Shroppie Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Can't see this anywhere else. Reported that Stoke are prepared to offer £1.5 M in January. Would have thouhgt he was worth twice that, but I expect we'll grab it and run. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/gossip_and_transfers/default.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 He's not worth twice that! He's a reasonably average player in a struggling coca cola team. I'd expect £900,000 would be about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Value aside, would that be a good move for him ? next year the chances are he could STILL be playing in the Championship but for a team 100's of miles from home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shroppie Posted 13 November, 2008 Author Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Perhaps we could have Delap in part exchange . Apparently he's got a wicked long throw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 I really don't undersand why people don't see the great potential in Surman. He is a quality player still learning the game and he will only get better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Can't see this anywhere else. Reported that Stoke are prepared to offer £1.5 M in January. Would have thouhgt he was worth twice that, but I expect we'll grab it and run. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/gossip_and_transfers/default.stm Signed sealed and virtually delivered when we were desperate to get Pulis Jnr ....... I would have thought Surman would have wanted to go to another "Total Football" Prem Team. as opposed to Dwarfs of Stoke ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fish fingers Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 1.5m is laughable, not worth half that really. Good deal if true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 1.5m is laughable, not worth half that really. Good deal if true. Thank you Rupert ........ we get the idea .......... PS ......... who do we get as a replacement ........... oh yes ......... Boyle ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonbenali Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Worth much more on current form. Has come on leaps and bounds this season. Would be gutted to see him go, particularly to a team of hoofers like Stoke. Hopefully he'll see sense and stay til end of season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 I really don't undersand why people don't see the great potential in Surman. He is a quality player still learning the game and he will only get better. And a goalscoring midfielder to boot... People will be willing to pay good money for that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladysaint Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 If Surman had pace he would be worth twice that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 So: Fuller, Delap, Higgingbotham, Surman, and they play in red and white stripes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie2008 Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 If we sell Surman without signing a competent replacement, which seems to be the way we do things these days, we're doomed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 He's not really a Stoke sort of player, and there's no way they'll modify their style of play just to suit one signing. I can't see any mileage in that rumour, to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krissyboy31 Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 I really don't undersand why people don't see the great potential in Surman. He is a quality player still learning the game and he will only get better. Absolutely agree! We have 4 outfield players currently playing that are head and shoulders above anything else we have (or are likely to have for many years to come). Schneiderlin, Cork, Lallana and Surman. After January there is a good chance that we will no longer have any of them and then we will really be in the sh!t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 He's not really a Stoke sort of player, and there's no way they'll modify their style of play just to suit one signing. I can't see any mileage in that rumour, to be honest. I think the very fact he is not a Stoke sort of player is precisely the reason they'll buy him. That is, he might offer some of the creativity they lack. Still can't take corners though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Worth much more on current form. Has come on leaps and bounds this season. Would be gutted to see him go, particularly to a team of hoofers like Stoke. Hopefully he'll see sense and stay til end of season. Havn't you got it yet ??? It won't be up to Surman Come January, Lowe will SELL any and ALL he can ........ Got it now ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintrich Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 We should sell Schneiderlin, Surman and/or Lallana. Use Gasmi, Pulis and Holmes as replacements. And then keep most of the cash to keep us afloat and use the rest to get Saganowski back from loan in january to pay his wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Hello Rupert! *waves* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 I think the very fact he is not a Stoke sort of player is precisely the reason they'll buy him. That is, he might offer some of the creativity they lack. Still can't take corners though. They do have creativity in the form of a) Rory Delap's throw-ins and b) Liam Lawrence who, in my opinion, is a physically stronger version of Surman who also happens to score more goals. Stoke's style of play is very much geared towards strength, size and set-pieces, and so far it's not doing them too much harm in the Premier League. If/when someone figures out a decent way to defend those throw-ins (there must be a way, surely?), then they might have to look at other avenues, but while that tactic is working - and it's worked against some good teams (e.g. Arsenal, Villa, Everton, Pompey, etc) - they won't change it. It's tried and tested at Championship level and it's tried and currently working pretty well at Premier League level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 It won't be up to Surman Come January, Lowe will SELL any and ALL he can ........ Got it now ???? It won't even be up to Lowe. Barclays will be aware of offers made and will apply pressure accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krissyboy31 Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 We should sell Schneiderlin, Surman and/or Lallana. Use Gasmi, Pulis and Holmes as replacements. And then keep most of the cash to keep us afloat and use the rest to get Saganowski back from loan in january to pay his wages. Great, use players all recovering from long-term injuries, two of which have never pulled on a Saints' shirt. Nobody has even seen Gasmi play and the concensus of opinion is Pulis isn't good enough. We should sell Schneiderlin, Surman and/or Lallana. Use Gasmi, Pulis and Holmes as replacements. And then keep most of the cash to keep us afloat and use the rest to get Saganowski back from loan in january to pay his wages. For how long with even more dwindling attendances and less family silver to flog!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norwaysaint Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Would be bad for us, but good for Surman and Stoke, so I can see it happening. Tragic that going to Stoke is now an upward move for a saints player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyFartPants Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Havn't you got it yet ??? It won't be up to Surman Come January, Lowe will SELL any and ALL he can ........ Got it now ???? Such a bombastic tone to your post. Lowe may well opt to want to renegade on the players contract, but actually it is down to the player too. Lowe can want him to go all he likes, but if he doesn't want to, he won't. Ergo, it has to suit both of them, even if that doesn't suit your Lowe hating agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Such a bombastic tone to your post. Lowe may well opt to want to renegade on the players contract, but actually it is down to the player too. Lowe can want him to go all he likes, but if he doesn't want to, he won't. Ergo, it has to suit both of them, even if that doesn't suit your Lowe hating agenda. You are spot on. (However just for information, the spelling is renege, a renegade is a description of a outlaw/bandit/rebel etc.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Such a bombastic tone to your post. Lowe may well opt to want to renegade on the players contract, but actually it is down to the player too. Lowe can want him to go all he likes, but if he doesn't want to, he won't. Ergo, it has to suit both of them, even if that doesn't suit your Lowe hating agenda. There are ways to "unsettle" players that are happy with where they are. Even Le Tiss nearly went if you recall Nothing to do with a "Lowe hating Agenda" as you call it Have a pop at me on February 1st ......... We will both know by then You call me Bombastic ??? ..... I have much to learn from Lord Lowe before I can take on that mantle It's almost as if you believe that Lowe actually cares a stuff about what is left to run out on the pitch .......... and do not even try to tell me that the Bank are insisting that Lowe HAS to sell the very Young talent that are trying very hard to come to terms with the CCC, and keep us in that Division Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyFartPants Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 There are ways to "unsettle" players that are happy with where they are. Even Le Tiss nearly went if you recall Nothing to do with a "Lowe hating Agenda" as you call it Have a pop at me on February 1st ......... We will both know by then You call me Bombastic ??? ..... I have much to learn from Lord Lowe before I can take on that mantle It's almost as if you believe that Lowe actually cares a stuff about what is left to run out on the pitch .......... and do not even try to tell me that the Bank are insisting that Lowe HAS to sell the very Young talent that are trying very hard to come to terms with the CCC, and keep us in that Division That is correct, Le Tiss didn't go did he? Why was that, because we were willing to sell a few times? Was it because he didn't want to go? How will having a pop at you on Feb 1st prove anything? Either he will have stayed (because he and Lowe wanted him to) or he will have gone, (because he and Lowe wanted him to). It doesn't mean you will be right if he goes, as that is the very point I am trying to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever a red and white Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 i would hate this if this went through. Surman is just finding his feet, scoring a few. Although he was poor last season it is clear he has a lot of potential to go a long way, maybe he doesn't have much pace, more reaon to play him in the middle of the park? but his passing on his day is second to none, and