Letting SAGA/DAVIES GO! Is it our biggest mistake?

[SOTONS EAST SIDE]

How we need them now!

[Arizona]

People laughed when I said we'd be better off keeping Saga than John. Kind of hard to say who was right because neither is in the team, however I still maintain we need someone with a decent work rate up front. Despite last season he does know where the goal is in this league.

 

Davies... that goes without saying. Even last season he was our best defender. I doubt Jan would be allowed to play either if they were still here.

[Weston Saint]

Davies not yet in Stoke squad and has not played this season yet. Still injured? What good would he have been to us?

 

Saganowski - Has he scored for his loan club yet?

 

Rasiak - fractured his shoulder at the beginning of the season with Watford and still not fit.

 

Seems correct decisions on Lowes part if you ask me.

[70's Mike]

Davies not yet in Stoke squad and has not played this season yet. Still injured? What good would he have been to us?

 

Saganowski - Has he scored for his loan club yet?

 

Rasiak - fractured his shoulder at the beginning of the season with Watford and still not fit.

 

Seems correct decisions on Lowes part if you ask me.

 

 

or luck

[Benj540]

Davies not yet in Stoke squad and has not played this season yet. Still injured? What good would he have been to us?

 

Saganowski - Has he scored for his loan club yet?

 

Rasiak - fractured his shoulder at the beginning of the season with Watford and still not fit.

 

Seems correct decisions on Lowes part if you ask me.

 

Would Davies be more motivated to get fit for us? As he would be captain and was loved by fans and players, and would be at centre back where he prefers to play.

 

Doesn't it take time to slot into a new team? Saga had atleast played with a few of our team so it might have been easier for him to fit in and get some games/goals.

 

Would Rasiak of broken his shoulder if he was still here? And he is proven in this division, he will get goals.

[benjii]

Our biggest mistake was letting Pearson go - or to take it to the next level... our biggest mistake was Michael Wilde stabbing us in the back.

[Weston Saint]

Would Davies be more motivated to get fit for us? As he would be captain and was loved by fans and players, and would be at centre back where he prefers to play.

 

Doesn't it take time to slot into a new team? Saga had atleast played with a few of our team so it might have been easier for him to fit in and get some games/goals.

 

Would Rasiak of broken his shoulder if he was still here? And he is proven in this division, he will get goals.

 

I am only stating the facts in answer to the original poster.

 

Checked Saga's team and no he has not scored for them yet.

[saintjay77]

Not sure about saga as he couldnt hit a cows arse with a banjo last season either although his work rate is something McGoldrick can only dream about.

 

Davies is another massive loss but he would only be warming the treatment room like many other half decent players we seem to have.

[Arizona]

Davies not yet in Stoke squad and has not played this season yet. Still injured? What good would he have been to us?

 

Saganowski - Has he scored for his loan club yet?

 

Rasiak - fractured his shoulder at the beginning of the season with Watford and still not fit.

 

Seems correct decisions on Lowes part if you ask me.

 

Davies may well be still injured, however I doubt he will stay that way all season.

 

Saga has at least one goal so far and is being regularly selected by a team in the Champions League. I'd have him over DMG if I am honnest.

 

Rasiak wouldn't have broken his shoulder if he was still here, on account he wouldn't have been playing in that match and wouldn't have been involved in the challenge that caused the injury. In any case, I doubt Lowe got rid of him because he knew he was going to injury his shoulder.

 

Correct decisions I think not.

[Leicestersaint]

As said by others, none of them are playing or doing any good where they now are - so how could they have helped?? Time to move on.

[benjii]

Not picking John is having much more of an impact.

 

If any of those players were still here we wouldn't pick them anyway.

[saintjay77]

Not picking John is having much more of an impact.

 

If any of those players were still here we wouldn't pick them anyway.

 

Not picking John might not be doing our goal scoring any good but the guy is a lazy bugger at the best of times so I can understand him not getting on the team sheet as his tracking back is appauling.

 

Playing McGoldrick and others ahead of him considering thier form/ability is a tad more confusing though.

 

but none of that really matters when its the defending that it letting us down the most and the players that are not getting picked are not defenders either.

[team-saint]

Not picking John might not be doing our goal scoring any good but the guy is a lazy bugger at the best of times so I can understand him not getting on the team sheet as his tracking back is appauling.

