Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Rumours Rumours - Summer 2021 edition (Deadline Day from p814)

1663664666668669868

Comments

  • cabbles said:
    AndyG said:
    Rothko said:
    shine166 said:
    Can everyone thats saying we are obviously refusing to pay wages, at least acknowledge that TS is spending his own money, while the Ipswich owner is spending the money of others ? 
    Exactly, very easy to spend Karen from Ohio 401k then your own money 
    I do find this whole pension investment thing at Ipswich very interesting. I like alot of people have a SIPP and through that own some commercial property. When one of them need some maintenance the pension administrator insists I get 3 quotes for anything I spend from my SIPP. This is slightly annoying as I own a building maintenance company lol, but that is the job of a pension administrator and why I pay them their fees. How on earth has the administrator of that American fund approved investment into a football club in the uk ?
    The pension fund has not made a direct investment in the club, it is has passed over it would seem about 0.03%, an insignificant part, of its £13bn of assets to a modest US portfolio manager ORG Portfolio Management as a small play on the market to diversify returns with a bit of risk and a higher potential return.  

    It seems most of the investment will have been to acquire debt and property from Marcus Evans, so mostly fixed rate returns, and probably at tasty rates. That is the attraction for the pension fund.

    The 90% equity gives ORG overall control to appoint management and give a windfall if Ipswich get promoted and justify the level of risk being taken.  It does not mean there is a gravy train of cash pouring out of the pension fund.  It is an arms length investment via ORG and if it goes bad it will just be one of the many small higher risk investments that statistically will go bad for the pension fund.

    The pension fund will not be involved in the day to day running of the club, or writing cheques for Paul Cook, that is down to the management team.  ORG is 90% shareholder but only has one representative sitting on the board.  That is not the set up if you gave the club your magic porridge pot.

    The management team calling the shots and spunking money on players are the 3 yanks who own "Three Lions Fund" which has a 5% investment and the CEO who is ex West Brom CEO.  If it goes bad these will be the fall guys who ORG will blame for losing money for their client pension fund.  ORG is not playing with its own money and it will not throw good money after bad on behalf of its client.

    The idea that the pension fund is writing cheques for Paul Cook, or that he has access to an unlimited source of money is fanciful.  

    Paul Cook has been given the keys to the sweet shop, but when he runs out of sweets and the club is still in League 1 he will be stuffed even if the ultimate owner does have £13bn of assets.


    How does ORG/the pension fund make a return on its investment?  I know the club could make money if they reach the Premier League, but how does that equate to an ROI for the fund?  Is it going to be similar to the Glazers at Man Utd? 
    It’s a roll of the dice by the look of it. Thought that you would have got better odds at the casino

  • cabbles said:
    AndyG said:
    Rothko said:
    shine166 said:
    Can everyone thats saying we are obviously refusing to pay wages, at least acknowledge that TS is spending his own money, while the Ipswich owner is spending the money of others ? 
    Exactly, very easy to spend Karen from Ohio 401k then your own money 
    I do find this whole pension investment thing at Ipswich very interesting. I like alot of people have a SIPP and through that own some commercial property. When one of them need some maintenance the pension administrator insists I get 3 quotes for anything I spend from my SIPP. This is slightly annoying as I own a building maintenance company lol, but that is the job of a pension administrator and why I pay them their fees. How on earth has the administrator of that American fund approved investment into a football club in the uk ?
    The pension fund has not made a direct investment in the club, it is has passed over it would seem about 0.03%, an insignificant part, of its £13bn of assets to a modest US portfolio manager ORG Portfolio Management as a small play on the market to diversify returns with a bit of risk and a higher potential return.  

    It seems most of the investment will have been to acquire debt and property from Marcus Evans, so mostly fixed rate returns, and probably at tasty rates. That is the attraction for the pension fund.

    The 90% equity gives ORG overall control to appoint management and give a windfall if Ipswich get promoted and justify the level of risk being taken.  It does not mean there is a gravy train of cash pouring out of the pension fund.  It is an arms length investment via ORG and if it goes bad it will just be one of the many small higher risk investments that statistically will go bad for the pension fund.

