Rooney or Sigurðsson?

[tim cahill]

Wouldn't be massively keen on either really. At same time wouldn't be massively disappointed if we signed one of them. Rooney would be less of a fee but more in wages. Sigurdsson the opposite (but younger). But I think, of the two and as a club, we'd be more inclined to go for Rooney.

Why wouldn't you want sigurdsson??

 

[Martino Robertez]

Both if we have the money.

We'll need the bigger improved squad next year for those tricky Thursday night ties in Gibraltar.

 

[bflefc]

Both.

I've always been a greedy, needy git

 

[maccavennie]

good poll, I've plumped for Gylfi due to his set piece deliveries and probably get a few more seasons out of him.

 

[Groucho]

As both feature in transfer rumours, which would you prefer to have at the club?

Hey why not both for squad depth?

 

[Deulofeumygod]

How are people voting for Rooney? Mind boggling

 

[Stutheblue]

Why wouldn't you want sigurdsson??

I wouldn't mind him, but he's not one I'm dead keen on. I know he's great at set pieces, but he's not the quickest. Whether he would push us to top 4, I don't know. I think if we'd got him when he left Spurs to go back to Swansea, then maybe. So it could be his age and the price we'd have to pay.
At the end of the day its not my money, and he would be an addition to the squad, but I wouldn't be bothered if we never got him either.

 

[Darth Toffeeman]

I voted neither. Not that they both would not improve us, Gylfi might not be as productive elsewhere as teams do not park the bus v Swansea.
Good player though he is.
Rooney had his chance here and left to give his prime years to Man U. He is not required now.

I just think Barkley can become the player we all want and we could go for someone younger. Tielemans for example.

 

[Groucho]

I voted neither. Not that they both would not improve us, Gylfi might not be as productive elsewhere as teams do not park the bus v Swansea.
Good player though he is.
Rooney had his chance here and left to give his prime years to Man U. He is not required now.

I just think Barkley can become the player we all want and we could go for someone younger. Tielemans for example.

Fair points

 

[nsno-chris]

Barkley is better than both, so neither.

Rooney's profile would still be a beneficial boost for us and he may find an extra spark in his game. But it's a maybe

Gylfi, I don't get. He's never had to deal with a situation like yesterday when a team has everyone behind the ball. He's an ace deadball specialist and does seem to excel when the game is wide open

Aim higher to compliment Ross, because he's streets ahead of the 2 mentioned

 

[Deleted member 28206]

I never expected to see any 'Neither' votes

This needs to be in every voting system. Particularly parliamentary.

 

[ianefc]

Rooney is completely finished. He's too slow. So in that case, it has to be the other fella. Although he was a flop at Spurs.

 

[Eggsyblueskin]

Neither. I would prefer younger and better additions than these two.

 

[Bluebonic]

I would take either and voted both. I cannot undertand people saying Rooney or Gylfi would bring nothing to the squad? The major statement for this club or any other club, is not so much how good your first 11 is, but how good a bench you can boast! Those two would i prove our squad ( and therefore our bench) immensely. If we get European football next season, we much have the squad to cope with it as well as the domestic competitions, if we have any realistic hope of silverware! Buy them both, plus ten others say I, make it happen Mosh damn you!

 

[Neiziro]

Siggy. It's not even a contest.