CanadaSaint

"Don’t ever wrestle with a pig. You’ll both get dirty, but the pig will enjoy it."

Why the hell are people even responding to this moron?

Agreed. I'm not saying we shouldn't be doing it - I'm wondering why we're willing to spend so much on doing it when there are other areas in which we need to strengthen as well. The only rationales that I can think of are 1) All is not as well with Rickie as we'd all hope, or B) We have a lot more money to spend that many of us thought. I think you're right and I'm delighted to see that. I'd hate to see us blowing our budget on players who can help us to get out of this division but are out of their depth as soon as we do.

I don't disagree at all with what you're saying - we'd be much, much stronger for signing both Lee and Hooper. However, I don't understand why we'd spend that much on our strike force if we have other positions that need strengthening unless A) something is amiss with Rickie and/or B) we're willing to spend a lot more than many of us thought and the Hooper thing is just the start.

Well, no smokescreen without fire! No, we haven't told anyone but leaks from the Celtic end - including comments from Lennon - very much suggest that we have.

I still can't understand how it can be a smokescreen to let the world know that you're willing to spend six million or more on a striker. There aren't many positives to this if we fail to land Hooper. Now everyone knows how much we're willing to spend on a striker (and it could be even more) and our current strikers have watched us sign one positional competitor and fail in an attempt to sign another one. Yes, it could gee them up, but it could also unsettle them - especially Rickie (unless he's already somewhat unsettled, God forbid). And the other thing that confuses me is why we'd look to bring in not one but two high-profile strikers 1) if Rickie is staying here, and 2) when other positions arguably need strengthening as well. Hopefully there's more legs in the Hooper thing (because I don't think we'd try that kind of cheeky raid unless we had good reason to believe that we could pull it off), and (even more hopefully) our willingness to spend six million or more on a striker suggests that there's a much bigger budget back there and a willingness to spend it.

Indeed, and even more meaningless if they seldom attend the games. I'm sure they're interested because they feel (and probably have) a responsibility to see Markus's wishes through to fruition, but whether it goes beyond that - and how much was set aside to pursue the vision - are things we don't know and probably never will. I don't set much stock in the wealth of our owners but the rumours about a huge bid for Hooper add a very interesting dimension to the discussion. Just as a matter of interest, when was the last time anyone from the Liebherr family attended a game?

They've always caused problems for keepers. Some years back the challenge was magnified by worn goal areas that could cause the ball to rear-up unpredictably. Now that element is less of a problem because the pitches wear much better, but it has been replaced by the unpredictability of the livelier ball; the pre-match pitch watering magnifies the chance that the ball will skid and pick up pace. When Tim Howard scored the other day the ball bounced higher than I ever remember seeing, and it would have "done" better keepers than Bogadan. That was a freak but the underlying issue is the thing that susses out poor technique. The really good keepers always seem to have a back-up plan and you'll see Joe Hart, for example, bring his chest into play even when diving, with the hands trapping the ball as soon as it hits his chest. He also makes an early decision to parry, which gives him a much better chance of parrying to a safe area rather than back out towards onrushing strikers. Something else we see is that too many keepers time their advance poorly. They start too soon and have to stop, meaning that when the shot comes they're trying to dive from a flat-footed position which limits their reach on either side. Just my "five eggs", but I think it's much harder to be a good keeper these days and that's compounded more than ever by weaknesses in technique.

If we'd signed him when we were supposedly trying, when he was at Millwall, we'd likely still be in the PL. He's a hell of a player whose game has gone completely pear-shaped scoring-wise, so he desperately needs a change of scenery. A reliable midfield goal scorer would add a lot to us but I doubt that he'd come here. Plus, Everton might have not forgiven us for selling them Beatts.

I think his anger was aimed at our bench, but not Nigel.

Better class of pub there!

How is it a smoke screen to advertise that you've got six million to spend?