    The pension fund will not be involved in the day to day running of the club, or writing cheques for Paul Cook, that is down to the management team.  ORG is 90% shareholder but only has one representative sitting on the board.  That is not the set up if you gave the club your magic porridge pot.

    The management team calling the shots and spunking money on players are the 3 yanks who own "Three Lions Fund" which has a 5% investment and the CEO who is ex West Brom CEO.  If it goes bad these will be the fall guys who ORG will blame for losing money for their client pension fund.  ORG is not playing with its own money and it will not throw good money after bad on behalf of its client.

    The idea that the pension fund is writing cheques for Paul Cook, or that he has access to an unlimited source of money is fanciful.  

    Paul Cook has been given the keys to the sweet shop, but when he runs out of sweets and the club is still in League 1 he will be stuffed even if the ultimate owner does have £13bn of assets.


    How does ORG/the pension fund make a return on its investment?  I know the club could make money if they reach the Premier League, but how does that equate to an ROI for the fund?  Is it going to be similar to the Glazers at Man Utd? 
    That’s exactly it, as Dippenhall, it one high risk investment for the pension fund. Many funds have a high risk component. The story alway was that if 1 in 5 worked you made a profit even after writing off the other 4. It’s a bundle of cash for Ipswich, and a very small financial hit for the fund if it doesn’t work. But it not a cash stream. If they don’t succeed this year, or maybe next, the money will dry up quickly. 
  • cabbles said:
    AndyG said:
    Rothko said:
    shine166 said:
    Can everyone thats saying we are obviously refusing to pay wages, at least acknowledge that TS is spending his own money, while the Ipswich owner is spending the money of others ? 
    Exactly, very easy to spend Karen from Ohio 401k then your own money 
    I do find this whole pension investment thing at Ipswich very interesting. I like alot of people have a SIPP and through that own some commercial property. When one of them need some maintenance the pension administrator insists I get 3 quotes for anything I spend from my SIPP. This is slightly annoying as I own a building maintenance company lol, but that is the job of a pension administrator and why I pay them their fees. How on earth has the administrator of that American fund approved investment into a football club in the uk ?
    The pension fund has not made a direct investment in the club, it is has passed over it would seem about 0.03%, an insignificant part, of its £13bn of assets to a modest US portfolio manager ORG Portfolio Management as a small play on the market to diversify returns with a bit of risk and a higher potential return.  

    It seems most of the investment will have been to acquire debt and property from Marcus Evans, so mostly fixed rate returns, and probably at tasty rates. That is the attraction for the pension fund.

    The 90% equity gives ORG overall control to appoint management and give a windfall if Ipswich get promoted and justify the level of risk being taken.  It does not mean there is a gravy train of cash pouring out of the pension fund.  It is an arms length investment via ORG and if it goes bad it will just be one of the many small higher risk investments that statistically will go bad for the pension fund.

    The pension fund will not be involved in the day to day running of the club, or writing cheques for Paul Cook, that is down to the management team.  ORG is 90% shareholder but only has one representative sitting on the board.  That is not the set up if you gave the club your magic porridge pot.

    The management team calling the shots and spunking money on players are the 3 yanks who own "Three Lions Fund" which has a 5% investment and the CEO who is ex West Brom CEO.  If it goes bad these will be the fall guys who ORG will blame for losing money for their client pension fund.  ORG is not playing with its own money and it will not throw good money after bad on behalf of its client.

    The idea that the pension fund is writing cheques for Paul Cook, or that he has access to an unlimited source of money is fanciful.  

    Paul Cook has been given the keys to the sweet shop, but when he runs out of sweets and the club is still in League 1 he will be stuffed even if the ultimate owner does have £13bn of assets.


