sadoldgit

Well there we go then. If the club were prepared to double his wages they clearly valued him and tried to keep him and he left to get regular football rather than feeling pushed out. Fair play to him and to the club. Perhaps now those who were using Jack's departure as a stick to beat the club with will find another reason to do so.

You should be very proud, it certainly puts all of my feeble efforts to shame but I shall try and copy yours if we get any decent snow this year!

And don't get me wrong Dig Dig, Swansea are a decent side and it is a good move for him But he hasn't gone to Manchester United or Liverpool has he?

Now that is a work of art!

Pah, youre no fun.

No I never said that he was never that good for us. But clearly two managers didn't see him as the main man (why buy Vic?) and he wasnt always an automatic starter. Perhaps, if he had of been, he would have signed a new contract? I have said many times I was sorry to see him go and the club wouldn't have offered him a new contract if they didn't want to keep him. That is a bit of a leap from the posters who suggest that he was badly treated and driven out of the club.

bling

Wally lol. I am not upset about discussing what a good player he was for us (he has moved on now you know). I am fed up with the way some posters seem to need to find ways of knocking the club when the club have done nothing wrong.

clone

People like me? Pot, kettle, black. See my post above. And perhaps you could do something about your avatar? It brings back bad memories.

Thanks for the usual dig Hypo - in fact it was a gentle wind up but that seems to have passed most people by. Too subtle perhaps

I feel a song from Frozen coming on....

I think I can round this one off for good. We all agree that Jack Cork is a decent player We all agree that we would have wanted him to stay We all agree that he was offered a new contract Some think it wasn't a decent contract and some think it was good Some think it should have been offered earlier Some think there was a legal reason from his existing contract that made that difficult Some think he was treated badly by the club Some think if he wanted to stay he could have done We all agree that he now plays for Swansea Some find it hard to let go. Next...

doppelganger

Indeed as I am very confused.

Why, are they saying that the club treated him badly too?

So you are saying Wotte said that was a shame, because the way you have written it is looks like you said it was a shame. Either way signing Morgan didn't turn out too bad in the end did it?

The word on the Internet at the time (and feel free to take it with a pinch of salt if you like) was that Lowe had sanctioned the signing of Morgan because he was worth more and he planned to sell him fairly quickly to make some money. Fortunately he wasn't sold as he, along with Lambert and Fonte were the best signings the club made for £1m and helped us get where we are today.

Because you said it was a shame that we couldn't sign Eriksen because we had signed Morgan. Would you say signing Morgan was a poor move by the club?

Would you have preferred that we didn't sign Morgan?

So despite the fact that two people have mentioned that there seemed to be a legal reason why the club couldn't offer Cork a new contract earlier, you still insist that he was treated badly. Fair enough, perhaps you should drop Saints and follow Swansea instead?

So can you and Batman

I think several clubs will finish above Spurs this season.

Roy Keane's idea of a brilliant challenge usually involves someone's kidneys being left on the side of the pitch. Football is a physical game, although nothing like it used to be, and we all enjoy seeing a strong physical challenge by our players. Unfortunately sometimes someone gets seriously hurt.

so are you letting it go yet?