Luke Chambers to Derby

Hopefully his is true:-


http://www.lewis-mitchell.com/07/family-issues-the-reason-behind-chambers-protracted-switch-to-blues/?

Former Nottingham Forest skipper Luke Chambers looks set to put pen to paper on a three-year deal at Portman Road over the weekend following protracted negotiations throughout the summer. However, the 26-year-old has openly discussed recent family issues that affected his form throughout the first half of last term.

Partner, Helen gave birth to Chambers’ new son in September and suffered from post-natal depression for over six months. It is perhaps unsurprising then that Chambers has taken so much time to make up his mind regarding Ipswich’s contract offer – the only concrete bid for his services.

Chambers said: “My son, Maxy, was born in September and my wife, Helen, suffered really badly with post-natal depression. People who have been through that will know exactly how difficult that can be.

“From September right through to February, I was coming home from training and from matches worrying about how my wife was. It really was a tough time. There are things away from football that can influence you; there is sometimes more to worry about than your job.”

Town boss Paul Jewell admitted yesterday that discussions regarding Chambers’ switch to Suffolk have been ongoing throughout the close season and the uncertainty regarding Nottingham Forest’s proposed takeover appears to have forced the defender’s hand into accepting the terms on offer at Portman Road.

“It’s been going on all summer really. I’ve met him on a number of occasions and have spoken to him quite a lot over the summer,” said Jewell.

“He’s a player we’ve been interested in for a while and we’re hopeful we can conclude a deal. I think everything’s agreed but until it’s signed, sealed and delivered you’re never 100%.

“But as sure as we can be without it actually being signed – and I spoke to Luke not 20 minutes ago – everything’s agreed.”

Well that's the end of that rumour. Any more?

im not spartacus

cos he wouldnt be a bench warmer and would have a serious point to prove in the championship.
cos brighton are showing a lot more ambition than us and are frankly a bunch of no-marks..
cos glick would have been in a good negotiating position and from a networking pov man city "owe us one".
cos im seriously pssd off with the sheer stupidity of selling shackell for such a ridiculously low return.

think that sums it up.

Just for a it of overkill


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18736692

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

Man City owe us.

Jeez Jorv, it's the other way round. The bloke is an incompetent buller. Man City are making sure he has nothing to do with the footballing side of their business. Even on the non footballing side, he didn't understand the product or what was needed to get the fans back to PP, he relied on cheap givaways and the matchday experience was rubbish, broken tellys, scoreborads, microphones, music that made your ears bleed, crap wine in polystyrene cups, kids annoucing the line up, sheep masks, t shirts and then, undermining season ticket holders, groupon, demand based pricing, top six finish, priority is to get Nigel a quality striker, Barker type signings, join the family, etc etc etc. Man City owing us is completely absurd.

Iwaslevel..... nice one.

http://www.twtd.co.uk/news.php?storyid=20980

LC not coming to Derby then.