Jump to content

Danny Ings - Official: Signs for Villa


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

I could see him at Chelsea tbh. Tammy leaving, haaland by no means a cert... And... Well... Fuck me how do you put this...

 

 

 

 

 

Werner 😱

Chelsea are buying a striker this window 😅

According to the Guardian Chelsea should go for Ings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, miserableoldgit said:

Just posted on FB. Not sure ( being an old git) what the hand signals mean...

FB_IMG_1627567884756.jpg

I believe its something to do with where Valery is from in Paris. He did it when he scored that belter at Old Trafford

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, tunit said:

I believe its something to do with where Valery is from in Paris. He did it when he scored that belter at Old Trafford

Is it this? "The Circle Game is a very short game. It has only one goal, but it never ends. There is no winner or loser. It's just meant to keep going until all parties forget it existed. The aim is simple: you create a circle with your thumb and forefinger – like the "OK" hand gesture (also known as the "That's a Spicy Meat-a-Ball" gesture) – and you draw someone's gaze to it. If the person(s) look at the circle, you are allowed to strike them on the arm with your fist. The circle must be below the waist; you can't just hold it up to someone's face and smack them. That's against the rules."

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SKD said:

We’ve progressively reduced the quality within our squad for a number of years now, we’re riddled with debt and losing money season upon season, to the point where we can’t even spend £20m on a player to improve said squad. 

Last season we won about 3 games in 20, it was that bad I’ve forgotten how many. 

Those around us are improving and we’re getting worse. We’re heading towards relegation. 

No leadership from the owner. An owner who wants out; but no one wants to buy us. 

A number of highly paid players who we’ve had to loan out season upon season and/or get rid for next to nothing. 

not a dig at those running the club, I think given the circumstances are doing the best they can, with their hands tied behind their back. 

What a big ol' bag of nonsense. 

One at time -

'We’ve progressively reduced the quality within our squad for a number of years now' - Have we? So like the signings of Ings, Armstrong, KWP, Vestergaard, Salisu, to a lesser extent Diallo, Djenepo done that have they? Not IMO.

We've also seen several players improve a lot under the current manager. With even a young player like Tella coming through.

Most of our transfer duds, if not all were signed in a period before the current manager and board, for big fees and big wages, that have hamstrung the club financially. Also your statement makes out like they did it on purpose, all the players signed (aside the travesty signing of Carrillo that went outside of usual transfer strategy and against the recruitment department) were young, high rated players, who were internationals and had impressed in decent clubs like Juve or Lazio or in the Champions league, they were the exact profile the club had been successful with before and really the only sort of players we can sign if we want to improve because we don't have money to throw at players like the big 6 or clubs like West Ham or Everton.

 

 

'Those around us are improving and we’re getting worse. We’re heading towards relegation.'  - Other have covered this but this is also giant nonsense. Barely any PL clubs full stop have made major signings beyond Utd (who are IIRC the richest club in the world).

Palace lost their experienced manager and replaced him with a guy who has no real managerial experience, lost many of their squad on frees and whilst they have made some decent signings, one of their best players is injured until at least December and they seem to be excited about signings a guy from Chelsea reserves who got nowhere near their first team. 

Newcastle signed literally no one and only stayed up last year basically because of a magical spell of form from a loanee they look unlikely to get back.

Burnley have signed a centre-back from Stoke. 

Brighton are about to lose a key defender and likely their best centre-mid and still haven't sorted out their striker issue. 

Wolves have got a squad player in from Barcelona on loan, lost Portugal's no.1 keeper and replaced him basically his back up and have a manager unproven in this league.

Promoted clubs are the promoted clubs, but Norwich have lost their best player hands down in Buendia, and the others haven't recruited much. 

I cannot see how in our current state we are any worse off than we were last year against the bottom half PL teams, if not better off, because we have potentially upgraded at left back and at the moment with Elyounissi and Valery currently around, we actually have a little more depth. We also have Romeu fit again who was a big loss for basically the whole second half of the season last year.

AND we have cleared the likes of Lemina, Hoedt, Bertrand and Gunn off the wage bill giving us at very least scope to add some loans minimum.

 

 

'No leadership from the owner. An owner who wants out; but no one wants to buy us.' - What does this even mean? What does 'leadership' from an owner do to a football club? He hasn't exactly destabilised the club and told the whole first team they are going to be sold, he just lets the board and football people get on with it. Not sure how this has any impact at all. He doesn't interfere, which is a GOOD thing. 

 

'we’re riddled with debt' - Are we? Or did we actually take out one major loan for a specific purpose to cover issues due to COVID, and something that other clubs IIRC did. 

 

'A number of highly paid players who we’ve had to loan out season upon season and/or get rid for next to nothing.'  Which we have finally got rid off and should now basically be a clean slate with more room to move in the wage bill.

 

'not a dig at those running the club, I think given the circumstances are doing the best they can, with their hands tied behind their back.' - Hand tied behind their back by whom exactly? You say you are not 'having a dig' but it damn well looks like you are. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 13
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, miserableoldgit said:

Just posted on FB. Not sure ( being an old git) what the hand signals mean...

FB_IMG_1627567884756.jpg

I think it's a reference to the Cardiff scoreline. They both hold up 4 fingers with one hand and a 0 shape with the other as we won 4-0. Not sure tbh but that was my interpretation.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, tajjuk said:

What a big ol' bag of nonsense. 

One at time -

'We’ve progressively reduced the quality within our squad for a number of years now' - Have we? So like the signings of Ings, Armstrong, KWP, Vestergaard, Salisu, to a lesser extent Diallo, Djenepo done that have they? Not IMO.

We've also seen several players improve a lot under the current manager. With even a young player like Tella coming through.

Most of our transfer duds, if not all were signed in a period before the current manager and board, for big fees and big wages, that have hamstrung the club financially. Also your statement makes out like they did it on purpose, all the players signed (aside the travesty signing of Carrillo that went outside of usual transfer strategy and against the recruitment department) were young, high rated players, who were internationals and had impressed in decent clubs like Juve or Lazio or in the Champions league, they were the exact profile the club had been successful with before and really the only sort of players we can sign if we want to improve because we don't have money to throw at players like the big 6 or clubs like West Ham or Everton.

 

 

'Those around us are improving and we’re getting worse. We’re heading towards relegation.'  - Other have covered this but this is also giant nonsense. Barely any PL clubs full stop have made major signings beyond Utd (who are IIRC the richest club in the world).

Palace lost their experienced manager and replaced him with a guy who has no real managerial experience, lost many of their squad on frees and whilst they have made some decent signings, one of their best players is injured until at least December and they seem to be excited about signings a guy from Chelsea reserves who got nowhere near their first team. 

Newcastle signed literally no one and only stayed up last year basically because of a magical spell of form from a loanee they look unlikely to get back.

Burnley have signed a centre-back from Stoke. 

Brighton are about to lose a key defender and likely their best centre-mid and still haven't sorted out their striker issue. 