 

He defends from the front though by not losing the ball

[Arizona]

He defends from the front though by not losing the ball

 

No, he can hold the ball up pretty well (on a good day) but if there is nobody to support him he will soon lose it. Given that Jan insists on playing one up front, that is going to be more often than not.

 

Saga is the only striker we've have recently that really defends from the front. Putting pressure on the defenders and not allowing them to play the ball.

 

John is too lazy, Rasiak is too slow, BWP is both.

[Weston Saint]

No, he can hold the ball up pretty well (on a good day) but if there is nobody to support him he will soon lose it. Given that Jan insists on playing one up front, that is going to be more often than not.

 

Saga is the only striker we've have recently that really defends from the front. Putting pressure on the defenders and not allowing them to play the ball.

 

John is too lazy, Rasiak is too slow, BWP is both.

 

Jan played 4 3 3 at the start yesterday.

[Chez]

Keeping Davies (if he had actually wanted to stay) would have been a no brainer, but Saga was **** last season and does not hold the ball uo well, gives it away far too often and would not be able to play on his own up front. Wages would have crippled us as well.

[Window Cleaner]

Keeping Davies (if he had actually wanted to stay) would have been a no brainer, but Saga was **** last season and does not hold the ball uo well, gives it away far too often and would not be able to play on his own up front. Wages would have crippled us as well.

 

Trouble is Davies wasn't a no brainer, he's not fit and believe what you will, the fact is we can't afford passengers again this season.He's been gone since what end of August, that makes a saving of 100K+ so far.What's more we got 1.3 million for him which decreases our borrowing and saves money on interest.

We are in that apple cart, every situation must be weighed up to see if it saves us money.

I expect we wanted to keep him if he wanted to stay, Rudi didn't want to go to Ipswich so someone had to move on. It's really not rocket science.

We,seemingly, have established a budget on the base of 17K gates. Not much room for manoeuvre there if Skacel,Thomas,Euell, BWP and John are skimming off nearly a third of that every match.

[fish fingers]

 

Davies... that goes without saying. Even last season he was our best defender. I doubt Jan would be allowed to play either if they were still here.

 

I doubt he would be allowed to play Davies due to the fact he is still injured and out for some time again. Good comment.

[Arizona]

I doubt he would be allowed to play Davies due to the fact he is still injured and out for some time again. Good comment.

 

Due to the marvels of modern medicine, it is possible for players to recover from some injuries. If Davies were still here, it is possible he'd be amongst the this lucky few and be available for selection some time in the future, at which point he wouldn't be allowed to play because Mr Lowe says so.

 

See, we can both be needlessly sarcastic.

[IN MY DAY]

Davies is reported to be about to go under the knife again in the papers today, so what use he would have been so far this season is neglible. As for Saga who despite a promising start was turning into Omerod (great tryer but no end result) I think the biggest ask at the moment is youth and experience is not being used. I understand that J.P. set out with a vision but we now need to see if he has a plan B. I'm not jumping on the bandwagon like many on here, i've got patience by the bucket loads with very low expectations of this squad, with a big dollop of hope for the future. But if J.P. wants us all onside he needs to help these lads out with a bit of experience,if and only if they want to wear the shirt, not to criticise as J.P. has started to do post match on the last couple of occasions.

[southamptonfclegend]

Davies not yet in Stoke squad and has not played this season yet. Still injured? What good would he have been to us?

 

Saganowski - Has he scored for his loan club yet?

 

Rasiak - fractured his shoulder at the beginning of the season with Watford and still not fit.

 

Seems correct decisions on Lowes part if you ask me.

how? your a d*ck mcgoldrick is **** compared to both of 'em nice decision by mr low hey!? d*ck

[VectisSaint]

He's been gone since what end of August, that makes a saving of 100K+ so far

An interesting point here. I've made a couple of posts regarding Pulis and how he hadn't really signed for us, and many responded saying it was just because Stoke were paying his wages until he was fit. So, how come we also believe that Stoke are paying for Davies when he is not fit. Cuts both ways. Just wonder if actually we have been paying for Davies all this time or not.

[sperm_john]

why does everything thats happened in the last months seem to be the biggest mistake?

[Rory]

Our biggest mistake was letting Pearson go

 

This comment has been cropping up quite a lot lately and it is really starting to grate on me.

 

Firstly, are you certain we would be in a better position with Pearson at the helm? I assume you're basing this on the fact that Leicester are top of League One?

