if he's any good why don't we give him a go. I've seen him for the ressies and he's looked a good player. I'd rather see him that Holland/Hughes/Ambrose :
Valencia in for Addicks youngster
By: Dan on Fri 15th December 2006
Spanish giants Valencia are the front runners to sign promising Charlton youngster Rurik Gislason.
Tipped as the "hottest thing out of Iceland" on his arrival to Charlton nearly two years ago, Gislason has only featured for the reserves and was not even been given a chance by former bosses Alan Curbishley and then Iain Dowie.
Valencia representatives have been impressed by the Icelandic's performances, especially during his countries European Championship Qualifying Group where he represents at under-19’s level.
Charlton have received a formal offer from the Spanish side, who initially want the player on a 6 month loan period. Charlton are considering the request.
The 18-year-old has become frustrated by his lack of first team opportunities.
“People come to me after every training session to tell me that I'm getting closer to be in the first team but then nothing happens," he said.
"I’ve been slightly frustrated by this during this season because I have been doing well for the reserves but the manager has opted to field the same players in the first team.
"Which I can understand from his point of view because it is hard to experiment when the team is in the kind of position it now finds itself in.
"I will continue to work hard and will try not to let this get on my nerves and hopefully my chance will come when Charlton play against Wycombe in the Cup next week.”
Clubs in Germany, Scotland, England and Scandinavia have made enquiries about the player’s availability over the past month and are looking to make a permanent move.
Gislson’s contract expires at the end of the season but the club has a clause to extend the contract by one year.
0
Comments
It came from Addickted.net - http://www.addickted.net/newsitem.php?id=209
Must be nice being right all the time - well right about getting it wrong I guess - the article came from addickted.net was written by addickted.net and yet you accuse addickted.net of copying and pasting - what off there own site -
Unlike you to get your facts wrong Inspector Sands - not losing the plot are we ?
LOL - what are you implying Rothko - you need to be a bit more specific than that - I'm having a bit of a thick day so please enlighten me with your wisdom
You didnt answer the question I think you need to S-P-E-L-L it out for me ;o)
You what? Do I need to go on Addickted and communicate via smilies?
if the pair of you want to take it on, do it by whisper.
thanks
The post was in response to Inspector Sands comments
You have two lifts off the addickted site with no credit - yet accuse us of copying it?
Well done Rothko you are a real Winner - Conrgratulations on giving us another drubbing. ;P
Playing devils advocate though, if you guys have been out and got the quotes then fair play. But if you haven't, i do think its a fair point that when you drop quotes from elsewhere into articles, giving the impression you had got them yourselves, then i don't think that's the right way of going about things. Just my opinion though.
Thats why my initial response to this was a simple link back to where the article was originally posted.
I don't want this to be a slagging match, I just want to put this to bed.
Rothko, you seem to have issues with our Charlton site. I have noted several silly, pointless quips on several occasions regarding our stories - if you don't like it, don't read it.
The Addickted.net site, although features some "blogging" articles, we also feature news service from a Charlton point of view. With many of the stories, we have our own sources and contacts "in the field" and gather our quotes, etc through these, so please don't be put off.
As for this particular story, regarding Rurik Gisalason, this was received from a contact in Iceland working for a media group out there. We have to honour people's privacy and as with all media sites, sources are not generally given, for one reason or the other, and mainly for the obvious.
If you don't agree with a certain article, what would be nice, is if you could post off the back of the story in the Addickted.net forums, rather than just run off and post one liners elsewhere.
Failing that, simply don't read it.
Nah mate, you have done nothing wrong at all - I am pleased that you did it, as it got the story and "word" out to a slightly larger audience. So thank you for that.
Large, you did nothing wrong mate. I've been posting a fair few articles up myself, i generally try and just mention where a story originated from. 1 because i'm not sure of copywright issues, and 2 if its from a similar site to this, out of politeness.
Rothko, no more public digs on here please mate.
Spirito, come and post some time when its not a row !
Have you no shame,do you read your own blog,a copy/paste here, a bit there,and a few words added from you.
jeeeeeeeze
Just defending ouselves,just so happens they've latched on to this site.
Maybe the 'public digs' should me moderated better.
Defending ourselves? bloody hell!
unbelievable !!
So did the Icelandic media your contact works for run this quote?
Seriously, and I'm not trying to make a cheap dig, but there's too many football sites which rip off quotes from the UK tabloids and others without attribution, and then try to claim them as their own. If you want to be credible at this kind of thing, you should say where/when it came from (ffs, it could earn you money in tip fees from the tabs if it's genuine.)
(and if it's your own work, you should shout EXCLUSIVE from the hills...)
We're not in the "business" for ripping the big media sites off, if we don't get the quotes in from our contacts, whether they are from outside the club, or in it. - i.e unlike some sites that just replicate the same stories and change the headline, then we won't publish them, simple as. I personally don't feel the need to put a story on the site if it's not been backed up, and no-one particularly wants to read a story which has about 100 or so different versions.
Like I have said, I can't post sources if the people involved don't want to be included for whatever reason.
The site is ultimately there to promote Charlton as a club and along with this, and the most important factor, us as fans, so no items are run for the sheer hell of it. We do put our stories (when exclusives arrive) out to a media pool and many of the "big" sites run the stories off the back of them, as seen by yesterdays item. Which as a non-profit, solely Charlton fan site, this is great to see.
The site, along with CL, are here for the enjoyment of ALL Charlton fans. To share opinions, read articles and make Charlton on the Internet a great place.
If you want to bicker then at least have the grace to do it in private - use the whisper function.
The last two posts above yours I don't see as "bickering".
I think we are both now on common grounds and I fully appreciate the comments.
Thank you
(Just very painful getting there!)
You should at the least indicate that it was an un-named source or something similar to avoid the impression that you have either interviewed Gislason, are making the quote up or are ripping off another on-line source.