Wolves have got a squad player in from Barcelona on loan, lost Portugal's no.1 keeper and replaced him basically his back up and have a manager unproven in this league.

Promoted clubs are the promoted clubs, but Norwich have lost their best player hands down in Buendia, and the others haven't recruited much. 

I cannot see how in our current state we are any worse off than we were last year against the bottom half PL teams, if not better off, because we have potentially upgraded at left back and at the moment with Elyounissi and Valery currently around, we actually have a little more depth. We also have Romeu fit again who was a big loss for basically the whole second half of the season last year.

AND we have cleared the likes of Lemina, Hoedt, Bertrand and Gunn off the wage bill giving us at very least scope to add some loans minimum.

 

 

'No leadership from the owner. An owner who wants out; but no one wants to buy us.' - What does this even mean? What does 'leadership' from an owner do to a football club? He hasn't exactly destabilised the club and told the whole first team they are going to be sold, he just lets the board and football people get on with it. Not sure how this has any impact at all. He doesn't interfere, which is a GOOD thing. 

 

'we’re riddled with debt' - Are we? Or did we actually take out one major loan for a specific purpose to cover issues due to COVID, and something that other clubs IIRC did. 

 

'A number of highly paid players who we’ve had to loan out season upon season and/or get rid for next to nothing.'  Which we have finally got rid off and should now basically be a clean slate with more room to move in the wage bill.

 

'not a dig at those running the club, I think given the circumstances are doing the best they can, with their hands tied behind their back.' - Hand tied behind their back by whom exactly? You say you are not 'having a dig' but it damn well looks like you 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Very good and reasoned post but will fall on deaf ears for him, club bashing is all he does irrespective of fact.

Edited by Chapel End
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TWar said:

I think it's a reference to the Cardiff scoreline. They both hold up 4 fingers with one hand and a 0 shape with the other as we won 4-0. Not sure tbh but that was my interpretation.

Ah yes.....you could be on to something there.. .

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, tajjuk said:

What a big ol' bag of nonsense. 

One at time -

'We’ve progressively reduced the quality within our squad for a number of years now' - Have we? So like the signings of Ings, Armstrong, KWP, Vestergaard, Salisu, to a lesser extent Diallo, Djenepo done that have they? Not IMO.

We've also seen several players improve a lot under the current manager. With even a young player like Tella coming through.

Most of our transfer duds, if not all were signed in a period before the current manager and board, for big fees and big wages, that have hamstrung the club financially. Also your statement makes out like they did it on purpose, all the players signed (aside the travesty signing of Carrillo that went outside of usual transfer strategy and against the recruitment department) were young, high rated players, who were internationals and had impressed in decent clubs like Juve or Lazio or in the Champions league, they were the exact profile the club had been successful with before and really the only sort of players we can sign if we want to improve because we don't have money to throw at players like the big 6 or clubs like West Ham or Everton.

 

 

'Those around us are improving and we’re getting worse. We’re heading towards relegation.'  - Other have covered this but this is also giant nonsense. Barely any PL clubs full stop have made major signings beyond Utd (who are IIRC the richest club in the world).

Palace lost their experienced manager and replaced him with a guy who has no real managerial experience, lost many of their squad on frees and whilst they have made some decent signings, one of their best players is injured until at least December and they seem to be excited about signings a guy from Chelsea reserves who got nowhere near their first team. 

Newcastle signed literally no one and only stayed up last year basically because of a magical spell of form from a loanee they look unlikely to get back.

Burnley have signed a centre-back from Stoke. 

Brighton are about to lose a key defender and likely their best centre-mid and still haven't sorted out their striker issue. 

Wolves have got a squad player in from Barcelona on loan, lost Portugal's no.1 keeper and replaced him basically his back up and have a manager unproven in this league.

Promoted clubs are the promoted clubs, but Norwich have lost their best player hands down in Buendia, and the others haven't recruited much. 

I cannot see how in our current state we are any worse off than we were last year against the bottom half PL teams, if not better off, because we have potentially upgraded at left back and at the moment with Elyounissi and Valery currently around, we actually have a little more depth. We also have Romeu fit again who was a big loss for basically the whole second half of the season last year.

AND we have cleared the likes of Lemina, Hoedt, Bertrand and Gunn off the wage bill giving us at very least scope to add some loans minimum.

 

 

'No leadership from the owner. An owner who wants out; but no one wants to buy us.' - What does this even mean? What does 'leadership' from an owner do to a football club? He hasn't exactly destabilised the club and told the whole first team they are going to be sold, he just lets the board and football people get on with it. Not sure how this has any impact at all. He doesn't interfere, which is a GOOD thing. 

 

'we’re riddled with debt' - Are we? Or did we actually take out one major loan for a specific purpose to cover issues due to COVID, and something that other clubs IIRC did. 

 

'A number of highly paid players who we’ve had to loan out season upon season and/or get rid for next to nothing.'  Which we have finally got rid off and should now basically be a clean slate with more room to move in the wage bill.

 

'not a dig at those running the club, I think given the circumstances are doing the best they can, with their hands tied behind their back.' - Hand tied behind their back by whom exactly? You say you are not 'having a dig' but it damn well looks like you are. 

A number of great points made here. People like to be all doom and gloom but we have definitely improved with the return of Romeu from injury, Bertrand to Perraud, and Tella developing more and becoming more crucial. We will spend more too, other sides are also struggling and unlike the likes of Burnley we have been told more are coming, they are relying on loans at best from what I hear.

The only big spenders around us are Villa, palace and Brighton and all are losing major players in Grealish, White, Bissouma, if rumours are to be believed and palace having half their team out of contract.

Edited by TWar
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tajjuk said:

What a big ol' bag of nonsense. 

One at time -'

Some fair points in there, let me expand; 

 

We’ve progressively reduced the quality within our squad for a number of years now' - Have we? So like the signings of Ings, Armstrong, KWP, Vestergaard, Salisu, to a lesser extent Diallo, Djenepo done that have they? Not IMO.

We've also seen several players improve a lot under the current manager. With even a young player like Tella coming through.

Most of our transfer duds, if not all were signed in a period before the current manager and board, for big fees and big wages, that have hamstrung the club financially. Also your statement makes out like they did it on purpose, all the players signed (aside the travesty signing of Carrillo that went outside of usual transfer strategy and against the recruitment department) were young, high rated players, who were internationals and had impressed in decent clubs like Juve or Lazio or in the Champions league, they were the exact profile the club had been successful with before and really the only sort of players we can sign if we want to improve because we don't have money to throw at players like the big 6 or clubs like West Ham or Everton.

Ings and Vestergaard are off, we will not come Close to replacing them, well ings at least, with like for like quality. We’re looking at a championship striker. KWP, Armstrong and Salisu (too early to say about him, imo) are about the level we’re at. KWP is an upgrade on Cedric, granted, but Armstrong isn’t at the level of Tadic as an example. They’re about our level of bottom half fighting relegation. IMO, our squad is / has been getting worse but I guess that’s up for debate. 

Agree, we’ve got better scouting wise since the Crooker came in. 

