egg

He crossed my mind a while ago. He's got something from what I've seen.

Good post. If we can replace Ings with someone half decent (we won't get as good, that's to be expected) I and can get some decent cover at LB, I think we'll have a pretty decent squad and do OK. If not, I think it'll be a tough slog. Yesterday was a shocker from us, but we've been OK before then, and I don't think we're relegation fodder.

When we went down I enjoyed some of my best years as a fan. Away days at some new grounds where the fans were real fans, seeing us win regularly, the joy of promotion. The home games were great too. Fans knew who the players were, they didn't go after 80 mins to beat the traffic. I wanted us to do well as a club, but having watched us cheat relegation many times, seen the money men take any sense of real competition out of the game, I knew we'd never actually be able to go toe to toe with the big boys. Whilst I'm happy we're a premier league club, I'd still spend my money going to watch us play whatever league we're in. Salford City or Man Utd are both a 200 ish mile drive to watch my team play and have day out.

Water

Remember that game, great debut. My favourite Clarke moment was away at Anfield, probably 87 or thereabouts. Scored a diving header in front of our away corner. 1-1 draw I think.

On the pitch, unfortunately. Feck knows where though.

It's you that wrote that it won't solve anything!! I'm not wasting my time debating with abusive people who throw their toys out the pram when their contradictions get highlighted.

You really are struggling. You've agreed that it won't "solve anything" yet you persist with saying that it's a good idea to carry on with it. You know that you're contradicting yourself and are having to resort to childish insults. Carry on if you want to treacle, but we both know that you're all punched out.

Ah back to the insults. Here's an idea - read your own posts...amongst your words are it's "pointless" and "that it won't solve anything".

"You've lost the argument when you resort to insults" is a very true statement. Yes, you can highlight something that's already known but you only need to if it serves a useful purpose. When you've said yourself that it's "pointless" and "that it won't solve anything", and that it leads to white guys seeking to lecture other white guys and hurling insults, I'm really struggling to understand your best point. Deep down, I think you know that you're struggling too.

Vestegaard has a very similar 'knee injury' to JWP I suspect. It's one of those knocks that will suddenly improve either immediately after a transfer, or the transfer window closes.

That's nonsensical to me. Get in position and miss over and over. Pointless. If that was the hallmark of a good striker, we'd all be lauding Long as the saviour but we're not as he always misses, thus he's a shit striker.

Yep. It's atrocious. I'd have preferred to have kept and played N'lundulu. And he's shit.

I'm not that there's much to debate. Your Shane Long point is correct - a strikers primary job as to be able to finish. Anything less and they're a poor striker.

Keep the issue to the fore to achieve what though? Aintforever has already said its pointless and won't achieve anything. Turkish has made the valid point that the issue was known already. Thus, what will this actually achieve other than division, such as that evident from this thread?

Yep. I'd be stag-gered if we signed him.

Dunno, but despite their stadium debt, they've found a big chunk for a player I suspect most people have never heard of. My gut feel is that they'll have to sell Kane for the money.

You're all over the place. Using your own words is the knee a) "pointless" and "won't solve anything" or b) "might make a bit of difference" It can only be a or b. What's your final answer? And dishing out abuse because your posts are getting pulled apart is not cool.

Alas, even Ray would help our squad at the moment. And he was shit.

I'm not sure he's the answer, but they wouldn't sell him to us unless the fee was massive.

I think you're right, and I like the look of him. I could see Obafemi involved, probably for an inflated fee, thus a lower fee for Armstrong to keep the sell on down. If Obafemi is involved, it'll slow things as there'll be his discussions and probably talks with Newcastle too as we won't want to sour relations with them, and nor will Blackburn.

The reports of £120k a week at Villa over 3 years, and £100k a week here over 4. I was lazy and x50 rather than x52 but the difference is still circa £2m, assuming those reports are correct.

There's no way he's got what he wanted by a) signing for Villa, and b) getting £18m in wages rather than the £20m in wages we had offered. I suspect he irritated us by refusing his deal and his willingness to run down his contract (and coast through it). He looked for other clubs, and we invited buyers. He either didn't get the offer he wanted from a big club, or he did, but we didn't get the fee we wanted. However, Villa offered us what we wanted, but perhaps Ings wanted to go where there was a better deal for him. He could then have threatened to run down his deal and walk next year. We said crack on, but everyone will be sorted by then so either take what we're willing to let you take (Villa) now or take your chances when you're another year older, and having had a lazy year, less attractive as a signing. I may be off beam, but nobody is persuading me that Ings has got what he wanted.

So cutting through all your posts on the issue, you "just think" that booing the knee is daft. Gotcha. We agree on that.

We were always selling him when he refused to sign. The issue was on who's terms. He never wanted Villa.