Howaythetoon 0 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 If they are not available, then you must ask, do we have the squad to cope until they are, and the answer to that is an obvious no because an injury to Martins and that's us fucked. So you try and work around that and get in some short-term deals. We got one but really, that's not good enough and we did have a whole month to get more than one new face in. I refuse to accept we couldn't do that. My guess is that the board and manager have written off the season, and accepted that we are safe now, and will take anything else as a bonus which is inexcusable when there is so much still to play for and very dangerous because the line as we know is very thin. Basically they are jeopardising our long-term future by failing to adress short-term issues. If we don't make Europe next year, we'll lose out financially, if we get knocked out of the UEFA Cup bang goes another trophyless season. As Alex hinted at above, I don't believe these words of comfort is actually the club's new transfer policy, but soundbites to mask yet another failure in the trasnfer window. I could actually support these words if that was our policy, but I don't believe it for a moment. We'll find out in the Summer one way or another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 (edited) If Martins gets injured we want to thank our lucky stars we've already got 33 points. Edited February 2, 2007 by alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Kelly 1125 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 Can people please stop talking about Martins getting injured. You're gonna jinx him man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9065 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 Can people please stop talking about Martins getting injured. You're gonna jinx him man! I think the risk of jinxing it is rather when people are saying he will have a great second half of the season... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 I think not having any cover is risking jinxing him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 36847 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 I don't believe in the power of the jinx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 Neither do I. It was more a reference to our "horrendous luck with injuries". As Ritchie and I were talking about the other week, it isn't really horrendous luck when you consider two factors: the lack of cover and the knowledge we already had about the players in our squad, i.e. Owen (we've been unlucky with the extent of his injuries though), Dyer, Bramble, Moore, Babayaro, Emre, Shola (long-standing hip problem) and Carr all being prone to injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 I agree with Shepherd on this one and would prefer to wait rather than panic buy. We still should have brought a striker in on loan though, even if he would have been behind Sibierski in the pecking order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 If they players we need were not available then I'm all in favour of waiting until the summer. Roeder has to know that there can't be any excuses then. I don't see the point in bringing in loan players if they aren't significantly better than the players we have unless it's a view to a permanent transfer. What we do need is a clean out next summer and definitely move out the likes of babyaro, Luque, Pattison and possibly Bramble and carr. Another issue with loan players is that they are usually one of three types: 1. Past it or just not very good. 2. Young with potential but a long way from the finished article. 3. Had a huge fallout with management (al la Bellamy). It's always going to be tough to get good quality loans, and those that do exist there'll be stiff competition for. But aye, in the summer we NEED 4 or so in (more the better really) and 3 or so out, if that doesn't happen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9065 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 I agree with Shepherd on this one and would prefer to wait rather than panic buy. We still should have brought a striker in on loan though, even if he would have been behind Sibierski in the pecking order. I think that is what most people are thinking. Nobody was expecting or wanting Roeder to make second rate permanent signings for the sake of it. But it really was about bringing bodies in short term to be prepared for a worst worst cast scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4057 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 I agree with Shepherd on this one and would prefer to wait rather than panic buy. We still should have brought a striker in on loan though, even if he would have been behind Sibierski in the pecking order. I think that is what most people are thinking. Nobody was expecting or wanting Roeder to make second rate permanent signings for the sake of it. But it really was about bringing bodies in short term to be prepared for a worst worst cast scenario. Its failing to learn the numbers lesson from the summer thats bothering me - as it stands we could lose 4 or 5 players in June which means we'll need 8 or 9 in in my view - integrating that many is hard so 1 or 2 now would have lessened the load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9065 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 I agree with Shepherd on this one and would prefer to wait rather than panic buy. We still should have brought a striker in on loan though, even if he would have been behind Sibierski in the pecking order. I think that is what most people are thinking. Nobody was expecting or wanting Roeder to make second rate permanent signings for the sake of it. But it really was about bringing bodies in short term to be prepared for a worst worst cast scenario. Its failing to learn the numbers lesson from the summer thats bothering me - as it stands we could lose 4 or 5 players in June which means we'll need 8 or 9 in in my view - integrating that many is hard so 1 or 2 now would have lessened the load. I fear this problem is "eased" by handing the likes of Bramble, Moore and Sibierski new