 

'Those around us are improving and we’re getting worse. We’re heading towards relegation.'  - Other have covered this but this is also giant nonsense. Barely any PL clubs full stop have made major signings beyond Utd (who are IIRC the richest club in the world).

Palace lost their experienced manager and replaced him with a guy who has no real managerial experience, lost many of their squad on frees and whilst they have made some decent signings, one of their best players is injured until at least December and they seem to be excited about signings a guy from Chelsea reserves who got nowhere near their first team. 

Newcastle signed literally no one and only stayed up last year basically because of a magical spell of form from a loanee they look unlikely to get back.

Burnley have signed a centre-back from Stoke. 

Brighton are about to lose a key defender and likely their best centre-mid and still haven't sorted out their striker issue. 

Wolves have got a squad player in from Barcelona on loan, lost Portugal's no.1 keeper and replaced him basically his back up and have a manager unproven in this league.

Promoted clubs are the promoted clubs, but Norwich have lost their best player hands down in Buendia, and the others haven't recruited much. 

I cannot see how in our current state we are any worse off than we were last year against the bottom half PL teams, if not better off, because we have potentially upgraded at left back and at the moment with Elyounissi and Valery currently around, we actually have a little more depth. We also have Romeu fit again who was a big loss for basically the whole second half of the season last year.

AND we have cleared the likes of Lemina, Hoedt, Bertrand and Gunn off the wage bill giving us at very least scope to add some loans minimum.

Fair point around Newcastle and Burnley. Not considering wolves as I think they’ll be well clear of us. In my mind I was thinking Villa, Brighton and palace (who I think will surprise people). 

 

'No leadership from the owner. An owner who wants out; but no one wants to buy us.' - What does this even mean? What does 'leadership' from an owner do to a football club? He hasn't exactly destabilised the club and told the whole first team they are going to be sold, he just lets the board and football people get on with it. Not sure how this has any impact at all. He doesn't interfere, which is a GOOD thing. 

Agree him not interfering is a good thing, however what is his strategy? What direction does he want to take the club. Does anyone hear from the owner? 

'we’re riddled with debt' - Are we? Or did we actually take out one major loan for a specific purpose to cover issues due to COVID, and something that other clubs IIRC did. 

Debt is debt regardless of what it’s for. 

'A number of highly paid players who we’ve had to loan out season upon season and/or get rid for next to nothing. Which we have finally got rid off and should now basically be a clean slate with more room to move in the wage bill.

We have no money to sign anyone to worry about the wage bill. We may be paying for previous mistakes, however it’s contributing to us struggling to compete. 

'not a dig at those running the club, I think given the circumstances are doing the best they can, with their hands tied behind their back.' - Hand tied behind their back by whom exactly? You say you are not 'having a dig' but it damn well looks like you are. 
 

Nope I’m really not. I think the club are in safe hands with crooker, Simmens and co. However, with Gao as owner, we’re heading for the championship. 

As a club; We’ve got no ambition. Why would a player like Ings want to commit to spending his last few years at a club who will be battling relegation at best. 

Edited by SKD
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TWar said:

A number of great points made here. People like to be all doom and gloom but we have definitely improved with the return of Romeu from injury, Bertrand to Perraud, and Tella developing more and becoming more crucial. We will spend more too, other sides are also struggling and unlike the likes of Burnley we have been told more are coming, they are relying on loans at best from what I hear.

The only big spenders around us are Villa, palace and Brighton and all are losing major players in Grealish, White, Bissouma, if rumours are to be believed and palace having half their team out of contract.

We’re told this every window and every window an excuse comes out. We’ll likely replace what we lose (but with less quality). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SKD said:

Some fair points in there, let me expand; 

 

We’ve progressively reduced the quality within our squad for a number of years now' - Have we? So like the signings of Ings, Armstrong, KWP, Vestergaard, Salisu, to a lesser extent Diallo, Djenepo done that have they? Not IMO.

We've also seen several players improve a lot under the current manager. With even a young player like Tella coming through.

Most of our transfer duds, if not all were signed in a period before the current manager and board, for big fees and big wages, that have hamstrung the club financially. Also your statement makes out like they did it on purpose, all the players signed (aside the travesty signing of Carrillo that went outside of usual transfer strategy and against the recruitment department) were young, high rated players, who were internationals and had impressed in decent clubs like Juve or Lazio or in the Champions league, they were the exact profile the club had been successful with before and really the only sort of players we can sign if we want to improve because we don't have money to throw at players like the big 6 or clubs like West Ham or Everton.

Ings and Vestergaard are off, we will not come Close to replacing them, well ings at least, with like for like quality. We’re looking at a championship striker. KWP, Armstrong and Salisu (too early to say about him, imo) are about the level we’re at. KWP is an upgrade on Cedric, granted, but Armstrong isn’t at the level of Tadic as an example. They’re about our level of bottom half fighting relegation. IMO, our squad is / has been getting worse but I guess that’s up for debate. 

Agree, we’ve got better scouting wise since the Crooker came in. 

 

'Those around us are improving and we’re getting worse. We’re heading towards relegation.'  - Other have covered this but this is also giant nonsense. Barely any PL clubs full stop have made major signings beyond Utd (who are IIRC the richest club in the world).

Palace lost their experienced manager and replaced him with a guy who has no real managerial experience, lost many of their squad on frees and whilst they have made some decent signings, one of their best players is injured until at least December and they seem to be excited about signings a guy from Chelsea reserves who got nowhere near their first team. 

Newcastle signed literally no one and only stayed up last year basically because of a magical spell of form from a loanee they look unlikely to get back.

Burnley have signed a centre-back from Stoke. 

Brighton are about to lose a key defender and likely their best centre-mid and still haven't sorted out their striker issue. 

Wolves have got a squad player in from Barcelona on loan, lost Portugal's no.1 keeper and replaced him basically his back up and have a manager unproven in this league.

Promoted clubs are the promoted clubs, but Norwich have lost their best player hands down in Buendia, and the others haven't recruited much. 

I cannot see how in our current state we are any worse off than we were last year against the bottom half PL teams, if not better off, because we have potentially upgraded at left back and at the moment with Elyounissi and Valery currently around, we actually have a little more depth. We also have Romeu fit again who was a big loss for basically the whole second half of the season last year.

AND we have cleared the likes of Lemina, Hoedt, Bertrand and Gunn off the wage bill giving us at very least scope to add some loans minimum.

Fair point around Newcastle and Burnley. Not considering wolves as I think they’ll be well clear of us. In my mind I was thinking Villa, Brighton and palace (who I think will surprise people). 

 

'No leadership from the owner. An owner who wants out; but no one wants to buy us.' - What does this even mean? What does 'leadership' from an owner do to a football club? He hasn't exactly destabilised the club and told the whole first team they are going to be sold, he just lets the board and football people get on with it. Not sure how this has any impact at all. He doesn't interfere, which is a GOOD thing. 

Agree him not interfering is a good thing, however what is his strategy? What direction does he want to take the club. Does anyone hear from the owner? 

