Posting without having read in case this has already been shared… but we could’ve had this kid if we hadn’t mugged spurs off with Nile John last season.
I've left it a few days, but I'm still upset about deadline day. We now have a manager who I & most others feel can get us out of this league & take the club forward. Sandgaard just needed to back him with a couple of signings on deadline day to add extra quality and depth to the squad, but he ballsed it up.
Feels like such a missed opportunity. So frustrating
There seems to be a lot of chat about Clare , who personally I think is an excellent player and rumours of championship clubs being interested but our problem is left back , we have tried to make Clayden into a full back who was a winger - he was at fault for the first 2 goals on Saturday - watch the highlights carefully - he is still young but he is not a full back and the goals are coming down that side - we need to sort that out first - it’s great having a left back who can get forward but he needs to be a defender first .
Unfortunately, he was at fault for all 3 goals. The 3rd goal he was marking their player who received the short free kick. Their player ran and received the ball and Clayden was far too slow to simply run with him. Next thing the ball is in the net. Apologies to Clayden a young lad thrown in at the deep end, but all 3 goals were mainly down to him (obviously not totally down to him).
The problem is, if we lose our better players in the second window, doesn't that take us backwards not forwards.
This - I doubt Garner will be here this time next season either.
Unless we are promoted, I see Garner as being a one season wonder, after all he didn’t hang around at Swindon to have another go. Depending on his and the team's response to injuries and the poor end to the transfer window, his departure could be a lot sooner.
The problem is, if we lose our better players in the second window, doesn't that take us backwards not forwards.
This - I doubt Garner will be here this time next season either.
Unless we are promoted, I see Garner as being a one season wonder, after all he didn’t hang around at Swindon to have another go. Depending on his and the team's response to injuries and the poor end to the transfer window, his departure could be a lot sooner.
I think our ‘potential’ vs Swindon’s and no disrespect to them, is greater, so another year may be of appeal, but if unsupported in building the right balanced squad, I regretfully think you are right.
The last day chain is so reliant on the first link to work and as usual we came a cropper. I wonder if Bonne was the first choice ? No Natural LB option, the bizarre situation with Inniss getting another contract despite never managing more than 15 League games for Cafc in a season and a history of breaking down at most of his loan clubs. Chuks Aneke would have been a bargain if he could emulate the 34 games he was in the squad when super sub; Worse this time around for injury. We needed a forward who could play in any of the front 3 positions; even central as that is where a lot of the chances occur.
Other that the Lincoln game when Conor Washington missed 4 good chances, the games at the valley I went to under JJ, Conor was scoring in and we won most of them with clean sheets. Apparently they were all shit games as JJ tenure and Adkins tenure are joined together in the write off of 13th place. (Better than 22nd after 13 games) I really enjoyed the 2-0 win home games at the valley but when history is rewritten this often happens. I was looking forward to the upgrade on Conor but.....
I just felt flat like the decent players we have who thought we might bring in a player or 2 on the last day to give the squad a boost as we are short. Seeing Steve Gallen's angst and Ben Garner bemused with the lack of success on the last day.
The interview with Garner was a two way street and I can't believe this is what was sold to Ben from Sandgaard ?
My understanding is that Bonne was agreed days in advance with Gallen despite TS then trying to renegotiate it himself, but was always a back up. Thing is, QPR knew that Charlton’s other options were unrealistic so they always expected the deal to come forward. Their end say it was over hours before Charlton confirmed it, although that doesn’t tally with Jaiyesimi being pulled back from Mansfield very late.
QPR offered Bonne a deal to make the Charlton deal permanent. Bonne refused and Charlton pulled out after a stand off.
In my opinion, everybody wins except QPR. I have some sketchy details , but I know a figure of 25% was involved. I really don’t know if QPR offered him 25% of his contract or not. Can’t ask my source for more details than this - ‘ QPR offered to pay up his contract to 25% but he turned it down’.
