Only saw the first half but Forest looked a cut above even then at only 1-0. They passed it around nicely. Hobbs being allowed to play seems bizarre if anyone else is interested in him.
There could be plenty of brown envelopes changing hands at the boleyn ground this January. One last big pay day before his days are numbered.
[video=youtube;sLPD0CNfK1c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLPD0CNfK1c[/video] This the one (32 secs)? Definitely has the Leeds' look.
More on this Wigan rumour regarding Hobbs. http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull...ary-6th-Jean/story-20405216-detail/story.html
the Scot (Davies) was adamant Hobbs was not leaving the City Ground to join Uwe Rosler's side or anyone else. Asked if Hobbs might have played his last game for Forest, he replied: "Not a chance. "There is a (recall) clause which is for an emergency. As far as we're concerned that hasn't changed. He's still our player. "We're looking forward to having him here for the rest of the season if that's possible. Arrogant little ****. Hobbs is our player and I hope he goes to Wigan and ****s Forest and the Gnome up.
If they didn't pay a loan fee for him, then there's nothing they can do about it, any parent club can recall a loan in January if they want to sell the player.
Expect it regularly now, West Ham are looking for him to give him and his family VIP treatment at an upcoming PL game. The quote is bollocks. We may only be able to recall him for ourselves if we have a crisis, but if it's because you're selling a player you don't need a clause in the deal to end the loan at any time. We could even sell him to an MLS side in February whilst the MLS window is still open. (As could Sunderland with Graham, now there's a thought on how to **** us over by preventing us loaning another player and then removing him from our squad as well) Even if they did pay a fee there'd be no choice, we'd just have to consider any potential refund when negotiating a fee with the buyers.
Hobbs has 6 months left on his contract. The only important question is, is he happy at Forest. He doesn't have to sign a contract with Wigan if he doesn't want to.
I still think Hobbs is the 3rd best defender we have, and considering we play mostly with a back three I am surprised we never kept him
I suspect given how little we've played Faye his contract renewal was a default (I think it was even reported as such). Had he not had that I think Hobbs would have stayed. Because we wanted to bring in Davies we had to let someone go, and unfortunately that was Hobbs as he was the one wanted by other clubs. You could say Macca or Bruce could have been let go with their contracts up, but last season they earnt them as much if not more than Hobbs did and they've not cost us yet this season. When it comes to this summer I expect Faye to be gone, and if we feel the need to replace him it'll be by someone younger, and who is better than all 4 of the players I've mentioned so Hobbs would be back to being a sub if we'd given him a new deal. (Given how little he's played we may not replace him like for like, we might just allocate the wages to another part of the team).
According to the Mail we want to swop Hobbs with Wigan for Beausejour. They've also got Mcmanaman I wouldnt mind.
If true, we should try to get Rhodes in return for a reduced fee... That would be three players we've given them. It's only fair...
Billy Davies will be a very angry dwarf right now. Come on Forest, how much do you want him? Outbid them! They bid £5m...ahem.