'we’re riddled with debt' - Are we? Or did we actually take out one major loan for a specific purpose to cover issues due to COVID, and something that other clubs IIRC did. 

Debt is debt regardless of what it’s for. 

'A number of highly paid players who we’ve had to loan out season upon season and/or get rid for next to nothing. Which we have finally got rid off and should now basically be a clean slate with more room to move in the wage bill.

We have no money to sign anyone to worry about the wage bill. We may be paying for previous mistakes, however it’s contributing to us struggling to compete. 

'not a dig at those running the club, I think given the circumstances are doing the best they can, with their hands tied behind their back.' - Hand tied behind their back by whom exactly? You say you are not 'having a dig' but it damn well looks like you are. 
 

Nope I’m really not. I think the club are in safe hands with crooker, Simmens and co. However, with Gao as owner, we’re heading for the championship. 

As a club; We’ve got no ambition. Why would a player like Ings want to commit to spending his last few years at a club who will be battling relegation at best. 

I’m not reading all that. Wtf is this? A book club?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, SKD said:

We’re told this every window and every window an excuse comes out. We’ll likely replace what we lose (but with less quality). 

There was a bad spell of recruitment after 2016 but things have started to turn around in recent windows. It has been a lot better under Crocker.

Is Ings not an upgrade on Austin?

Is Walker-Peters not an upgrade on Cedric?

Are Vestergaard and Salisu not upgrades on Hoedt?

Is Adams not an upgrade on Carrillo?

Is Armstrong not an upgrade...? etc etc

Edited by Matthew Le God
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SKD said:

Some fair points in there, let me expand; 

 

We’ve progressively reduced the quality within our squad for a number of years now' - Have we? So like the signings of Ings, Armstrong, KWP, Vestergaard, Salisu, to a lesser extent Diallo, Djenepo done that have they? Not IMO.

We've also seen several players improve a lot under the current manager. With even a young player like Tella coming through.

Most of our transfer duds, if not all were signed in a period before the current manager and board, for big fees and big wages, that have hamstrung the club financially. Also your statement makes out like they did it on purpose, all the players signed (aside the travesty signing of Carrillo that went outside of usual transfer strategy and against the recruitment department) were young, high rated players, who were internationals and had impressed in decent clubs like Juve or Lazio or in the Champions league, they were the exact profile the club had been successful with before and really the only sort of players we can sign if we want to improve because we don't have money to throw at players like the big 6 or clubs like West Ham or Everton.

Ings and Vestergaard are off, we will not come Close to replacing them, well ings at least, with like for like quality. We’re looking at a championship striker. KWP, Armstrong and Salisu (too early to say about him, imo) are about the level we’re at. KWP is an upgrade on Cedric, granted, but Armstrong isn’t at the level of Tadic as an example. They’re about our level of bottom half fighting relegation. IMO, our squad is / has been getting worse but I guess that’s up for debate. 

Agree, we’ve got better scouting wise since the Crooker came in. 

 

'Those around us are improving and we’re getting worse. We’re heading towards relegation.'  - Other have covered this but this is also giant nonsense. Barely any PL clubs full stop have made major signings beyond Utd (who are IIRC the richest club in the world).

Palace lost their experienced manager and replaced him with a guy who has no real managerial experience, lost many of their squad on frees and whilst they have made some decent signings, one of their best players is injured until at least December and they seem to be excited about signings a guy from Chelsea reserves who got nowhere near their first team. 

Newcastle signed literally no one and only stayed up last year basically because of a magical spell of form from a loanee they look unlikely to get back.

Burnley have signed a centre-back from Stoke. 

Brighton are about to lose a key defender and likely their best centre-mid and still haven't sorted out their striker issue. 

Wolves have got a squad player in from Barcelona on loan, lost Portugal's no.1 keeper and replaced him basically his back up and have a manager unproven in this league.

Promoted clubs are the promoted clubs, but Norwich have lost their best player hands down in Buendia, and the others haven't recruited much. 

I cannot see how in our current state we are any worse off than we were last year against the bottom half PL teams, if not better off, because we have potentially upgraded at left back and at the moment with Elyounissi and Valery currently around, we actually have a little more depth. We also have Romeu fit again who was a big loss for basically the whole second half of the season last year.

AND we have cleared the likes of Lemina, Hoedt, Bertrand and Gunn off the wage bill giving us at very least scope to add some loans minimum.

Fair point around Newcastle and Burnley. Not considering wolves as I think they’ll be well clear of us. In my mind I was thinking Villa, Brighton and palace (who I think will surprise people). 

 

'No leadership from the owner. An owner who wants out; but no one wants to buy us.' - What does this even mean? What does 'leadership' from an owner do to a football club? He hasn't exactly destabilised the club and told the whole first team they are going to be sold, he just lets the board and football people get on with it. Not sure how this has any impact at all. He doesn't interfere, which is a GOOD thing. 

Agree him not interfering is a good thing, however what is his strategy? What direction does he want to take the club. Does anyone hear from the owner? 

'we’re riddled with debt' - Are we? Or did we actually take out one major loan for a specific purpose to cover issues due to COVID, and something that other clubs IIRC did. 

Debt is debt regardless of what it’s for. 

'A number of highly paid players who we’ve had to loan out season upon season and/or get rid for next to nothing. Which we have finally got rid off and should now basically be a clean slate with more room to move in the wage bill.

We have no money to sign anyone to worry about the wage bill. We may be paying for previous mistakes, however it’s contributing to us struggling to compete. 

'not a dig at those running the club, I think given the circumstances are doing the best they can, with their hands tied behind their back.' - Hand tied behind their back by whom exactly? You say you are not 'having a dig' but it damn well looks like you are. 
 

Nope I’m really not. I think the club are in safe hands with crooker, Simmens and co. However, with Gao as owner, we’re heading for the championship. 

As a club; We’ve got no ambition. Why would a player like Ings want to commit to spending his last few years at a club who will be battling relegation at best. 

I think that Armstrong is a class act. Would I rather have Tadic, yes but it would be a close run thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

I think that Armstrong is a class act. Would I rather have Tadic, yes but it would be a close run thing.

Armstrong is decent (occasional dangerous loss of possession aside) but he's not remotely in the same class as Tadic.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Armstrong's the player you would want in our current situation. Mr. Consistent, always giving a 7/10, when the team's playing poorly, he's usually one of the few positives. When the team was playing poorly with Tadic, that's when he went missing. However, I don't think Armstrong gets into our 2014-15, or 2015-16 team, due to his on the ball limitations and Tadic was one of the key performers of those two years. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, HarvSFC said:

Armstrong's the player you would want in our current situation. Mr. Consistent, always giving a 7/10, when the team's playing poorly, he's usually one of the few positives. When the team was playing poorly with Tadic, that's when he went missing. However, I don't think Armstrong gets into our 2014-15, or 2015-16 team, due to his on the ball limitations and Tadic was one of the key performers of those two years. 