Sorry if I waffled a bit there, maybe someone can explain exactly what this means as I’m not totally sure. However, I do know the information is right.
None of the above is true as QPR manager has admitted today that the deal fell through because they failed to get the striker they wanted so .. pulled the Bonne deal nothing more nothing less .. people trying to make something out of lies
My source sticks by this and says that Bonne told him QPR tried to shaft him and he refused. I stick by my comments ..
The problem is, if we lose our better players in the second window, doesn't that take us backwards not forwards.
This - I doubt Garner will be here this time next season either.
Unless we are promoted, I see Garner as being a one season wonder, after all he didn’t hang around at Swindon to have another go. Depending on his and the team's response to injuries and the poor end to the transfer window, his departure could be a lot sooner.
I think our ‘potential’ vs Swindon’s and no disrespect to them, is greater, so another year may be of appeal, but if unsupported in building the right balanced squad, I regretfully think you are right.
If TS is around next summer, i'm not sure our potential is there. No transfer budget to work with, thin squad. Not sure how we move on from that.
Posting without having read in case this has already been shared… but we could’ve had this kid if we hadn’t mugged spurs off with Nile John last season.
I love leaburn so maybe it’s right we didn’t need another 18 year old. But also we can see from the palace kid that premier league Teenagers tend to be a lot better/ readier than our own. We need another striker from somewhere anyway, and I’m just worried about how far our squad is behind the other bigger clubs in this league
Aren't Clare and Dobson (extension dependant) out of contract next summer? I'd expect to see some tempting championship offers come in for both in Jan, and I doubt either will want to stay should we not be challenging (or adding to the squad to mount that challenge).
Adding that free agent forward will seem pretty pointless should those two depart soon.
My understanding is that Bonne was agreed days in advance with Gallen despite TS then trying to renegotiate it himself, but was always a back up. Thing is, QPR knew that Charlton’s other options were unrealistic so they always expected the deal to come forward. Their end say it was over hours before Charlton confirmed it, although that doesn’t tally with Jaiyesimi being pulled back from Mansfield very late.
QPR offered Bonne a deal to make the Charlton deal permanent. Bonne refused and Charlton pulled out after a stand off.
In my opinion, everybody wins except QPR. I have some sketchy details , but I know a figure of 25% was involved. I really don’t know if QPR offered him 25% of his contract or not. Can’t ask my source for more details than this - ‘ QPR offered to pay up his contract to 25% but he turned it down’.
Sorry if I waffled a bit there, maybe someone can explain exactly what this means as I’m not totally sure. However, I do know the information is right.
None of the above is true as QPR manager has admitted today that the deal fell through because they failed to get the striker they wanted so .. pulled the Bonne deal nothing more nothing less .. people trying to make something out of lies
My source sticks by this and says that Bonne told him QPR tried to shaft him and he refused. I stick by my comments ..
I believe you as the statements clubs put out are rarely the whole truth of a transfer.
My first instinct was Bonne and his agent pulled the plug as why would he be forced out from a club to go to a club were many fans don't want him, it makes no sense? No insider information on this deal but have learnt the political football facts of life from Rhoys Wiggins just after he retired and in the last year mix with many agents, coaches, and heads of recruitment for Professional youth teams. Fragile ego's in a cut throat business and when you have that decent contract you really don't want to give it up. From Hibernian to Sutton these guy's have their own take on the nonsense that goes on with transfers. Plus one guy who looked as fit as a fiddle but was 70 this year and was a scout for Blackburn when they won the Premier.
Scouts come in all shapes and sizes and believe it or not there are some that are decent people ? Ok not many !
Aren't Clare and Dobson (extension dependant) out of contract next summer? I'd expect to see some tempting championship offers come in for both in Jan, and I doubt either will want to stay should we not be challenging (or adding to the squad to mount that challenge).
Adding that free agent forward will seem pretty pointless should those two depart soon.
They are though we have an optional 1 year extension for Dobson.
This 18-year-old is ready to start games but ours isn't?
