrated he is, wasn't his fault the guys behind him couldn't muster anything chances wise other than poor long balls... keeping Modric was probably the right decision but i'm sure he will be transferred at the next window when they see he really doesn't wanna be giving his all for them.

Guys let's not forget that Redknapp will be leaving at the end of the season.....i dont blame Levy for not stumping up megacash for Harry to spend on players that a new manager may not fancy.......

And of the 5/6 players "lost" how many of them would actually be starters? Zero

I'd have to say that Liverpool shelling out £40 million on Henderson and Downing is a bit of a stinger

Guys let's not forget that Redknapp will be leaving at the end of the season.....i dont blame Levy for not stumping up megacash for Harry to spend on players that a new manager may not fancy.......

And of the 5/6 players "lost" how many of them would actually be starters? Zero

I'd have to say that Liverpool shelling out £40 million on Henderson and Downing is a bit of a stinger