Jump to content
oneBoro Forum
SmogDane

January transfer window 19/20 season Post Mortem

Recommended Posts

Why drop Pears he's done nothing wrong, aren't we building for the future? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Denzel Zanzibar said:

He hasn't failed a medical.

Ok. So what’s going on with West Ham?

Share this post


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

I like Randolph, he was deservedly best keeper in the league last season. I also think it is unfair to Pears who actually wants to play for us. 

Randolph wants to play for us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Red Rocket said:

I like Randolph, he was deservedly best keeper in the league last season. I also think it is unfair to Pears who actually wants to play for us. 

Has Randolph said he doesn’t want to play for us?

im not in the know about what has been said in private but for first time in ages we have 2 keepers I have confidence in and both have claims to the keepers shirt, but Randolph at the moment is the better keeper imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TeaCider24 said:

I'd sooner have Friend on the left of a 3 than Fry right now.

 

1 hour ago, mendieta420 said:

If fit I'd have him play left of the back 3 over Fry every week. He's a leader, aggressive, good in the air and better on the deck.

 

He was at fault for both goals we conceded in the last game he played for us at QPR.  Played them onside for their first goal and gave away a corner he didn't need to that they scored from.  Then he was injured again.  Still, get him in the side anyway 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SzilardNemethsCurtains said:

There are massive differences, he's younger, has more prem experience and most importantly Cardiff don't need to sell, we do

Younger by 2 years, 9 more premier league appearances and Randolph is a much better keeper. 

Market value is how much a player is worth in terms of talent and ability. Us having to sell is precisely why we are having to sell at below market value.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Blanco said:

Randolph wants to play for us

I think that's true but there is no denying he wants a move.

Just to clarify I'm not saying we shouldn't play Randolph, as he is the better keeper. I'm just saying it's harsh. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

He was at fault for both goals we conceded in the last game he played for us at QPR.  Played them onside for their first goal and gave away a corner he didn't need to that they scored from.  Then he was injured again.  Still, get him in the side anyway 

Fry was at fault for both goals on Saturday, failed to kick the ball out and lost it for the first and headed straight in to the path of the goalscorer for the second, and has been fairly poor for much of the season.

Edited by TeaCider24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still concerned about Gibson. Hopefully he will prove me wrong, but he's been injured, even when fit has not been playing in matches, and will be lacking match fitness. He is not currently the player we sold to Burnley, and a lot of fans will be expecting him to just slot in how he was before. I am concerned that expectations will not match reality for either him or fans. Think about how frustrated and disappointed some of our fans were with Woodgate and Downing when they returned as players  - I don't want the same happening with him.

Share this post


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

Why drop Pears he's done nothing wrong, aren't we building for the future? 

Because we have a far better far more experienced keeper who makes exceptional saves. Just because pears has done nothing wrong doesnt mean we should keep him in the team at the expense of someone who can actually win us points on his own.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Neverbefore said:

Younger by 2 years, 9 more premier league appearances and Randolph is a much better keeper. 

Market value is how much a player is worth in terms of talent and ability. Us having to sell is precisely why we are having to sell at below market value.  

Can't believe he's 30 next month, I thought he was early 20s from looking at him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Red Rocket said:

I think that's true but there is no denying he wants a move.

Just to clarify I'm not saying we shouldn't play Randolph, as he is the better keeper. I'm just saying it's harsh. 

Randolph never looked for a move. He’s quite happy where he is. The club are the ones doing all the pushing to get him off the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, scotty189 said:

Charlton have bid for Maddison accepted.  

Peterborough owner Darragh MacAnthony has accepted a bid from Charlton Athletic for forward Marcus Maddison.

Charlton have been given permission to speak to the 26-year-old, who has 10 goals in 26 appearances this season.

MacAnthony says two other Championship clubs have made multiple bids for Maddison but “do not currently have permission to speak to the player.”

Wonder if were one of them

They have money now. In for Toney too I hear from a charlton supporting mate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If adama traore suddenly became available on loan should we turn him down because he wanted to leave?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Latest Posts

    • Businesses should be means tested much like people are for social welfare. There is no way bajillionaires like Branson should get away with furloughing staff, neither should businesses with 100's of millions of pounds income per year. 
    • Liverpool have reversed the decision now. Rightly so, in my opinion. 
    • I don’t think it’s down to the working class nature of football, boxers don’t get the same flack, I think it’s because clubs are very often the heart of a community. I remember chatting to a woman I met a few years ago who wouldn’t let her kids watch football because footballers were payed an obscene amount of money. I asked her if she allowed her kids to watch Hollywood movies, of course, she said!  
    • Wherever you stand on it... Footballers do always seem to be fair game when it comes to having a pop at the rich. Is it the working class nature of football? I've always wondered.  Where are the calls for musicians, actors, or even athletes from other well-paid sports to give up their earnings for the less fortunate? Or the bankers and CEOs who squirrel millions away into offshore accounts, taking from society and never giving back? At least footballers bring a bit of joy and entertainment to millions of people a couple of times a week. 
    • Yep, its a real sob story.  But in normal life, imagine if you could live comfortably on 10% of your takehome after buying your house and car. You would only have day to day expenses, holidays, etc. You take the rest of your salary and put it in one of those long term savings accounts (or whatever) that you cannot touch for 2 years. Then your salary is reduced and that 10% is no longer enough to cover your day to day. Regardless of how much actual money that is, when you try to force people to change their living circumstances you will always have push-back.  Now of course nobody earning decent money should be in that situation. It is recommended to split your savings, some in short term (easily retrieved), some in medium term (normally a wait period to retrieve) and some in long term (not normally retrievable) eg Property and pension.  On one hand it does highlight that these are just people, like all of us. On the other hand, they are fabulously wealthy and a target for those less well off who are revered when times are good and reviled when times are bad.  I don't blame the players for earning what they do, you make hay while the sun shines and we would all probably try to earn the same if circumstances were different. The clubs though are a different story and should be looking after the non mega-rich employees. 
×
×
  • Create New...