If Leaburn were still at a Premier League club (which he probably should be, looking at him) then he'd likely be loaned out to L1 with the intention of playing.
The problem is, if we lose our better players in the second window, doesn't that take us backwards not forwards.
This - I doubt Garner will be here this time next season either.
Unless we are promoted, I see Garner as being a one season wonder, after all he didn’t hang around at Swindon to have another go. Depending on his and the team's response to injuries and the poor end to the transfer window, his departure could be a lot sooner.
I think our ‘potential’ vs Swindon’s and no disrespect to them, is greater, so another year may be of appeal, but if unsupported in building the right balanced squad, I regretfully think you are right.
I think we have to be careful not to exaggerate Garner's attractiveness to other clubs anyway. He seems a decent manager, but has achieved nothing yet. If we finish 8th, the world of football is hardly going to be fighting over him
Aren't Clare and Dobson (extension dependant) out of contract next summer? I'd expect to see some tempting championship offers come in for both in Jan, and I doubt either will want to stay should we not be challenging (or adding to the squad to mount that challenge).
Adding that free agent forward will seem pretty pointless should those two depart soon.
Leaburn, Dobson and Clare off in January would probably cover that 4 million shortfall quite nicely...
Not sure why my comments on Dobson and Clare I made 12 months ago are being brought up for discussion. Neither were any good at the start of last season, and although they turned their form around incredibly well and are far from being an issue in the current side, that’s not the issue. They proved a lot of people wrong. Good on them! However, one is playing out of position by necessity yet proving to be decent, the other is all about winning it back and the more Garner has time to implement his style, the less I’ll see the him being used. We got a taste of that already against Derby. Give it a few months or another transfer window and I can see it being a way we go forward under Garner. But those two are not an issue and not what the conversation is about. Using a comment and opinion from a year ago to devalue an opinion now is a bit frustrating.
Stockley has offered us nothing this season. He doesn’t possess the leadership skills on the pitch to take us up a level. He doesn’t press but when he does lots like he’s running through water, he’s constantly moaning at other players, like I’ve said before he doesn’t run in behind, his hold up play is actually poor for a man of his size, he’s not great with the ball at his feet, he’s often behind the play and unless we have patient build up and put the ball in the box, he doesn’t look threatening. I actually believe Davison would have offered us more so far because at least he’s willing to stretch a defence, he works hard, he’s less predictable.
We saw last season Stockley up front on his own is shocking and in a new style and system, I’ve seen nothing this season to change that.
So why keep playing him? Put Leaburn up there, put Stockley and maybe Kanu on the bench. I know people, and probably the club, don’t want to put too much pressure on Leaburn, but at this point, can he do any worse? We know he can run, we know he can hold the ball up and pass. Sure he might get outmuscled by some of the old hands, but at this point, what is there to lose by going that route.
It’s not Stockleys fault Garner keeps playing him.
It’s not Garners either.
Perhaps it is partially because he could tweak the system to play to Stockley's strengths, I accept where you are coming from though, the SMT got it wrong and TS has not backed him.
I find it intriguing that Adkins, Jackson and now Garner are sticking to one system on the whole and so far non of them were prepared to change or tweak a system. Even though they didn't/don't have the round pegs for round holes.
I am speaking only of Garner's situation (as it's sufficiently different I think to warrant it) but I would say that in his defence he's always tried to implement the system he's pushing and pretty much every signing we DID make was geared towards making that system work.
I'm fairly sure that if he'd known going in that he was not going to be given one of the key ingredients he might have come up with a different plan but it feels to me that he's had the metaphorical rug pulled out as much as we have, if not more.
I do agree with you on this and in fairness to Garner the realisation that he has been left with out the players he likely expected is fresh. Going forward though he needs to find a solution between now and January even if it means changing or tweaking the system. Else this is likely to unfold as it did under the previous 2 managers.
Aren't Clare and Dobson (extension dependant) out of contract next summer? I'd expect to see some tempting championship offers come in for both in Jan, and I doubt either will want to stay should we not be challenging (or adding to the squad to mount that challenge).