certainly someone we should be looking to keep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr X Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 If we sell Surman without signing a competent replacement, which seems to be the way we do things these days, we're doomed! were already doomed we've sold loads of players without signing competent replacements. I stand by my statement that this team under the current management team (all of them) will be in division 1 next year, as always I'm more than willing to be proved wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krissyboy31 Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 (edited) That is correct, Le Tiss didn't go did he? Why was that, because we were willing to sell a few times? Was it because he didn't want to go? How will having a pop at you on Feb 1st prove anything? Either he will have stayed (because he and Lowe wanted him to) or he will have gone, (because he and Lowe wanted him to). It doesn't mean you will be right if he goes, as that is the very point I am trying to make. The difference here is that Lowe could say to Drew (not saying he would), we have received an offer from xxxx (possibly Stoke, possibly another team). The bank has told us that we must accept the offer, the alternative is that it will withdraw its support and we will have to file for administration. This puts Surman in an impossible position (especially as a Saints fan). He either has to agree to go, even if it's the last place on earth he wants to move, or he is seen as the reason for SFC going into administration. It's a no-brainer! Edited 13 November, 2008 by krissyboy31 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 I think he's worth 2.5m, but no more than that. Will have to sell at that price anyway. Good player, but we'll get over it. We'll have to. If we can perhaps free up some money for a left back and move Rudi central or left wing, then it may help the team. But I imagine we'll just rely on pulis and gasmi to fill the gap. I'd swap Surman for 2.5m and saga and rasiak back. Football transfers are going to take a nose dive. We should have taken every last penny on offer in August , we'll probably still sell the same players in January but for half the price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 If we sell Surman without signing a competent replacement, which seems to be the way we do things these days, we're doomed! Wilde has already arranged a replacement .......... Boyle ....... you don't think Lowe will SPEND money on one do you Get used to it ... every Transfer window, Lowe will sell as many as it takes to keep the PLC solvent ...... he cares nothing for the Football, or it's iratant ( and diminishing) Customers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyFartPants Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 The difference here is that Lowe could say to Drew (not saying he would), we have received an offer from xxxx (possibly Stoke, possibly another team). The bank has told us that we must accept the offer, the alternative is that it will withdraw its support and we will have to file for administration. This puts Surman in an impossible position (especially as a Saints fan). He either has to agree to go, even if it's the last place on earth he wants to move, or he is seen as the reason for SFC going into administration. It's a no-brainer! Or, he could put a gun to his mums head and tell him that he has to go or he will blow her brains out. That too is speculation, and would equally be a no brainer decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 (edited) ....................... Edited 7 December, 2008 by Viking Warrior Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Tone Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Value aside, would that be a good move for him ? next year the chances are he could STILL be playing in the Championship but for a team 100's of miles from home But on premiership wages, supported for a while by parachute payments, and maybe having made more of a name for himself with more media coverage so that he might then be 'rescued' by another so -so premership team - cf Rory Delap's career! So you couldn't blame him for going. However I would be really sorry to see Drew go. He is both a proper saints lad, and a really promising player. He won't ever be a star in the premeirhsio, but he is certainly going to be of at least 'journeyman' premiership standard, which is more than can be said of most players. As I said last season, he is the new Oakley,ie appreciated by managers and those who watch *football*, but not always by the more gung ho, "just get it in the box" type of fan. K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 The difference here is that Lowe could say to Drew (not saying he would), we have received an offer from xxxx (possibly Stoke, possibly another team). The bank has told us that we must accept the offer, the alternative is that it will withdraw its support and we will have to file for administration. This puts Surman in an impossible position (especially as a Saints fan). He either has to agree to go, even if it's the last place on earth he wants to move, or he is seen as the reason for SFC going into administration. It's a no-brainer! If we DO go into Admin .... any "neutral" will cite Lowe as a major reason ... WHY ??? ANY Business needs a combination of a Decent Product, and a large potential Customer base Lowe has dictated that we go with a "Total Football" Youth policy, at the expense of EVERYTHING else He has SOLD any and all