 

This is all well and good but Leicester have got money and were able to keep the majority of their squad which, let's face it, is of Championship standard because they could afford to. The team went down because Holloway got too big for his boots and got punished.

 

Secondly, Pearson would HAVE to use the SAME resources as Jan is using. For what it's worth, the players he's brought in have been pretty good. Schiederlin is the business and Wotton is a solid midfielder. These two have been singled out for praise by a lot of posters on here and I really doubt Pearson would have brought in the French fella and would have plagued the club with journey-men like Lucketti and Perry. I think Perry is poor and he was a Pearson signing.

 

I think we would be in a far worse position with Pearson at the helm now than with the current reigme. You have to give the management team at the moment a bit of a break because the players at their disposal are inexperienced and not up to the standard just yet.

 

We play good football but we are defensively poor. This is the only criticism I have of Jan because he should have brought in defenders rather than a plethora of midfielders. If one of the penalties had gone in yesterday, I am sure it would have been a different scoreline and, once again, the most fickle fans on the planet would be raving about how well we are going to do this season. They didn't and the doom and gloom returns.

[Andy_Porter]

Perry may not be the best defender in the world but he's easily been our best defender this season. I imagine Pearson was involved in the Holmes signing as well, he was great for us before his injury at QPR.

 

Schneiderlin looks like he could be a great signing but I very much doubt Poortvliet had much say in that transfer, sounded more like Lowe signed him after Prosts reccomendation.

[Whitey Grandad]

We play good football but we are defensively poor. This is the only criticism I have of Jan because he should have brought in defenders rather than a plethora of midfielders. If one of the penalties had gone in yesterday, I am sure it would have been a different scoreline and, once again, the most fickle fans on the planet would be raving about how well we are going to do this season. They didn't and the doom and gloom returns.

It wasn't bad luck that they didn't go in, it was because the personnel are not up to the quality needed.

[hells]

I would dearly love to have such a 'journey-men like Lucketti' in our defense. Both he and Perry were very good for us under Pearson's management. He acknowledged and addressed the problem, we needed defenders.

 

Instead Jan seems intent on bringing in more and more midfielders and injured ones at that, why?

 

As for Perry I thought he was actually signed by the new regime, he was on loan with Pearson.

 

Yes Pearson would have had the same resources BUT he would not have been a 'yes' man to Rupes.

[NickG]

This comment has been cropping up quite a lot lately and it is really starting to grate on me.

 

Firstly, are you certain we would be in a better position with Pearson at the helm? I assume you're basing this on the fact that Leicester are top of League One?

 

This is all well and good but Leicester have got money and were able to keep the majority of their squad which, let's face it, is of Championship standard because they could afford to. The team went down because Holloway got too big for his boots and got punished.

 

Secondly, Pearson would HAVE to use the SAME resources as Jan is using. For what it's worth, the players he's brought in have been pretty good. Schiederlin is the business and Wotton is a solid midfielder. These two have been singled out for praise by a lot of posters on here and I really doubt Pearson would have brought in the French fella and would have plagued the club with journey-men like Lucketti and Perry. I think Perry is poor and he was a Pearson signing.

 

I think we would be in a far worse position with Pearson at the helm now than with the current reigme. You have to give the management team at the moment a bit of a break because the players at their disposal are inexperienced and not up to the standard just yet.

 

We play good football but we are defensively poor. This is the only criticism I have of Jan because he should have brought in defenders rather than a plethora of midfielders. If one of the penalties had gone in yesterday, I am sure it would have been a different scoreline and, once again, the most fickle fans on the planet would be raving about how well we are going to do this season. They didn't and the doom and gloom returns.

 

if one of the penalties had gone in it would definately been a different score!;)know what you mean tho

[dubai_phil]

Our biggest mistake was not the fact of selling them.

 

It was getting ourselves into this mess where we actually could not afford to pay their wages and the reasons for which we have debated to death since 2003.

 

We could not afford to pay Davies's wages. It hurts. But we have to move on

[SOTONS EAST SIDE]

Our biggest mistake was not the fact of selling them.

 

It was getting ourselves into this mess where we actually could not afford to pay their wages and the reasons for which we have debated to death since 2003.

 

We could not afford to pay Davies's wages. It hurts. But we have to move on

Then what about Euell, Skacel's & Johns wages, we can still afford to pay their wages though! STRANGE THAT!

[Weston Saint]

Then what about Euell, Skacel's & Johns wages, we can still afford to pay their wages though! STRANGE THAT!