Adding that free agent forward will seem pretty pointless should those two depart soon.
Leaburn, Dobson and Clare off in January would probably cover that 4 million shortfall quite nicely...
There seems to be a lot of chat about Clare , who personally I think is an excellent player and rumours of championship clubs being interested but our problem is left back , we have tried to make Clayden into a full back who was a winger - he was at fault for the first 2 goals on Saturday - watch the highlights carefully - he is still young but he is not a full back and the goals are coming down that side - we need to sort that out first - it’s great having a left back who can get forward but he needs to be a defender first .
Unfortunately, he was at fault for all 3 goals. The 3rd goal he was marking their player who received the short free kick. Their player ran and received the ball and Clayden was far too slow to simply run with him. Next thing the ball is in the net. Apologies to Clayden a young lad thrown in at the deep end, but all 3 goals were mainly down to him (obviously not totally down to him).
In Clayden's defense he has very little experience at all, virtually none at full back and worst of all gets zero protection from the wage stealing pisstaker in front of him Charlie The Shirk Kirk Charles has been callously thrown to the dogs and left to fend for himself - on that context his performances are remarkable - better a team of eleven Claydens than ever see Kirk in Charlton red again
I still live in hope that we are playing roulette with deadline day. Things are certainly going down to the wire and I’m as certain in my own mind that we have a few moves and angles in mind…..but whether any of them come to fruition is of course another thing altogether. One thing leaving it so late is that deals can backfire and you end up with no one, or second or third choices at best! Personally, I wouldn’t mind us pitching in for Lewis Grabban.
Mmmmm……not at all pleased to say…….I told you so.😕
This 18-year-old is ready to start games but ours isn't?
If Leaburn were still at a Premier League club (which he probably should be, looking at him) then he'd likely be loaned out to L1 with the intention of playing.
A very good argument.
But he would not be expected to be leading the line and the saviour of the team. he would be coming into a side that is at least firing on all cylinders and showing good form through out the squad.
There seems to be a lot of chat about Clare , who personally I think is an excellent player and rumours of championship clubs being interested but our problem is left back , we have tried to make Clayden into a full back who was a winger - he was at fault for the first 2 goals on Saturday - watch the highlights carefully - he is still young but he is not a full back and the goals are coming down that side - we need to sort that out first - it’s great having a left back who can get forward but he needs to be a defender first .
Unfortunately, he was at fault for all 3 goals. The 3rd goal he was marking their player who received the short free kick. Their player ran and received the ball and Clayden was far too slow to simply run with him. Next thing the ball is in the net. Apologies to Clayden a young lad thrown in at the deep end, but all 3 goals were mainly down to him (obviously not totally down to him).
In Clayden's defense he has very little experience at all, virtually none at full back and worst of all gets zero protection from the wage stealing pisstaker in front of him Charlie The Shirk Kirk Charles has been callously thrown to the dogs and left to fend for himself - on that context his performances are remarkable - better a team of eleven Claydens than ever see Kirk in Charlton red again
Clayden looks more effective as a winger than Kirk. Once Sessignon/Egbo are back I would kick Kirk out and put Clayden on the wing.
My understanding is that Bonne was agreed days in advance with Gallen despite TS then trying to renegotiate it himself, but was always a back up. Thing is, QPR knew that Charlton’s other options were unrealistic so they always expected the deal to come forward. Their end say it was over hours before Charlton confirmed it, although that doesn’t tally with Jaiyesimi being pulled back from Mansfield very late.
QPR offered Bonne a deal to make the Charlton deal permanent. Bonne refused and Charlton pulled out after a stand off.
In my opinion, everybody wins except QPR. I have some sketchy details , but I know a figure of 25% was involved. I really don’t know if QPR offered him 25% of his contract or not. Can’t ask my source for more details than this - ‘ QPR offered to pay up his contract to 25% but he turned it down’.
