egg

Link?

Whats your point? Isn't it fair to ask if Davis is the only one to blame?

this is really tenuous. I agree that there is a difference between playing to lose and paying someone to try a bit harder to win. on balance I don't like it. it eliminates fair play and thus is indirect match fixing through the back door. I expect (and hope) Mr laudrup to have a trip to the FA and a need to find his cheque book. I expect better from young and supposedly bright managers.

Maybe! We've only named 1 keeper but apparently 3 have to be named so we forfeit 2 places so are at a notional 25.

So about as much as Butland played before he turned into a 6m+ England player? If the lads good enough, he's old enough. Don't get me wrong I'd rather throw in an old head but our options are Gazza or a confidence shot Davis. Given that Adkins only has a choice of a rock or a hard place he ain't got much choice but to try the lad.

short, fat and mental?

To be fair there's pages of ****e on there, I'd much rather read a single thread than trawl through that. It's very plausible that he could start. Davis looks shot to pieces. I have a gills supporting mate who reckons the lad is a top, top keeper.

I don't think recalls can happen where there is a loan fee paid. I would be surprised if he went without a fee. Also, I'm not sure we can add him (or anyone ) to our squad. He's 22 so would have to be one of the 25 but he isn't. Only free agents can be added (if there's room) and he's not one of them. Also our squad has 23 named players but only one keeper but we have to name 3. My understanding is that we therefore lose those 2 additional spaces meaning we have no space. I'm not certain of these rules though and i hope that I'm wrong. No doubt someone will be able to clarify.

The financial ramifications of relegation, and inevitable loss of our best players, mean that unless results (forget performances, they don't get you points) improve then NA will be gone. I really feel for NA as I have little doubt that he hasn't got the squad that he wants. I also can't see how anyone else could get more out of the group of players we have. That said, I'm in no doubt that if NC fires the gun he'll do it early, perhaps within the next month.

To answer the question, two things. They bought wisely and didn't change their formations.

Ads needs to get himself dropped to our bench, might get a bit of England game time then. Ffs.

Ah just what we need, a square peg in a round hole.

Agreed. Milner has been equally sh!t though.

seemed clear, but clarify if you feel the need.

For a bloke who can write, you don't read too well. I haven't suggested he should or would be sold. I've said its a possibility but that I don't think that it will happen. Bless ya'

Not sure I understand your point. Do you share Hypo's opinion that players should be given a go as they helped get us promoted? I'm pretty sure NA and NC don't think that way.

What? Get relegated just so Rickie can enjoy his moment in the sun? Pathetic. Arguably Davis and Fonte have "got us here" too but people are quite content to cast them aside now. Perhaps we should give it a go with them too, and Hammond, coz of what they've done for us. Forget sentiment, if Rickie is deeemed not good enough, or a big bid comes in , he'll be gone. Cortese's plans don't involve sentiment.

Why does pointing out that Rickie may leave suggest that anyone would love it if he goes?!? Its a real possibility he'll leave this window. We can't keep the number of forwards we have happy (or accomodate them in a 25 man squad) so at least one of the forwards will be moved on imo. I have a feeling that Rickie won't be the sacrifial lamb. I think the front 3 tonight were playing for their futures and wouldn't be surprised if Lee made way as well as SDR.

I agree. Lambo drops deep and arguably is our most creative player. The "Sheringham" role behind jay, lee or sharp is the only we that we can accommodate him without putting square pegs in round holes or playing an archaic 442. It would be the same system as Everton have been using. On the line up, I think that Puncheon is good enough. That line up with Puncheon in for Guly and a decent CB would be competitive.

So how do you know that they're plight has not been factored in ? Cortese has bound to have done so. What he can't factor in is another suitor coming in and snatching the boy. If you have exclusivity in a deal you can hardball. You don't have that in football so have to get the balance between and brinkmanship and faffing about.

I agree that it's a real relief that we are (on the face of it) being shrewdly run. The problem is that football is a unique business. The players expectations, those of their agents, and other clubs are often ridiculous. If we want to compete for players we have to accept, rightly or wrongly, that things are done a certain way in football.

This assumption is one that most have made. Is it really that complicated or have we made it such? If the total price is 15 mil and Penarol get 30 % it sounds simple to me. We are a Premier League team and if we want to play with the big boys we have to pay big boy money and play by the big boy rules. Our refusal to play by the rules in the Buttner deal killed that one. Man Utd got their man without any published issues. I'd guess they paid what we weren't prepared to pay. The same could happen with this boy, and potentially others.

This. People overlook that we could have been faffing about and penny pinching and that's been then problem. Not saying that's the case but it can't be ruled out.

Quite easy to pay more up front than we've offered. Whether that's a sensible commercial decision is another debate, but it's easily done.

I appreciate the cash flow point but none of us know what our income or budget is. My point, simply, is this seems to be a put up or shut up deal. If we want the player and cashflow/budget allows us to then we get the job done. The statement from others that it would be silly to pay the full fee (as a matter of principle) is silly.