    How does ORG/the pension fund make a return on its investment?  I know the club could make money if they reach the Premier League, but how does that equate to an ROI for the fund?  Is it going to be similar to the Glazers at Man Utd? 
    I assume a short term business plan. Go hard quick, chuck say £50-100M at promotion to the PL, if it works sell for £200M, if it doesn't write it off as a bad experience and go after the realization of the fixed assets (land/players) hard to get out with the smallest loss possible I assume?
  • Sage said:
    Jack Tucker was approached but Gills asked for too much. We went in early doors but haven't been back since. Tucker is keen to join us. 
    Maybe this is one we aim to revisit near the end of the window hoping that they become realistic and we get the player for a lower fee.

    Not a clue if we went in for Tucker, but most certainly the type of player we should be looking at.

    As another option, he’d allow us to play 3 at the back if we signed an attacking left back too. That would mean we could be creative with who the midfield pairing is and have DJ and Kirk either side of Stockley. 
    I think 3-5-2 (or a hybrid of it) is where we should head and Gunter will be more than capable as the right sided CH in this system. Key is getting a decent LWB.
  • edited August 2021
    Maccn05 said:
    MrBurns said:


    This is the kind of thing the recruitment team and TS are up against. 

    Expectations have been set so high, no matter what good business we do, it will be seen as “being done on the cheap” by a vocal section of the fan base. 

    Not digging out this specific poster but it does show how some fans are living in a completely different reality. 
    Tucker for £0.5m LOL
    So to be open this was my post on Twitter.

    My intention was simply to create some debate over who you’d like us to sign if we did spend bit mainly about the balance between do you spend the money and push for promotion and the extra £6m it delivers or do you do it on a budget and continue to lose £5-10m each season of you don’t go up?

    Effectively what’s more cost effective / the best way. Not a serious demand of TS - and anyone who thinks it was needs to remove the stick from up their arse!

    If you read the full thread you can clearly see I say I don’t expect this to happen at all. It’s just some fun, musings, ideas.

    But it also Shows one of the biggest problems - our fanbase is divided right now between ‘The realists’ or the ‘Cult of Sandgaard’ or whatever you want to call it. I try sit in the middle-ish But it’s pretty nasty on the socials.

    If anyone posts anything on socials it just becomes a mud slinging match, point scoring with people trying to mug people off and a battle between the two sides. Our fan base isn’t a nice place right now, largely instigated by TS’s ridiculous claims. As evidenced on here by the comments to my post and it’s why I rarely post anymore after trying to get involved with this ‘community’

    The names selected were simply players I rate I have no ideas on the fees, I’m just a fan. But for your information I was told by some people who have a direct line in that yeah we did hold discussions with Tucker (no fee agreed) and we did discuss a deal when Charles (he was interested but wants a Champ move, if not would consider us) so is it really so ridiculous or living in another reality?

    … and yeah I really do love FM have played it successfully for 30 years particularly on my business travels 👍🏼

    So chill the F out people it was just a bit of fun. It’s only football!
    If only football was as simple as spending a bit of money and getting promotion. What if you spend loads of money and push for promotion and then don't go up?

    Tell that to Derby, Sheffield Wednesday or Sunderland spending their 4th consecutive season in this division.
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited August 2021
    Scoham said:
    Chunes said:
    I mean... I just prefer to take people at their word. If the owner comes out and says we're probably just making loan signings, then isn't that likely the truth? I don't buy into these 'hidden agendas' it just seems like people hearing what they want to hear. 

    People were saying similar when Bowyer said we didn't want another CB, saying he was actually just trying to get the prices down. No, turns out he just didn't want another CB! 
    It’s more about managing expectations of fans, players, agents etc than a hidden agenda.

    We’ve always known we’d make loan signings towards the end of the window, that hasn’t changed.

    Bowyer was probably more honest than most. Managers are careful how they word their comments all the time - do you really believe Adkins is happy to have 3 full backs for a full season with Gunter covering Purrington?
    Those things you've mentioned are what I meant by having a 'hidden agenda'. 