Sorry if I waffled a bit there, maybe someone can explain exactly what this means as I’m not totally sure. However, I do know the information is right.
None of the above is true as QPR manager has admitted today that the deal fell through because they failed to get the striker they wanted so .. pulled the Bonne deal nothing more nothing less .. people trying to make something out of lies
My source sticks by this and says that Bonne told him QPR tried to shaft him and he refused. I stick by my comments ..
Sounds plausible. QPR tries to shaft him, he then reads what we say about him, refuses to leave, and promptly posts a silly little picture to get back at us!
What I like about Clayden is that he plays his game and I think it will mean he develops quickly into a decent player. We should factor in that he is not a left back and of course that he is still learning which is apparent sometimes but other times he looks good and grabs your attention. A poster suggested he might be better playing in Kirk's position but the issue of course is we don't have a left back to replace him with.
Not sure why my comments on Dobson and Clare I made 12 months ago are being brought up for discussion. Neither were any good at the start of last season, and although they turned their form around incredibly well and are far from being an issue in the current side, that’s not the issue. They proved a lot of people wrong. Good on them! However, one is playing out of position by necessity yet proving to be decent, the other is all about winning it back and the more Garner has time to implement his style, the less I’ll see the him being used. We got a taste of that already against Derby. Give it a few months or another transfer window and I can see it being a way we go forward under Garner. But those two are not an issue and not what the conversation is about. Using a comment and opinion from a year ago to devalue an opinion now is a bit frustrating.
Stockley has offered us nothing this season. He doesn’t possess the leadership skills on the pitch to take us up a level. He doesn’t press but when he does lots like he’s running through water, he’s constantly moaning at other players, like I’ve said before he doesn’t run in behind, his hold up play is actually poor for a man of his size, he’s not great with the ball at his feet, he’s often behind the play and unless we have patient build up and put the ball in the box, he doesn’t look threatening. I actually believe Davison would have offered us more so far because at least he’s willing to stretch a defence, he works hard, he’s less predictable.
We saw last season Stockley up front on his own is shocking and in a new style and system, I’ve seen nothing this season to change that.
So why keep playing him? Put Leaburn up there, put Stockley and maybe Kanu on the bench. I know people, and probably the club, don’t want to put too much pressure on Leaburn, but at this point, can he do any worse? We know he can run, we know he can hold the ball up and pass. Sure he might get outmuscled by some of the old hands, but at this point, what is there to lose by going that route.
It’s not Stockleys fault Garner keeps playing him.
It’s not Garners either.
Perhaps it is partially because he could tweak the system to play to Stockley's strengths, I accept where you are coming from though, the SMT got it wrong and TS has not backed him.
I find it intriguing that Adkins, Jackson and now Garner are sticking to one system on the whole and so far non of them were prepared to change or tweak a system. Even though they didn't/don't have the round pegs for round holes.
I am speaking only of Garner's situation (as it's sufficiently different I think to warrant it) but I would say that in his defence he's always tried to implement the system he's pushing and pretty much every signing we DID make was geared towards making that system work.
I'm fairly sure that if he'd known going in that he was not going to be given one of the key ingredients he might have come up with a different plan but it feels to me that he's had the metaphorical rug pulled out as much as we have, if not more.
I do agree with you on this and in fairness to Garner the realisation that he has been left with out the players he likely expected is fresh. Going forward though he needs to find a solution between now and January even if it means changing or tweaking the system. Else this is likely to unfold as it did under the previous 2 managers.
I actually wouldn't mind seeing Rak-Sakyi upfront with Stockley as an alternative formation, think Rak-Sakyi would cause havoc in the penalty area and he certainly as an eye for goal.
Posting without having read in case this has already been shared… but we could’ve had this kid if we hadn’t mugged spurs off with Nile John last season.
We have our own kid that has scored 2 in 122 mins of football
Yeah, but people don’t want to play our kids as they don’t have enough experience. I can’t imagine the whining we would have heard if we got a Spurs 18 year old on a loan.