Agreed, for the most part, Though to the surprise of no one, I'd put Armstrong in that team ahead of Steven Davis. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dorchester Saint said:

I genuinely don’t see Danny Ings leaving this summer now, he looks perfectly happy to me. 

I don't think he's a player that will spit his dummy out if he doesn't get the move he wants, unlike so many of our better players in the last ten or so years. If the move he wants doesn't materialise, I genuinely think he'll continue playing happily for us until the end of his contract, and will probably be out to impress bigger teams that he's good enough for them. Then he gets his big move next summer on a Bosman with probably a nice signing on fee, ahead of half a season at his new club to push for the WC.

The rub is that for a club with our tight financial restrictions, I feel that if we can sell him this summer for around the £20 million mark, we absolutely should be doing that. £20 million is a huge amount of money to lose on a player for one season, even someone as key to us as Ings, especially as he could spend large chunks of next season on the treatment table. A replacement won't be cheap, but I do think it is doable. You look at the likes of Edouard, a proven goalscorer albeit in Scotland, for that sort of money and we could plan ahead the next few seasons now, rather than bumping the problem down the road until next summer, when we lose Ings AND have no money from his transfer fees to sign a replacement.

 

All IMO of course.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are somewhat looking at Tadic with the benefit of hindsight through rose tinted glasses. He was absolutely incredible in the 15/16 season and has been absolutely incredible for Ajax but his last couple of seasons with us he was very poor and a lot of people were calling for him to go. He got 8 and 9 goal contributions in his last two seasons with us, exactly the same as Armstrong has in his previous two seasons, but Tadic played significantly more minutes.

Armstrong is atleast equal to Tadic when he left us but if he can stay fit a full season then I think he represents an upgrade.

As for other comparisons under Semmens tenure

Salisu > Hoedt

KWP > Cedric

Adams >>> Carrillo

Djenepo > Boufal (imo, it is close though)

Diallo < Hojbjerg (for now, but I think he has a very high ceiling)

Ings >>> Austin (since he was still signed under Semmens tenure technically)

Seems to me on the most part in the Semmens era we have upgraded almost entirely with almost no downgrades. The big downgrades came in 2017-19 like VvD to Hoedt, Mane to Redmond, Pelle to Austin et al.

Edited by TWar
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, SNSUN said:

I don't think he's a player that will spit his dummy out if he doesn't get the move he wants, unlike so many of our better players in the last ten or so years. If the move he wants doesn't materialise, I genuinely think he'll continue playing happily for us until the end of his contract, and will probably be out to impress bigger teams that he's good enough for them. Then he gets his big move next summer on a Bosman with probably a nice signing on fee, ahead of half a season at his new club to push for the WC.

The rub is that for a club with our tight financial restrictions, I feel that if we can sell him this summer for around the £20 million mark, we absolutely should be doing that. £20 million is a huge amount of money to lose on a player for one season, even someone as key to us as Ings, especially as he could spend large chunks of next season on the treatment table. A replacement won't be cheap, but I do think it is doable. You look at the likes of Edouard, a proven goalscorer albeit in Scotland, for that sort of money and we could plan ahead the next few seasons now, rather than bumping the problem down the road until next summer, when we lose Ings AND have no money from his transfer fees to sign a replacement.

 

All IMO of course.

I'd rather keep him instead of signing a player without Prem experience taking the chance that he might score some goals.

In Ings we have a player if fit will score double figures and keep us in the Prem, we lose a lot more than 20mill if we do down. 

  

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, TWar said:

I think people are somewhat looking at Tadic with the benefit of hindsight through rose tinted glasses. He was absolutely incredible in the 15/16 season and has been absolutely incredible for Ajax but his last couple of seasons with us he was very poor and a lot of people were calling for him to go. He got 8 and 9 goal contributions in his last two seasons with us, exactly the same as Armstrong has in his previous two seasons, but Tadic played significantly more minutes.

Armstrong is atleast equal to Tadic when he left us but if he can stay fit a full season then I think he represents an upgrade.

As for other comparisons under Semmens tenure

Salisu > Hoedt

KWP > Cedric

Adams >>> Carrillo

Djenepo > Boufal (imo, it is close though)

Diallo < Hojbjerg (for now, but I think he has a very high ceiling)

Ings >>> Austin (since he was still signed under Semmens tenure technically)

Seems to me on the most part in the Semmens era we have upgraded almost entirely with almost no downgrades. The big downgrades came in 2017-19 like VvD to Hoedt, Mane to Redmond, Pelle to Austin et al.

If you look at the squad that Puel had, other than maybe Ings, KWP and JWP (improving), across the board we are weaker than that. 

Over the past season our recruitment has certainly improved, I agree with that, but that wasn’t very hard given the dross we signed under the latter les Reed years. However, given we’re hamstrung with our lack of budget, the players were bringing in are going to keep our head above the water, at best. 

Imo (it’s a game of opinions), other than KWP & Salisu (early days for him, I’ve seen him play well and I’ve seen him play not so well), most of our recent signings wouldn’t look out of place in the championship (which is where I suspect we’ll be come the end of next season). I don’t think we’re signing any players of any real quality. 

Anyway, this isn’t a transfer thread. My point still stands, if you were in Danny’s shoes, why the hell would you want to stay with us in our current form!?

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Soggy Bottom said:

I'd rather keep him instead of signing a player without Prem experience taking the chance that he might score some goals.

In Ings we have a player if fit will score double figures and keep us in the Prem, we lose a lot more than 20mill if we do down. 

  

But the same could be said of the 2022-23 season - we won't have Ings' goals then and will be relying on an unproven striker to fill in so if we are going to get relegated without his goals, you're just delaying that relegation by one season. Except for a club that has to sell to buy, that unproven striker that we replace Ings with is likely to be less good than what we could buy this summer because we won't have the funds from Ings's transfer fee to use on a replacement.

 

I suppose the argument against selling him this summer is that there is a chance we have found investment/a new owner by next summer, and suddenly we are flush with cash to sign an expensive replacement. I don't know what the odds are for that to happen, but it's probably similar to me growing long sexy legs and performing in the Moulin Rouge.

 

I agree it is a difficult decision to make, and in all honesty I'd love him to stay and sign the new contract (even if it has, say, a minimum release clause of £20 million), but logically IMO, the best decision (even if it isn't necessarily the right one) would be to take the money and invest in the replacement now.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, SKD said:

If you look at the squad that Puel had, other than maybe Ings, KWP and JWP (improving), across the board we are weaker than that. 

Over the past season our recruitment has certainly improved, I agree with that, but that wasn’t very hard given the dross we signed under the latter les Reed years. However, given we’re hamstrung with our lack of budget, the players were bringing in are going to keep our head above the water, at best. 

Imo (it’s a game of opinions), other than KWP & Salisu (early days for him, I’ve seen him play well and I’ve seen him play not so well), most of our recent signings wouldn’t look out of place in the championship (which is where I suspect we’ll be come the end of next season). I don’t think we’re signing any players of any real quality. 