    Looking back at Adkins comment about signing a left-back, sounds unclear to me: "It’s something that we’ll talk about and have a look at but we’ve got Adam Matthews and Chris Gunter who can both play in that left-back position."

    Do you remember during a certain transfer window when Bowyer said (in about five interviews): "We're not signing a striker." And it was going mad on here, people saying we definitely were, he was just trying to manage agent fees, wages, etc... Even the memes were rolling out. And... we didn't sign a striker! 

    If CL can do that with Bowyer, who is more honest than most, there should be a bit of a 'RED ALERT' when this process of reinterpretation starts up again.

    The one word I could hold onto in the TS interview is "probably." He said they would probably be loans. So perhaps there is a glimmer of business elsewhere. But his other comments seem pretty clear cut to me.
  • Signing a new team is very easy when you just get to make up how much you think a player would cost. Personally I think we should get Messi £0.5m, Pogba £1.1m and van Dijk £0.4m. I haven't actually enquired about the players myself, but I've decided that's how much they'll cost so that's what it is. Get your finger out Sandgaard, these are a bargain
    Ipswich have signed nearly 2 teams thus far so it can be done.
    And they got rid of two teams as well there still 7 players short of players out to players in 
  • “ I try sit in the middle-ish”

    “ largely instigated by TS’s ridiculous claims.”

    Um. 

    But isn’t that that middle???

    I think lots of thing TS has done have been spot on and I think a few things he's don’t haven’t - like increasing expectations based on  outlandish declarations?
  • Maccn05 said:
    MrBurns said:


    This is the kind of thing the recruitment team and TS are up against. 

    Expectations have been set so high, no matter what good business we do, it will be seen as “being done on the cheap” by a vocal section of the fan base. 

    Not digging out this specific poster but it does show how some fans are living in a completely different reality. 
    Tucker for £0.5m LOL
    So to be open this was my post on Twitter.

    My intention was simply to create some debate over who you’d like us to sign if we did spend bit mainly about the balance between do you spend the money and push for promotion and the extra £6m it delivers or do you do it on a budget and continue to lose £5-10m each season of you don’t go up?

    Effectively what’s more cost effective / the best way. Not a serious demand of TS - and anyone who thinks it was needs to remove the stick from up their arse!

    If you read the full thread you can clearly see I say I don’t expect this to happen at all. It’s just some fun, musings, ideas.

    But it also Shows one of the biggest problems - our fanbase is divided right now between ‘The realists’ or the ‘Cult of Sandgaard’ or whatever you want to call it. I try sit in the middle-ish But it’s pretty nasty on the socials.

    If anyone posts anything on socials it just becomes a mud slinging match, point scoring with people trying to mug people off and a battle between the two sides. Our fan base isn’t a nice place right now, largely instigated by TS’s ridiculous claims. As evidenced on here by the comments to my post and it’s why I rarely post anymore after trying to get involved with this ‘community’

    The names selected were simply players I rate I have no ideas on the fees, I’m just a fan. But for your information I was told by some people who have a direct line in that yeah we did hold discussions with Tucker (no fee agreed) and we did discuss a deal when Charles (he was interested but wants a Champ move, if not would consider us) so is it really so ridiculous or living in another reality?

    … and yeah I really do love FM have played it successfully for 30 years particularly on my business travels 👍🏼

    So chill the F out people it was just a bit of fun. It’s only football!
    Divided fan base which you’ve added fuel to the fire with needless comments on TS
    So we can’t challenge anything TS says or does… we just blindly agree because it’s TS?