There seems to be a lot of chat about Clare , who personally I think is an excellent player and rumours of championship clubs being interested but our problem is left back , we have tried to make Clayden into a full back who was a winger - he was at fault for the first 2 goals on Saturday - watch the highlights carefully - he is still young but he is not a full back and the goals are coming down that side - we need to sort that out first - it’s great having a left back who can get forward but he needs to be a defender first .
Unfortunately, he was at fault for all 3 goals. The 3rd goal he was marking their player who received the short free kick. Their player ran and received the ball and Clayden was far too slow to simply run with him. Next thing the ball is in the net. Apologies to Clayden a young lad thrown in at the deep end, but all 3 goals were mainly down to him (obviously not totally down to him).
In Clayden's defense he has very little experience at all, virtually none at full back and worst of all gets zero protection from the wage stealing pisstaker in front of him Charlie The Shirk Kirk Charles has been callously thrown to the dogs and left to fend for himself - on that context his performances are remarkable - better a team of eleven Claydens than ever see Kirk in Charlton red again
Clayden looks more effective as a winger than Kirk. Once Sessignon/Egbo are back I would kick Kirk out and put Clayden on the wing.
Clayden instead of CBT? Claydon would make a decent option on the bench when we have our injured players back.
There seems to be a lot of chat about Clare , who personally I think is an excellent player and rumours of championship clubs being interested but our problem is left back , we have tried to make Clayden into a full back who was a winger - he was at fault for the first 2 goals on Saturday - watch the highlights carefully - he is still young but he is not a full back and the goals are coming down that side - we need to sort that out first - it’s great having a left back who can get forward but he needs to be a defender first .
Unfortunately, he was at fault for all 3 goals. The 3rd goal he was marking their player who received the short free kick. Their player ran and received the ball and Clayden was far too slow to simply run with him. Next thing the ball is in the net. Apologies to Clayden a young lad thrown in at the deep end, but all 3 goals were mainly down to him (obviously not totally down to him).
In Clayden's defense he has very little experience at all, virtually none at full back and worst of all gets zero protection from the wage stealing pisstaker in front of him Charlie The Shirk Kirk Charles has been callously thrown to the dogs and left to fend for himself - on that context his performances are remarkable - better a team of eleven Claydens than ever see Kirk in Charlton red again
Clayden looks more effective as a winger than Kirk. Once Sessignon/Egbo are back I would kick Kirk out and put Clayden on the wing.
He might look it on the basis he runs up and down the line a lot, but he certainly isn't.
Posting without having read in case this has already been shared… but we could’ve had this kid if we hadn’t mugged spurs off with Nile John last season.
We have our own kid that has scored 2 in 122 mins of football
Yeah, but people don’t want to play our kids as they don’t have enough experience. I can’t imagine the whining we would have heard if we got a Spurs 18 year old on a loan.
It isn't that, you play them according to how ready they are. An 18 year old can absolutely be ready or may need a bit more nuturing. It just is what it is. I would imagine the coaches think say Kanu has to develop other areas of his game more to be effective and if that is the case, playing him other than a sub cameo here and there would not be sensible at this stage. Leaburn is effective in the role he is playing but has looked lost when leading the line. Maybe the formation has to be looked at - horses for courses and all that.
We all do it, but the players on the bench or not in the squad or in somebody else's squad are usually better when the first team is not performing.
There seems to be a lot of chat about Clare , who personally I think is an excellent player and rumours of championship clubs being interested but our problem is left back , we have tried to make Clayden into a full back who was a winger - he was at fault for the first 2 goals on Saturday - watch the highlights carefully - he is still young but he is not a full back and the goals are coming down that side - we need to sort that out first - it’s great having a left back who can get forward but he needs to be a defender first .
Unfortunately, he was at fault for all 3 goals. The 3rd goal he was marking their player who received the short free kick. Their player ran and received the ball and Clayden was far too slow to simply run with him. Next thing the ball is in the net. Apologies to Clayden a young lad thrown in at the deep end, but all 3 goals were mainly down to him (obviously not totally down to him).