Anyway, this isn’t a transfer thread. My point still stands, if you were in Danny’s shoes, why the hell would you want to stay with us in our current form!?

There was two years between Puel leaving and Semmens coming in. I feel you are missing a step where we really cratered. I personally think we have done a great job of bouncing back from the mess three years back to back of poor buys put us in. But it is a long game, if we keep signing players of the quality of KWP, Ings, Adams and keep Ralph who can massively improve players like JWP, Armstrong, Vestergaard, and Romeu we will continue to grow. Rome wasn't built in a day though.

I also think Adams would look out of place in the championship, and did, he just played a championship side and made them look like school children. We also showed how we do against championship opposition, we absolutely battered them, Bournemouth last season too. People who we don't rate like Redmond, Obafemi, Djenepo ect. absolutely tore them a new one. I think when people say "championship quality" or "wouldn't look out of place in the championship" they need to reassess quite how big the gap is to that league. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, saintwbu said:

To me, that injury against Villa really knocked him. He was absolutely flying, had just stuck one in the top corner and stood there like he was the king of the world, and then he gets another knee injury. You could see for the rest of the season, the frustration he had that he was no longer at that peak anymore. It knocked him for six. I didn’t see any lack of effort, just frustration, with himself and with the team. It’s so easy to say a player who isn’t playing well has had his head turned, but I didn’t see anything to suggest that at all.

I agree with this.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, SKD said:

.....Some fair points in there, let me expand

 

Agree him [Gao] not interfering is a good thing, however what is his strategy? What direction does he want to take the club. Does anyone hear from the owner? 

 

 

 

Cutting down your mammoth post to address that single issue.

We have heard from Gao. I think it was just the once but he emphasised the club must be self sufficient. This has been reiterated several times by Semnens & co in various interviews and forums. That IS" his strategy". That IS the "direction he wants to take the club". 

For some reason you, and many like you, choose to ignore that and/or not accept it because it's not what you want to hear.

Once you accept that point you will realise that every other point you made in that post is either nonesense or unrealistic .

We are not going to turn into a Man City overnight even with new owners. We will continue to sell some very good players. We will replace them with what we hope turn out to be decent replacements that we can afford. We might get some wrong but we won't deliberately buy crap. We will try to win every game with what we have. We won't win every game. If 17 out of the other 19 teams in the league finish higher than us we go down (unlikely in the short term IMO but it could happen to anyone outside top 6 at some stage). If it happens it won't be deliberate, and we'll be doing our damndest to get back up again.

Accept the owners strategy for what it is, stop trying to project what you'd prefer that strategy to be onto the club, accept every club has ups and downs, accept how good those good times feel when they did/do come but only because we had/will have a few bad times to contrast with them, and maybe, just maybe, you could enjoy supporting Saints. If you can't do that I suggest there's a few clubs collectively known as the big 6, take your pick.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, saintwbu said:

To me, that injury against Villa really knocked him. He was absolutely flying, had just stuck one in the top corner and stood there like he was the king of the world, and then he gets another knee injury. You could see for the rest of the season, the frustration he had that he was no longer at that peak anymore. It knocked him for six. I didn’t see any lack of effort, just frustration, with himself and with the team. It’s so easy to say a player who isn’t playing well has had his head turned, but I didn’t see anything to suggest that at all.

Agree with all this, to me it just makes it even more puzzling that he hasn’t bitten the clubs hand off over a four year contract with the money on offer that he’s happy with. 
 

I suppose if he could get a shot at Champions League football then fair enough but he must know that if he goes to one of those clubs not only is he not playing every week but he’s not getting a four year security blanket either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Wurzel said:

Cutting down your mammoth post to address that single issue.

We have heard from Gao. I think it was just the once but he emphasised the club must be self sufficient. This has been reiterated several times by Semnens & co in various interviews and forums. That IS" his strategy". That IS the "direction he wants to take the club". 

For some reason you, and many like you, choose to ignore that and/or not accept it because it's not what you want to hear.

Once you accept that point you will realise that every other point you made in that post is either nonesense or unrealistic .

We are not going to turn into a Man City overnight even with new owners. We will continue to sell some very good players. We will replace them with what we hope turn out to be decent replacements that we can afford. We might get some wrong but we won't deliberately buy crap. We will try to win every game with what we have. We won't win every game. If 17 out of the other 19 teams in the league finish higher than us we go down (unlikely in the short term IMO but it could happen to anyone outside top 6 at some stage). If it happens it won't be deliberate, and we'll be doing our damndest to get back up again.

Accept the owners strategy for what it is, stop trying to project what you'd prefer that strategy to be onto the club, accept every club has ups and downs, accept how good those good times feel when they did/do come but only because we had/will have a few bad times to contrast with them, and maybe, just maybe, you could enjoy supporting Saints. If you can't do that I suggest there's a few clubs collectively known as the big 6, take your pick.

 

 

Good post. There shouldn't be any doubt about our strategy - do the best we can with what we've got. Gao can't do anything about the poor decisions made by those employed to make football and contractual decisions, he can't inject cash he ain't got, and can't sell to a non existent buyer. 

Acceptance of reality rather than unrealistic expectations. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Wurzel said:

Cutting down your mammoth post to address that single issue.

We have heard from Gao. I think it was just the once but he emphasised the club must be self sufficient. This has been reiterated several times by Semnens & co in various interviews and forums. That IS" his strategy". That IS the "direction he wants to take the club". 

For some reason you, and many like you, choose to ignore that and/or not accept it because it's not what you want to hear.

Once you accept that point you will realise that every other point you made in that post is either nonesense or unrealistic .

We are not going to turn into a Man City overnight even with new owners. We will continue to sell some very good players. We will replace them with what we hope turn out to be decent replacements that we can afford. We might get some wrong but we won't deliberately buy crap. We will try to win every game with what we have. We won't win every game. If 17 out of the other 19 teams in the league finish higher than us we go down (unlikely in the short term IMO but it could happen to anyone outside top 6 at some stage). If it happens it won't be deliberate, and we'll be doing our damndest to get back up again.

Accept the owners strategy for what it is, stop trying to project what you'd prefer that strategy to be onto the club, accept every club has ups and downs, accept how good those good times feel when they did/do come but only because we had/will have a few bad times to contrast with them, and maybe, just maybe, you could enjoy supporting Saints. If you can't do that I suggest there's a few clubs collectively known as the big 6, take your pick.

 

 

But "self sufficient" isn't a strategy, it's simply a statement that there won't be any external investment. In the absence of external investment, you spend less than you generate, or you go bust. That's hardly a clever strategy.

The strategy would be mapping out how to be self sufficient and competitive because, on that front, we are failing and will likely continue to do so. We don't do anything particularly special, we don't have any sort of "USP" and most other Prem clubs are well established and have comparable facilities and more money. So, if you want to be charitable and call "self-sufficiency" a "strategy" (which it obviously isnt), it's not a very good one.

Gao's investment in SFC has been a disaster for him personally and is potentially a disaster for the club. He has no plan, no vision, no clue and has brought nothing.