    But well done ignore everything I wrote just to summarise in that way. Your a great example of what I described 👍🏼
  • Just 14 days till the widow shuts,surely we are in for at least two signings,time to pull our finger out and Get some in 
  • cabbles said:
    AndyG said:
    Rothko said:
    shine166 said:
    Can everyone thats saying we are obviously refusing to pay wages, at least acknowledge that TS is spending his own money, while the Ipswich owner is spending the money of others ? 
    Exactly, very easy to spend Karen from Ohio 401k then your own money 
    I do find this whole pension investment thing at Ipswich very interesting. I like alot of people have a SIPP and through that own some commercial property. When one of them need some maintenance the pension administrator insists I get 3 quotes for anything I spend from my SIPP. This is slightly annoying as I own a building maintenance company lol, but that is the job of a pension administrator and why I pay them their fees. How on earth has the administrator of that American fund approved investment into a football club in the uk ?
    The pension fund has not made a direct investment in the club, it is has passed over it would seem about 0.03%, an insignificant part, of its £13bn of assets to a modest US portfolio manager ORG Portfolio Management as a small play on the market to diversify returns with a bit of risk and a higher potential return.  

    It seems most of the investment will have been to acquire debt and property from Marcus Evans, so mostly fixed rate returns, and probably at tasty rates. That is the attraction for the pension fund.

    The 90% equity gives ORG overall control to appoint management and give a windfall if Ipswich get promoted and justify the level of risk being taken.  It does not mean there is a gravy train of cash pouring out of the pension fund.  It is an arms length investment via ORG and if it goes bad it will just be one of the many small higher risk investments that statistically will go bad for the pension fund.

    The pension fund will not be involved in the day to day running of the club, or writing cheques for Paul Cook, that is down to the management team.  ORG is 90% shareholder but only has one representative sitting on the board.  That is not the set up if you gave the club your magic porridge pot.

    The management team calling the shots and spunking money on players are the 3 yanks who own "Three Lions Fund" which has a 5% investment and the CEO who is ex West Brom CEO.  If it goes bad these will be the fall guys who ORG will blame for losing money for their client pension fund.  ORG is not playing with its own money and it will not throw good money after bad on behalf of its client.

    The idea that the pension fund is writing cheques for Paul Cook, or that he has access to an unlimited source of money is fanciful.  

    Paul Cook has been given the keys to the sweet shop, but when he runs out of sweets and the club is still in League 1 he will be stuffed even if the ultimate owner does have £13bn of assets.


    How does ORG/the pension fund make a return on its investment?  I know the club could make money if they reach the Premier League, but how does that equate to an ROI for the fund?  Is it going to be similar to the Glazers at Man Utd? 
    I assume a short term business plan. Go hard quick, chuck say £50-100M at promotion to the PL, if it works sell for £200M, if it doesn't write it off as a bad experience and go after the realization of the fixed assets (land/players) hard to get out with the smallest loss possible I assume?
    Aah okay.  So, by selling.  I was wondering what their mechanics would be for physically making the money back, if they owned Ipswich, but what you’ve said makes sense
  • Sponsored links:


  • The Ipswich plan does seem like one of these " throw money at it to get out of this league" moves. I know they've covered a lot of their fees in player sales , but it's a very risky move from the owners if it doesn't work. 
  • Things are going to get more heated the closer it gets to the transfer deadline without us signing more players, whatever will be will be, I can’t control it, probably lots of clubs fans would like their clubs to be signing more players (except Ipswich and Wigan).

    All I can do is continue to support the club in what ever way possible.

    Good luck to the lads and lasses going to MK tonight, I hope your efforts are rewarded.
  • Maccn05 said:
    “ I try sit in the middle-ish”

    “ largely instigated by TS’s ridiculous claims.”

    Um. 

    But isn’t that that middle???

    I think lots of thing TS has done have been spot on and I think a few things he's don’t haven’t - like increasing expectations based on  outlandish declarations?
    The fan base was divided long before TS arrived and always will be, this isn’t unique to Charlton. 
    It isn't even unique to football. 
  • Maccn05 said:
    Maccn05 said:
    MrBurns said:


    This is the kind of thing the recruitment team and TS are up against. 

    Expectations have been set so high, no matter what good business we do, it will be seen as “being done on the cheap” by a vocal section of the fan base. 

    Not digging out this specific poster but it does show how some fans are living in a completely different reality. 
    Tucker for £0.5m LOL
    So to be open this was my post on Twitter.