No we cannot, that is why we are going deeper into debt.

[Saint In Exile]

Then what about Euell, Skacel's & Johns wages, we can still afford to pay their wages though! STRANGE THAT!

 

And the only one of those that we had an offer for was Skacel who ended up turning the move to Ipswich down because they weren't prepared to pay him the same as the contract he's on with us... You can only sell if someone wants to buy and the only one someone wanted to buy was Davies!!

[slickmick]

I still think an out of form Saga would have been better, than that good for nothing, waste of space McGoldrick.

[up and away]

Originally Posted by Weston Saint

Davies not yet in Stoke squad and has not played this season yet. Still injured? What good would he have been to us?

 

Saganowski - Has he scored for his loan club yet?

 

Rasiak - fractured his shoulder at the beginning of the season with Watford and still not fit.

 

Seems correct decisions on Lowes part if you ask me.

Davies may well be still injured, however I doubt he will stay that way all season.

 

Saga has at least one goal so far and is being regularly selected by a team in the Champions League. I'd have him over DMG if I am honnest.

 

Rasiak wouldn't have broken his shoulder if he was still here, on account he wouldn't have been playing in that match and wouldn't have been involved in the challenge that caused the injury. In any case, I doubt Lowe got rid of him because he knew he was going to injury his shoulder.

 

Correct decisions I think not.

 

God, get a partial grip on reality at least. Saga is still just as bad and would not improve matters, Davies is totally academic and knowing our luck, Rasiak would have been injured earlier.

There is one common denominator in the players leaving, getting fees or wages off the books. If someone had come in for John instead, Saga may still be here but that would have been the worst result of the two.

Why you place this cult status upon Saga is beyond belief, he has not done enough to lace John's boots. With Saga you always come away thinking it will be the next game, but after a season if the penny has not dropped, it never will.

[Bakovnetski]

I'd take John over Saga based on last season alone. Saga didn't do much when he was available which wasn't often. John is a proven goalscorer in this league and banged them in for us last year. There is no point leaving him on the bench. He is good at holding the ball and distributing it to players running on but I concede his workrate is suspect...he is getting on a bit. Start him off until he's whacked out like last year or bring him on with 30 mins to go, regardless of the score, with fresh-ish legs.

 

Selling Davies was a big mistake.

[dubai_phil]

Then what about Euell, Skacel's & Johns wages, we can still afford to pay their wages though! STRANGE THAT!

 

As WS said, we can't. But of course, if the dearly loved Skacel HAD left, along with John, Euell & Thomas during the window then there is a strong probablility that we COULD have afforded Davies's wages.

 

We couldn't cut down costs enough and we are lucky in many ways that KD & Surman didn't go. Financially keeping them was a bad as our situation is getting worse. from the footballing side, thank God they didn't go or it would have been even worse than it is now

[up and away]

Then what about Euell, Skacel's & Johns wages, we can still afford to pay their wages though! STRANGE THAT!

 

Are you Crouch's financial adviser?

You start off with stating we desperately need a striker that left us that still is not scoring and a defender who is still out injured.

Then you double up with Euell, Skacel and John who we have been trying to sell or loan to any mug within earshot and you are asking why we are still paying their wages!

Yep, something is very strange.

[bungle]

Saganowski was pretty much useless last season, and the only disappointing thing is that we couldn't get rid of him permanently and are going to have to have him back in January.

 

As for Davies, well, it would have been wonderful to keep him, but facts are facts. You can see in the accounts how much our wage bill went up, and we had to get rid of top earners. It's all very well saying "we should have got rid of John and Euell" but you can only get rid of players who people want to buy, you cannot just decide!

[Arizona]

God, get a partial grip on reality at least. Saga is still just as bad and would not improve matters, Davies is totally academic and knowing our luck, Rasiak would have been injured earlier.

There is one common denominator in the players leaving, getting fees or wages off the books. If someone had come in for John instead, Saga may still be here but that would have been the worst result of the two.

Why you place this cult status upon Saga is beyond belief, he has not done enough to lace John's boots. With Saga you always come away thinking it will be the next game, but after a season if the penny has not dropped, it never will.

 

How do you know Saga is just as bad, are you an ST holder at Aalborg? I said he had scored at least one goal, which was in a CL qualifier. I couldn't find any stats for the Danish League.