Gao has issued one public statement in his several years in charge, which was about fives lines long, and given a couple of snippets to one or two journalists. 

Let's not pretend there is a strategy, because there clearly isn't.

As I've said several times on here, it's good that he isn't a mentalist doing weird things. But, similarly, he doesn't bring anything positive whatsoever. He has taken over ownership and shown himself incapable of adding any value. That's the fact. 

Why shouldn't fans want an owner who has something to add?

The sad reality is, though, that Premier League football is fucked. It is unsustainable unless you have an ultra-rich owner or are Man U or Liverpool, with a big enough brand. 

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some really great posts here. Having read through them in detail, I'm actually feeling more optimistic about the coming season than I was.

I think the club have generally done well shifting out the majority of the remaining unsellables, bringing in some emerging talent and trying to deal pragmatically with the Ings situation.  It's definitely a distraction, but at least we have a player good enough to create this headache in the first place.  I'm sure Brighton, for example, would want to be faced with the same problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, benjii said:

But "self sufficient" isn't a strategy, it's simply a statement that there won't be any external investment. In the absence of external investment, you spend less than you generate, or you go bust. That's hardly a clever strategy.

The strategy would be mapping out how to be self sufficient and competitive because, on that front, we are failing and will likely continue to do so. We don't do anything particularly special, we don't have any sort of "USP" and most other Prem clubs are well established and have comparable facilities and more money. So, if you want to be charitable and call "self-sufficiency" a "strategy" (which it obviously isnt), it's not a very good one.

Gao's investment in SFC has been a disaster for him personally and is potentially a disaster for the club. He has no plan, no vision, no clue and has brought nothing.

Gao has issued one public statement in his several years in charge, which was about fives lines long, and given a couple of snippets to one or two journalists. 

Let's not pretend there is a strategy, because there clearly isn't.

As I've said several times on here, it's good that he isn't a mentalist doing weird things. But, similarly, he doesn't bring anything positive whatsoever. He has taken over ownership and shown himself incapable of adding any value. That's the fact. 

Why shouldn't fans want an owner who has something to add?

The sad reality is, though, that Premier League football is fucked. It is unsustainable unless you have an ultra-rich owner or are Man U or Liverpool, with a big enough brand. 

Why would a football club need a USP? I think a lot of this is overcomplicating the issue. We don't need the chairman to have a "plan" or "vision", this isn't a marketing exercise, the aim is to win football matches.

Gao ain't investing or taking money out, we use what we make, and it is Semmens job to turn that into results on the pitch. His strategy is to buy young, develop and sell at a profit. Not a bad one at all in my eyes. It will work to keep us competitive imo but it won't propel us up the table by default. We need good scouting, good youth and a good manager, I think recently we have shown all those things. I am quietly optimistic.

Edited by TWar
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, benjii said:

As I've said several times on here, it's good that he isn't a mentalist doing weird things. But, similarly, he doesn't bring anything positive whatsoever. He has taken over ownership and shown himself incapable of adding any value. That's the fact. 

He identified that our senior leadership positions were in need of an overhaul and brought in a group of much more capable people like Semmens. His senior recruitment strategy has led to better decision making throughout the club 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ex Lion Tamer said:

He identified that our senior leadership positions were in need of an overhaul and brought in a group of much more capable people like Semmens. His senior recruitment strategy has led to better decision making throughout the club 

Exactly! Gao's job is to hire someone to manage the football side of things, he has, and I rate that person. Certainly a hell of a lot more than the guys who tanked us post Koeman.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, benjii said:

But "self sufficient" isn't a strategy, it's simply a statement that there won't be any external investment. In the absence of external investment, you spend less than you generate, or you go bust. That's hardly a clever strategy.

The strategy would be mapping out how to be self sufficient and competitive because, on that front, we are failing and will likely continue to do so. We don't do anything particularly special, we don't have any sort of "USP" and most other Prem clubs are well established and have comparable facilities and more money. So, if you want to be charitable and call "self-sufficiency" a "strategy" (which it obviously isnt), it's not a very good one.

Gao's investment in SFC has been a disaster for him personally and is potentially a disaster for the club. He has no plan, no vision, no clue and has brought nothing.

Gao has issued one public statement in his several years in charge, which was about fives lines long, and given a couple of snippets to one or two journalists. 

Let's not pretend there is a strategy, because there clearly isn't.

As I've said several times on here, it's good that he isn't a mentalist doing weird things. But, similarly, he doesn't bring anything positive whatsoever. He has taken over ownership and shown himself incapable of adding any value. That's the fact. 

Why shouldn't fans want an owner who has something to add?

The sad reality is, though, that Premier League football is fucked. It is unsustainable unless you have an ultra-rich owner or are Man U or Liverpool, with a big enough brand. 

I normally agree with you, but can't agree with this. Our position is simple - we reap what we sow, and I'm not sure a) what usp we could have (we're a football club, not a brand), or b) how that helps us live within our limited means. 

I do agree though that the Premier league is unsustainable...and that kind of makes the point that our get by/make do strategy (it is a strategy) is about the best we can do. Sure, we're fans and all want more, but you can't build a house without cash for bricks. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would probably watch less women's gymnastics if they wore more clothes, but I can totally understand why they prefer not to parade their gusset.

Re Gao: I am not saying he should have a master plan and should be actively engaged in day to day affairs, or that we should have some kind of unique selling point. I just take issue with the idea that "self sustaining" is a strategy because running at 80% wages to turnover and borrowing 80m quid is not sustainable so, even if it is a strategy ' it's not going to lead anywhere in the long run. And that's fine, I guess. Lots of clubs come and go, and we go through ups and downs. 

Personally, though, if I was going to acquire a business, I would make sure I could actually bring something useful to the table. I guess I see it as a question of integrity, largely. He saw Saints as a convenient place to dump some cash outside China. That's all we are to him. And I don't respect that.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, benjii said:

I would probably watch less women's gymnastics if they wore more clothes, but I can totally understand why they prefer not to parade their gusset.

Re Gao: I am not saying he should have a master plan and should be actively engaged in day to day affairs, or that we should have some kind of unique selling point. I just take issue with the idea that "self sustaining" is a strategy because running at 80% wages to turnover and borrowing 80m quid is not sustainable so, even if it is a strategy ' it's not going to lead anywhere in the long run. And that's fine, I guess. Lots of clubs come and go, and we go through ups and downs. 

Personally, though, if I was going to acquire a business, I would make sure I could actually bring something useful to the table. I guess I see it as a question of integrity, largely. He saw Saints as a convenient place to dump some cash outside China. That's all we are to him. And I don't respect that.

I think he was responding to the Chinese dictatorship that encouraged such investment, they then decided it had gone over the top with ridiculous amounts of money being ploughed in with no benefit . Now if GAO sells up he may be targeted for making the Dictators look foolish and end up in prison as a result so he is trapped …

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, benjii said:

I would probably watch less women's gymnastics if they wore more clothes, but I can totally understand why they prefer not to parade their gusset.