In Clayden's defense he has very little experience at all, virtually none at full back and worst of all gets zero protection from the wage stealing pisstaker in front of him Charlie The Shirk Kirk Charles has been callously thrown to the dogs and left to fend for himself - on that context his performances are remarkable - better a team of eleven Claydens than ever see Kirk in Charlton red again
Clayden looks more effective as a winger than Kirk. Once Sessignon/Egbo are back I would kick Kirk out and put Clayden on the wing.
He might look it on the basis he runs up and down the line a lot, but he certainly isn't.
Massively agree. Kirk has had 1 bad game. Other than that he has created more than any of our other players and has 1 goal and 2 assists to his name already (and could have had more if Stockley could finish or Plymouths defender didn’t handball). Clayden is quick and direct but no where near the quality in possession and end product that Kirk can offer
Comments
Feels like such a missed opportunity. So frustrating
The 3rd goal he was marking their player who received the short free kick.
Their player ran and received the ball and Clayden was far too slow to simply run with him.
Next thing the ball is in the net.
Apologies to Clayden a young lad thrown in at the deep end, but all 3 goals were mainly down to him (obviously not totally down to him).
Depending on his and the team's response to injuries and the poor end to the transfer window, his departure could be a lot sooner.
No Natural LB option, the bizarre situation with Inniss getting another contract despite never managing more than 15 League games for Cafc in a season and a history of breaking down at most of his loan clubs.
Chuks Aneke would have been a bargain if he could emulate the 34 games he was in the squad when super sub; Worse this time around for injury. We needed a forward who could play in any of the front 3 positions; even central as that is where a lot of the chances occur.
Other that the Lincoln game when Conor Washington missed 4 good chances, the games at the valley I went to under JJ, Conor was scoring in and we won most of them with clean sheets. Apparently they were all shit games as JJ tenure and Adkins tenure are joined together in the write off of 13th place. (Better than 22nd after 13 games) I really enjoyed the 2-0 win home games at the valley but when history is rewritten this often happens. I was looking forward to the upgrade on Conor but.....
I just felt flat like the decent players we have who thought we might bring in a player or 2 on the last day to give the squad a boost as we are short. Seeing Steve Gallen's angst and Ben Garner bemused with the lack of success on the last day.
The interview with Garner was a two way street and I can't believe this is what was sold to Ben from Sandgaard ?
I love leaburn so maybe it’s right we didn’t need another 18 year old. But also we can see from the palace kid that premier league Teenagers tend to be a lot better/ readier than our own. We need another striker from somewhere anyway, and I’m just worried about how far our squad is behind the other bigger clubs in this league
Adding that free agent forward will seem pretty pointless should those two depart soon.
I believe you as the statements clubs put out are rarely the whole truth of a transfer.
My first instinct was Bonne and his agent pulled the plug as why would he be forced out from a club to go to a club were many fans don't want him, it makes no sense?
No insider information on this deal but have learnt the political football facts of life from Rhoys Wiggins just after he retired and in the last year mix with many agents, coaches, and heads of recruitment for Professional youth teams. Fragile ego's in a cut throat business and when you have that decent contract you really don't want to give it up.
From Hibernian to Sutton these guy's have their own take on the nonsense that goes on with transfers. Plus one guy who looked as fit as a fiddle but was 70 this year and was a scout for Blackburn when they won the Premier.
Scouts come in all shapes and sizes and believe it or not there are some that are decent people ? Ok not many !
Where's that whiskey glass....
Charles has been callously thrown to the dogs and left to fend for himself - on that context his performances are remarkable - better a team of eleven Claydens than ever see Kirk in Charlton red again
He might look it on the basis he runs up and down the line a lot, but he certainly isn't.
We all do it, but the players on the bench or not in the squad or in somebody else's squad are usually better when the first team is not performing.