    My intention was simply to create some debate over who you’d like us to sign if we did spend bit mainly about the balance between do you spend the money and push for promotion and the extra £6m it delivers or do you do it on a budget and continue to lose £5-10m each season of you don’t go up?

    Effectively what’s more cost effective / the best way. Not a serious demand of TS - and anyone who thinks it was needs to remove the stick from up their arse!

    If you read the full thread you can clearly see I say I don’t expect this to happen at all. It’s just some fun, musings, ideas.

    But it also Shows one of the biggest problems - our fanbase is divided right now between ‘The realists’ or the ‘Cult of Sandgaard’ or whatever you want to call it. I try sit in the middle-ish But it’s pretty nasty on the socials.

    If anyone posts anything on socials it just becomes a mud slinging match, point scoring with people trying to mug people off and a battle between the two sides. Our fan base isn’t a nice place right now, largely instigated by TS’s ridiculous claims. As evidenced on here by the comments to my post and it’s why I rarely post anymore after trying to get involved with this ‘community’

    The names selected were simply players I rate I have no ideas on the fees, I’m just a fan. But for your information I was told by some people who have a direct line in that yeah we did hold discussions with Tucker (no fee agreed) and we did discuss a deal when Charles (he was interested but wants a Champ move, if not would consider us) so is it really so ridiculous or living in another reality?

    … and yeah I really do love FM have played it successfully for 30 years particularly on my business travels 👍🏼

    So chill the F out people it was just a bit of fun. It’s only football!
    Divided fan base which you’ve added fuel to the fire with needless comments on TS
    So we can’t challenge anything TS says or does… we just blindly agree because it’s TS?

    But well done ignore everything I wrote just to summarise in that way. Your a great example of what I described 👍🏼
    Telling the guy how to spend his money and act as chief scout on Twitter. Not long before schools go back and social media won’t be full of this rubbish 👏🏻 
  • Chunes said:
    Scoham said:
    Chunes said:
    I mean... I just prefer to take people at their word. If the owner comes out and says we're probably just making loan signings, then isn't that likely the truth? I don't buy into these 'hidden agendas' it just seems like people hearing what they want to hear. 

    People were saying similar when Bowyer said we didn't want another CB, saying he was actually just trying to get the prices down. No, turns out he just didn't want another CB! 
    It’s more about managing expectations of fans, players, agents etc than a hidden agenda.

    We’ve always known we’d make loan signings towards the end of the window, that hasn’t changed.

    Bowyer was probably more honest than most. Managers are careful how they word their comments all the time - do you really believe Adkins is happy to have 3 full backs for a full season with Gunter covering Purrington?
    Those things you've mentioned are what I meant by having a 'hidden agenda'. 

    Looking back at Adkins comment about signing a left-back, sounds unclear to me: "It’s something that we’ll talk about and have a look at but we’ve got Adam Matthews and Chris Gunter who can both play in that left-back position."

    Do you remember during a certain transfer window when Bowyer said (in about five interviews): "We're not signing a striker." And it was going mad on here, people saying we definitely were, he was just trying to manage agent fees, wages, etc... Even the memes were rolling out. And... we didn't sign a striker! 

    If CL can do that with Bowyer, who is more honest than most, there should be a bit of a 'RED ALERT' when this process of reinterpretation starts up again.

    The one word I could hold onto in the TS interview is "probably." He said they would probably be loans. So perhaps there is a glimmer of business elsewhere. But his other comments seem pretty clear cut to me.
    On signing a left back Adkins also said they’d talk about it rather than completely rule it out. This was late July, if we were waiting for a loan that would have been 3-5 weeks away. 

    What the comments made clear is that we weren’t immediately going out to sign someone. I find it hard to believe our plan really is to go with our right backs and Roddy as cover for Purrington, regardless of what NA said after a friendly.

    In the last few seasons we’ve always aimed for two players per position, with the salary cap gone and us aiming for promotion it would be strange to go with only one senior left back.

    “I was very happy with Chris Gunter [playing at left-back against Palace],” added Adkins.