Re Gao: I am not saying he should have a master plan and should be actively engaged in day to day affairs, or that we should have some kind of unique selling point. I just take issue with the idea that "self sustaining" is a strategy because running at 80% wages to turnover and borrowing 80m quid is not sustainable so, even if it is a strategy ' it's not going to lead anywhere in the long run. And that's fine, I guess. Lots of clubs come and go, and we go through ups and downs. 

Personally, though, if I was going to acquire a business, I would make sure I could actually bring something useful to the table. I guess I see it as a question of integrity, largely. He saw Saints as a convenient place to dump some cash outside China. That's all we are to him. And I don't respect that.

We don't know Gao's motivation, but I'm not persuaded it was anything improper. I think he may have been sold on the idea that we invest well in players, develop youngsters, and then improve the squad by player sales and repeating the process. I doubt wasting £100m plus, and the wages, was ever in the business plan and whatever strategy he had has gone as a consequence of that. 

Like you, I'm unsure where we go with our wages to turnover rand debt issues. I can only assume there'll be a sale or two without replacement. As shit as that is, I can't see an alternative sadly.

Regardless, we are where we are, and the one blessing is that Gao isn't raping and pillaging the club. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, egg said:

We don't know Gao's motivation, but I'm not persuaded it was anything improper. I think he may have been sold on the idea that we invest well in players, develop youngsters, and then improve the squad by player sales and repeating the process. I doubt wasting £100m plus, and the wages, was ever in the business plan and whatever strategy he had has gone as a consequence of that. 

Like you, I'm unsure where we go with our wages to turnover rand debt issues. I can only assume there'll be a sale or two without replacement. As shit as that is, I can't see an alternative sadly.

Regardless, we are where we are, and the one blessing is that Gao isn't raping and pillaging the club. 

I agree. He’s actually the perfect owner in terms of lack of involvement and allowing the ‘football men’ running the club day to day. However, he lacks the most fundamental part you want from an owner… ability to spend. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, egg said:

We don't know Gao's motivation, but I'm not persuaded it was anything improper. I think he may have been sold on the idea that we invest well in players, develop youngsters, and then improve the squad by player sales and repeating the process. I doubt wasting £100m plus, and the wages, was ever in the business plan and whatever strategy he had has gone as a consequence of that. 

Like you, I'm unsure where we go with our wages to turnover rand debt issues. I can only assume there'll be a sale or two without replacement. As shit as that is, I can't see an alternative sadly.

Regardless, we are where we are, and the one blessing is that Gao isn't raping and pillaging the club. 

There was a rumour doing the round's that he didn't know we could be relegated, although i wonder if that was just usual bullsh1t. Either way i'm sure he was sold the dream, an established premier league club who develop players and sell them for £30m, who buy players for £13m and sell them for £75m, look we've got one going through right now, Van dijk, buy now and we'll sell him in January instead of now as a sweetener. He didn't back on the fact that after him was a load of shite we couldn't give away.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, egg said:

We don't know Gao's motivation, but I'm not persuaded it was anything improper. I think he may have been sold on the idea that we invest well in players, develop youngsters, and then improve the squad by player sales and repeating the process. I doubt wasting £100m plus, and the wages, was ever in the business plan and whatever strategy he had has gone as a consequence of that. 

Like you, I'm unsure where we go with our wages to turnover rand debt issues. I can only assume there'll be a sale or two without replacement. As shit as that is, I can't see an alternative sadly.

Regardless, we are where we are, and the one blessing is that Gao isn't raping and pillaging the club. 

His motivation was approval by the dictators in charge to invest in football and get a toe in the money go round with the kudos of football success , they decided that too much money was being exported from China so blocked money transfers . GAO then had to fund the purchase of Saints by borrowing money outside of China . He is now in a bind . The dictators are suggesting that selling at a loss would be a loss of face so Gao could well end up in prison if he does sell out. You couldn’t make it up but it is how it is so we are stuck .

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, East Kent Saint said:

I think he was responding to the Chinese dictatorship that encouraged such investment, they then decided it had gone over the top with ridiculous amounts of money being ploughed in with no benefit . Now if GAO sells up he may be targeted for making the Dictators look foolish and end up in prison as a result so he is trapped …

If he doesn’t sell at a loss and the club is relegated I dread to think what the PRC authorities will do to him if the asset becomes a total liability worth nowt. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TWar said:

Exactly! Gao's job is to hire someone to manage the football side of things, he has, and I rate that person. Certainly a hell of a lot more than the guys who tanked us post Koeman.

Am I the only person who recalls Mr. Gao saying (on Day 1) that he wasn't going to make investments and expected the club to be self-sufficient?.

A few years back the Chinese Govt. encouraged their rich businessmen to invest in European football, but now they have made an

about turn and Mr. Gao's is stuck between a rock and a hard place . He can't sell and recoup his original investment, yet is supposed to

divest himself of his commitment in order to to placate the Chinese regime... or face repercussions. 

This sort of unfair (fan) criticism of Mr. Gao really should stop now. 

Prem. clubs are well-used to big investment from billionaires around the World, (who will invest " their lunch money " just for fun) but in China  

even the richest men cannot put two fingers up to their Government, or they may get them cut off - along with their heads. 

(No joke - as not so long ago a leading Chinese finance man suffered that fate, and the Chinese make up the laws / rules - as it suits them.

I commend Mr. Gao for his original move, but in the present circumstances no-one can reasonably expect him to become even more involved.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, david in sweden said:

Am I the only person who recalls Mr. Gao saying (on Day 1) that he wasn't going to make investments and expected the club to be self-sufficient?.

A few years back the Chinese Govt. encouraged their rich businessmen to invest in European football, but now they have made an

about turn and Mr. Gao's is stuck between a rock and a hard place . He can't sell and recoup his original investment, yet is supposed to

divest himself of his commitment in order to to placate the Chinese regime... or face repercussions. 

This sort of unfair (fan) criticism of Mr. Gao really should stop now. 

Prem. clubs are well-used to big investment from billionaires around the World, (who will invest " their lunch money " just for fun) but in China  

even the richest men cannot put two fingers up to their Government, or they may get them cut off - along with their heads. 

(No joke - as not so long ago a leading Chinese finance man suffered that fate, and the Chinese make up the laws / rules - as it suits them.

I commend Mr. Gao for his original move, but in the present circumstances no-one can reasonably expect him to become even more involved.

 

This reads like Gao is holding one of your family members hostage.

  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, saint1977 said:

If he doesn’t sell at a loss and the club is relegated I dread to think what the PRC authorities will do to him if the asset becomes a total liability worth nowt. 

Even Billionaire owners of large companies in China have just been sentenced to 10 years or so for “being argumentative and disrespectful “ . He sided with the “wrong people “ who criticised the dictators , so this is not a joke , it’s very real . I see Abromavich has been mentioned as buying Chelsea at the behest of Putin , which is being denied but remember the World Cup in Russia where Putin told the press in front of him that they would be paying for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Lighthouse changed the title to Danny Ings - Official: Signs for Villa

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})