 

We never lost a game Saga started when Pearson picked the team. To me that shows just what a little work-rate can do to aid your defence. If we have lazy players like John, BWP and DMG who just can't be a*sed chasing down defenders and tracking back, then we will (and are) concede more goals.

 

There is also the small issue of John only scoring 5 of his 19 goals last season during the long periods Saga wasn't on the pitch. Why don't you get a partial grip on reality and admit that just possibly a player who is regularly in a Champions League team, might just be better than our current shower off sh*te.

 

Saying they left to help balance the books is all well and good, but it is no help what-so-ever to the squad. Your comment about Rasiak is pointless. AFAIK he has never had persistent shoulder injuries and his current knock is entirely down to circumstance and not some Powell-esq glass skeleton.

[up and away]

How do you know Saga is just as bad, are you an ST holder at Aalborg? I said he had scored at least one goal, which was in a CL qualifier. I couldn't find any stats for the Danish League.

 

We never lost a game Saga started when Pearson picked the team. To me that shows just what a little work-rate can do to aid your defence. If we have lazy players like John, BWP and DMG who just can't be a*sed chasing down defenders and tracking back, then we will (and are) concede more goals.

 

There is also the small issue of John only scoring 5 of his 19 goals last season during the long periods Saga wasn't on the pitch. Why don't you get a partial grip on reality and admit that just possibly a player who is regularly in a Champions League team, might just be better than our current shower off sh*te.

 

Saying they left to help balance the books is all well and good, but it is no help what-so-ever to the squad. Your comment about Rasiak is pointless. AFAIK he has never had persistent shoulder injuries and his current knock is entirely down to circumstance and not some Powell-esq glass skeleton.

 

Well fill your boots here.

A £ to a pinch of euro he will be back here pretty soon and those of us that saw him last season, can start the familiarisation process all over again.

 

We never lost a game Saga started under Pearson? get a grip! More than likely had more to do with Mrs Pearsons lucky pink undies than anything else. John does not look interested but scores goals, Saga does look interested and does not score goals! So which are you plumping for? If you go to enough games and keep thinking this will be the game and gradually that feeling will drift away. I don't think you sat through enough of those games and are still living on the magical glimpses we saw when he arrived at St Mary's. I am not saying Saga is useless, just he has had enough chances and has not delivered. If you dig a bit further back to Saga's time in France you will see a very similar story, this is not a one off.

 

My comment about Rasiak may well be pointless, but then equally so is yours. It's academic, the player is injured.

[SOTONS EAST SIDE]

Are you Crouch's financial adviser?

You start off with stating we desperately need a striker that left us that still is not scoring and a defender who is still out injured.

Then you double up with Euell, Skacel and John who we have been trying to sell or loan to any mug within earshot and you are asking why we are still paying their wages!

Yep, something is very strange.

Where did i state we desperatley needed Saga back, i said did we think it was a mistake him going (suits total football style). Dont take up proof reading will you.LOL

As for John he's not really setting the pace in the scoring stakes now is he.And who's to say Davies might not have been back in the first team by now! Football's a funny thing you know!

[Arizona]

Well fill your boots here.

A £ to a pinch of euro he will be back here pretty soon and those of us that saw him last season, can start the familiarisation process all over again.

 

We never lost a game Saga started under Pearson? get a grip! More than likely had more to do with Mrs Pearsons lucky pink undies than anything else. John does not look interested but scores goals, Saga does look interested and does not score goals! So which are you plumping for? If you go to enough games and keep thinking this will be the game and gradually that feeling will drift away. I don't think you sat through enough of those games and are still living on the magical glimpses we saw when he arrived at St Mary's. I am not saying Saga is useless, just he has had enough chances and has not delivered. If you dig a bit further back to Saga's time in France you will see a very similar story, this is not a one off.

 

My comment about Rasiak may well be pointless, but then equally so is yours. It's academic, the player is injured.

 

1. So you are saying our results occur on an entirely random basis, it has nothing to do with which players are on the pitch. If we play better when a certain player is on the pitch, it's coincidence.

 

2. That's the thing. John doesn't score goals unless there is someone along side him with a decent work ethic. Without Saga, there is no one who fits that discription, hence John has failed to make much of an impact in his limited appearances this season.

 

3. So the 11 games Saga started in 06/07 were just a "magical glimpse", but the 15 he started last season were, "more than enough chances"? So by that logic you can only form an accurate oppinion of a player if he has started between 12 and 14 games for the club?