    “We knew that, going into the season, both Adam Matthews and Chris Gunter have played in the left-back position before so I always knew that was a position we didn’t need to worry about too much.

    “Young Jacob Roddy did well at the weekend and again he’s come on and had 20 minutes there. It’s something that we’ll talk about and have a look at but we’ve got Adam Matthews and Chris Gunter who can both play in that left-back position.

  • edited August 2021
    Usually against loans but maybe that’s due more to the lack of quality of player we’ve had recently. The fact is most clubs outside the PL and certainly outside the Championship need loanees to field a decent team. 

    I hope Gallen is still leading player recruitment. We need more gems like Cullen, Gallagher and Bielik. 
  • Maccn05 said:
    Maccn05 said:
    MrBurns said:


    This is the kind of thing the recruitment team and TS are up against. 

    Expectations have been set so high, no matter what good business we do, it will be seen as “being done on the cheap” by a vocal section of the fan base. 

    Not digging out this specific poster but it does show how some fans are living in a completely different reality. 
    Tucker for £0.5m LOL
    So to be open this was my post on Twitter.

    My intention was simply to create some debate over who you’d like us to sign if we did spend bit mainly about the balance between do you spend the money and push for promotion and the extra £6m it delivers or do you do it on a budget and continue to lose £5-10m each season of you don’t go up?

    Effectively what’s more cost effective / the best way. Not a serious demand of TS - and anyone who thinks it was needs to remove the stick from up their arse!

    If you read the full thread you can clearly see I say I don’t expect this to happen at all. It’s just some fun, musings, ideas.

    But it also Shows one of the biggest problems - our fanbase is divided right now between ‘The realists’ or the ‘Cult of Sandgaard’ or whatever you want to call it. I try sit in the middle-ish But it’s pretty nasty on the socials.

    If anyone posts anything on socials it just becomes a mud slinging match, point scoring with people trying to mug people off and a battle between the two sides. Our fan base isn’t a nice place right now, largely instigated by TS’s ridiculous claims. As evidenced on here by the comments to my post and it’s why I rarely post anymore after trying to get involved with this ‘community’

    The names selected were simply players I rate I have no ideas on the fees, I’m just a fan. But for your information I was told by some people who have a direct line in that yeah we did hold discussions with Tucker (no fee agreed) and we did discuss a deal when Charles (he was interested but wants a Champ move, if not would consider us) so is it really so ridiculous or living in another reality?

    … and yeah I really do love FM have played it successfully for 30 years particularly on my business travels 👍🏼

    So chill the F out people it was just a bit of fun. It’s only football!
    Divided fan base which you’ve added fuel to the fire with needless comments on TS
    So we can’t challenge anything TS says or does… we just blindly agree because it’s TS?

    But well done ignore everything I wrote just to summarise in that way. Your a great example of what I described 👍🏼
    Telling the guy how to spend his money and act as chief scout on Twitter. Not long before schools go back and social media won’t be full of this rubbish 👏🏻 
    Where was I being TS’s chief scout and telling him how to spend his money 🤣🤣🤣

    I said it was a bit of fun and bit of fantasy football and what it.

    You really need to calm down, breathe and try to debate rather than just chucking out insults & snidey comments
  • Sage said:
    Jack Tucker was approached but Gills asked for too much. We went in early doors but haven't been back since. Tucker is keen to join us. 
    Maybe this is one we aim to revisit near the end of the window hoping that they become realistic and we get the player for a lower fee.

    Not a clue if we went in for Tucker, but most certainly the type of player we should be looking at.

    As another option, he’d allow us to play 3 at the back if we signed an attacking left back too. That would mean we could be creative with who the midfield pairing is and have DJ and Kirk either side of Stockley. 
    I think 3-5-2 (or a hybrid of it) is where we should head and Gunter will be more than capable as the right sided CH in this system. Key is getting a decent LWB.
    Gunter was shit at CB last season. 
  • ridiculous comment
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!