Experienced Footballers that COULD and SHOULD have been Blended in to a Youth culture Team .... THAT, IMHO, would have stabilised us in the CCC But Lowe has gone far further than that. With his sell everthing policy, he has not only asset stripped the Club, but has reduced the available Quality to the point that is in the lap of the Gods whether we survive in the CCC Fans have deserted St Mary's this season by at LEAST 5000 ... reducing prices for the Notts Forest game is a desperate gamble to get some of those to come back. Saints fans are no different than any other fan really. They like to see a winning Team, a Team able to compete, and a Team that is not going to be decimated at every Transfer Window The Lowe factor cannot now be dismissed. HIS actiopns have led to major Apathy to his CUSTOMERS. All he has ever done is Split the Fan base The joke of it is, he does not CARE one Iota about the Fans, he has said as much in the past. He is back for LOWE and the PLC. As long as he can SELL to keep the PLC solvent, then as far as he is concerned, that is Job Done, because he works for the PLC, NOT Saints Lowe is acting exactly AS an Administrator would .......... but he is NOT in any way concerned about what happens on the pitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Wayman Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 What is it with Stoke, always raiding us for players? Already, three of their regulars are ex-Saints, Hoofingbottom, Deflap and Fu**er. maybe we forgot too that Stoke played us pre-season in a friendly thus amking the link even more weird. Weird because the type of prehistoric crap that Stoke play is the polar opposite of everything that Saints stand for. Stoke obviously like talentless, thick-as-sh** hoofers and clatterers, so why try to unsettle our total football youngsters? My response to any Stoke approach for any of our team is "YOU WISH!" "FO!" Now, if Arsenal come calling that's a different matter altogether. Even if we have to sell just to stay afloat, one must hope that The Smarmy Little Twerp will at least do the decent thing and only entertain offers from decent teams that try to play football our way. I wouldn't wish Stoke and Pulis on my worst enemy let alone soem of our favoured sons! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 I'm way past caring too much either way. I long ago accepted it as an inevitability that any player worth having would be shipped out to whichever club (including our division rivals) wanted to buy them. That most if not all of the money raised by these sales would then disappear into the banks coffers and that those players sold would either be replaced by even younger, even greener youth from the academy, or nonentity players bought on the cheap from elsewhere in the vain hope that they might prove to be half as good as the players they replaced and then in turn sold themselves. If they could get away with it, the board would charge the same price that we used to pay to watch the Premiership giants, but as this has not worked and dwindling attendance numbers have forced their hand into making price reductions, when any sensible board would have realised what many hotels and airlines knew years ago; that it is better to fill your aircraft/hotel/stadium at reduced but attractive prices, than have it half empty at higher prices. Regrettably there is also the factor that by selling the better players who might offer better entertainment, not only will it be likely that we will be paying to watch a team that will probably be losing more frequently, but also one playing less entertainingly and with less flair and skill. Eventually, when administration happens, many will decide that their time would be better spent following the local Tyro teams for free in their local park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Wayman Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 On balance, I doubt that these stories have any substance. We are in peril as a club, we are in peril as an economy; the Club might be facing an impossible task trying to keep afloat if national economic woes continue to gain momentum. If the banks start calling in their loans as they are very likely to do if things do not start improving next year, football clubs will be amongst early casualties simply because HMG will pressure banks not to make PEOPLE HOMELESS. Football clubs such as Saints have assets such as their stadia which could be sold off to settle at least part of the debt owed to the banks, with some loss to society but surely better than hundreds of thousands homeless. If that is anywhere near a view of a bleak future who would have the money to, or give a monkey's about, paying to watch football. No, now is not the time for panic sales in an attempt to shore up a rusting ship with a coat of bitumen. Against this backdrop, the last thing the Board can afford to do is devalue the club even further by ensuring relegation, which is what will happen if the best players are sold off prematurely. Next summer is more likely once it is clear where our destiny lies and the state of the UK economy has been more fully revealed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan The Flames Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 I normally tried to sober up a bit in Jan, think I will delay the detox until feb and let January pass in alcoholic bliss. Its got to be better than watching the slow decline of this club. I know finances, no one better, its all the fans fault, barclays, admin blah and all that ********. But I'm throughily fed up with it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Wilde has already arranged a replacement .......... Boyle ....... you don't think Lowe will SPEND money on one do you Get used to it ... every Transfer window, Lowe will sell as many as it takes to keep the PLC solvent ...... he cares nothing for the Football, or it's iratant ( and diminishing) Customers beginning to understand why he finds them irritating! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winchester_stokie Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Weird because the type of prehistoric crap that Stoke play is the polar opposite of everything that Saints stand for. Stoke obviously like talentless, thick-as-sh** hoofers and clatterers, so why try to unsettle our total football youngsters? My response to any Stoke approach for any of our team is "YOU WISH!" "FO!" Now, if Arsenal come calling that's a different matter altogether. I wouldn't wish Stoke and Pulis on my worst enemy let alone soem of our favoured sons! OK Charlie, my (a Stoke fan) 2 pence worth: Pulis has in the past split the Stoke support with his style of football. I for one, have been dead against the so call "hoofball" that we have dished out in the past. What we play now, all be it physical, is not just the long ball. We mix it up and play some good football (just see Fuller's goal against Villa, Delap's against Spurs for example). We can be direct. We have to be to stand a chance to survive, but to describe us as "hoofers and clatterers" can only believed if you swallow hook line and sinker the Wengar line. I'd give most Saints fans so much more credit than that. My fear for your club is if you end up relying on Ant Pulis Jnr. After seeing him play a few times (including at the pre-season friendly at St Marys), he is just not a Championship footballer. He looks like a boy in a man's game. Eager to impress but just too light weight. From a Stokie local to Soton, good luck to you, and I hope you stabilise your club soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krissyboy31 Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 My fear for your club is if you end up relying on Ant Pulis Jnr. After seeing him play a few times (including at the pre-season friendly at St Marys), he is just not a Championship footballer. He looks like a boy in a man's game. Eager to impress but just too light weight. He'll fit in just fine then!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint2Hotty Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 So: Fuller, Delap, Higgingbotham, Surman, and they play in red and white stripes. Add Andrew Davies to that list aswell! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 beginning to understand why he finds them irritating! I LOL'd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Can see a repeat of the Skacel to Ipswich 'saga' if this rumour is true. Lowe I can imagine will bite their hands off at any offer about £1m. Surman on the other hand probably wouldn't fancy it, fail to agree a deal and vanish from Saints first team for a month or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonbenali Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Havn't you got it yet ??? It won't be up to Surman Come January, Lowe will SELL any and ALL he can ........ Got it now ???? No, it's not entirely up to Lowe. Surman can decide to stay and is within his contractual rights to do so. As his hometown club and playing in his preferred position, you'd hope he'd do so at least until the end of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Can see a repeat of the Skacel to Ipswich 'saga' if this rumour is true. Lowe I can imagine will bite their hands off at any offer about £1m. Surman on the other hand probably wouldn't fancy it, fail to agree a deal and vanish from Saints first team for a month or two. I think Lowe will accept any sensible offers based on if he doesnt he may lose the support of the bank. that said, we dont know what the bank have agreed too as the terms of there support. it may be agreed that some players are not for sale while there are others that are a must to lose. john and Skacel IMO were on the must be gone list and some of the emerging kids were on the try to keep list. Surman is probably somewhere in between as he is home grown and probably not a high earner. If we can get rid of the high earners and get some cash in for them then surman has a better chance of staying. As things stand all we have done is reduce some wages with no transfer fees so there is still a big hole in the finances that need filling for this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bailey Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Would be a little surprised by this as Surman is hardly a Stoke signing. Not only is he a half decent footballer, but he's not that strong in the tackle either. If this did happen, then I can imagine Surman rejecting the move with a certain Lowe 'encouraging' him to leave as we need the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winchester_stokie Posted 13 November, 2008 Share Posted 13 November, 2008 Would be a little surprised by this as Surman is hardly a Stoke signing. Not only is he a half decent footballer, but he's not that strong in the tackle either. If this did happen, then I can imagine Surman rejecting the move with a certain Lowe 'encouraging' him to leave as we need the money. Is Lawrence or Soars strong in the tackle? As I said earlier, we do mix it and do need different types of players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now