You're missing my point, and it has nothing to do with "mates". There's a difference between remonstrating over a bad foul and deliberately trying to get someone carded - especially if the pleas for a card are coming from coaching staff on the bench. Some will say it's all part of the game these days but IMO it cheapens the sport. That sort of crap comes from people like the Ronaldos, Nanis and Poyets of the world, which is where it's best left.

I'm still struggling to understand why we'd go for both Lee and Hooper in the same window when we have Rickie and when we have other areas to strengthen as well - unless the "powers that be" aren't sure that we'll have Rickie.

True, and Surman has become quite an "engine room" for them over the past couple of months, but the distance between August and November and between January and April seems to be a lot bigger in the Premier. Plenty of recently-promoted teams have fallen away badly after a bright start. That's when their weaknesses have been well and truly spotted and exploited. I'm trying not to be too hard on our squad but I certainly think it would be a bridge too far for a fair number of them. I hope I'm wrong but I wouldn't want us to underestimate how much we'll need to spend, which was the point of my comment.

None of us knows what our transfer budget is, but I'd be really concerned if we spent that much on one player when we have quite a list of first-teamers who may well be quite a way short of Premier League standard. However, if part of this big picture (who the hell knows?) is selling Rickie to Newcastle for big money, that could change things a bit. Just a thought.

It wasn't that long ago that the "authorities" issued a directive that leading with an elbow is a straight red, as it should be. Most refs have let that "clamp down" drift away, as they usually do. I know this may not be fashionable, and it doesn't change the fact that he's a utter d*ck, but ... if Cotterill was p*ssed-off about players or coaches trying to get fellow pros red-carded or even yellow-carded, I agree with him. I hate it when others do it to us, and I hate it just as much when we do it to them. That just puts us in the same column as turds like Poyet.

Jos needs to watch it now. Even-up in prospect.

Because that's exactly his modus operandi on here, and it's both dishonest and annoying. Pity, because there are some occasional decent points amidst the squealing.

Was anyone else impressed with Jamie Vardy in the Fleetwood vs Blackpool tie? I thought he was excellent and it seems that Holloway was very impressed too. Young, fast, two-footed, good in the air. He looks like the real deal to me.

Good interview - not many meaningless managerial platitudes and quite a few honest insights. Little surprised that he didn't grab the opportunity to boost Bart after his horrendous Blackpool experience, especially with him being a former keeper.

It's generally accepted that this is a weak area for him because he's been beaten there more often than he should (and not just this season); I can't count them or list them (others might) but they've certainly happened. He's also slow adjusting to a cross to the far post when he's opted to guard the near post. As much as I like Kelvin and respect what he's done for us (a lot more than some give him credit for), his best days are behind him. I'd keep picking him because he's the best we have but we need to splash the cash. I'm not sure why you're so sensitive about this justified criticism that you want to deny a fact.

LTC is right - it's a fact that reaction degeneration starts kicking in during the thirties. A keeper's prime age was always said to be 28-34 or so, but now it might be a little shorter because top-level physical fitness is such a prerequisite in the modern game. If you want "actual evidence", I'd say that being caught flat-footed by near-post shots is as good as any. IIRC Kelvin wasn't caught-out as often at the near post as he is now.

I think 80% of it is the ball and its often unpredictable movement. It's almost impossible to compute the intercept point for a cross, and harder to get there even if you could because of all the blocking that goes on today. Most shots from any distance have two or even more directional changes, including a late one. But this is why the modern keepers have developed "fail safe" techniques such as bringing the chest into diving saves and trapping the ball. I haven't seen Kelvin do much of this, and passing years are slowly dulling the great reactions on which he's always relied, so that makes him more vulnerable to errors than the "new breed". As much as I like him and the loyalty he's shown, he's hanging on at this level and would be exploited in the Premier league. With nothing for back up, a quality keeper must be a top priority.

Krull and Joe Hart both use the chest as the backstop and close the 'door' with their arms before the ball can get away. It's clever, fast and very planned. I don't know whether Kelvin doesn't believe in the technique or doesn't have the reactions any longer to pull it off. Either way it's a problem - and one that we're seeing more often because I think teams have a "book" on him and set out to exploit the weakness.