contracts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Patrokles Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 To be fair to Roeder, he's talking a good game, and for once he's making sense. Let's see how we do in the summer window though. Two in a row now he's fucked up, and I personally don't see it getting any better in the summer. And I'm sorry but it's because of his failings in the summer window that we're now effectively having to write yet another season off as transitional. Whether next season is another transitional write-off will depend how daft lad does between June and August of this year. I'm not holding out much hope. It was always going to be a transitional season this year, regardless. As you say, let's wait and see if there's significant improvement in everything next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Patrokles Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 I agree with Shepherd on this one and would prefer to wait rather than panic buy. We still should have brought a striker in on loan though, even if he would have been behind Sibierski in the pecking order. I think that is what most people are thinking. Nobody was expecting or wanting Roeder to make second rate permanent signings for the sake of it. But it really was about bringing bodies in short term to be prepared for a worst worst cast scenario. Its failing to learn the numbers lesson from the summer thats bothering me - as it stands we could lose 4 or 5 players in June which means we'll need 8 or 9 in in my view - integrating that many is hard so 1 or 2 now would have lessened the load. I fear this problem is "eased" by handing the likes of Bramble, Moore and Sibierski new contracts... Isn't that what people want, though? Bodies? Can't have it both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9065 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 I agree with Shepherd on this one and would prefer to wait rather than panic buy. We still should have brought a striker in on loan though, even if he would have been behind Sibierski in the pecking order. I think that is what most people are thinking. Nobody was expecting or wanting Roeder to make second rate permanent signings for the sake of it. But it really was about bringing bodies in short term to be prepared for a worst worst cast scenario. Its failing to learn the numbers lesson from the summer thats bothering me - as it stands we could lose 4 or 5 players in June which means we'll need 8 or 9 in in my view - integrating that many is hard so 1 or 2 now would have lessened the load. I fear this problem is "eased" by handing the likes of Bramble, Moore and Sibierski new contracts... Isn't that what people want, though? Bodies? Can't have it both ways. What, bodies and football ability are exclusive? Never knew that, but thanks for the explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Patrokles Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 I agree with Shepherd on this one and would prefer to wait rather than panic buy. We still should have brought a striker in on loan though, even if he would have been behind Sibierski in the pecking order. I think that is what most people are thinking. Nobody was expecting or wanting Roeder to make second rate permanent signings for the sake of it. But it really was about bringing bodies in short term to be prepared for a worst worst cast scenario. Its failing to learn the numbers lesson from the summer thats bothering me - as it stands we could lose 4 or 5 players in June which means we'll need 8 or 9 in in my view - integrating that many is hard so 1 or 2 now would have lessened the load. I fear this problem is "eased" by handing the likes of Bramble, Moore and Sibierski new contracts... Isn't that what people want, though? Bodies? Can't have it both ways. What, bodies and football ability are exclusive? Never knew that, but thanks for the explanation. This is the whole point. people are saying 'I don't care if we sign people who aren't great, we just need bodies!' Then people are lamenting the notion of having players they don't rate stay longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmericanMag 0 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 I agree with most that has been said here. This is just soundbites to cover their failure during the window. I am also content with this particular philosophy if they actually stick to it. I will wait til the summer to see what they do. But I believe that the supporters should be expecting a signing early in the summer window and not in the last 2-3 weeks like FS & Co. has been known to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9065 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 I agree with Shepherd on this one and would prefer to wait rather than panic buy. We still should have brought a striker in on loan though, even if he would have been behind Sibierski in the pecking order. I think that is what most people are thinking. Nobody was expecting or wanting Roeder to make second rate permanent signings for the sake of it. But it really was about bringing bodies in short term to be prepared for a worst worst cast scenario. Its failing to learn the numbers lesson from the summer thats bothering me - as it stands we could lose 4 or 5 players in June which means we'll need 8 or 9 in in my view - integrating that many is hard so 1 or 2 now would have lessened the load. I fear this problem is "eased" by handing the likes of Bramble, Moore and Sibierski new contracts... Isn't that what people want, though? Bodies? Can't have it both ways. What, bodies and football ability are exclusive? Never knew that, but thanks for the explanation. This is the whole point. people are saying 'I don't care if we sign people who aren't great, we just need bodies!' Then people are lamenting the notion of having players they don't rate stay longer. Who are those people? I don't know them. I know a couple of people thinking a stop gap solution until the next summer like signing Hasselbaink during last summer, or Cole in the winter would have been a decent choice as those players would really added bodies and a certain quality to the team. I don't know people advocating having players for the sake of it, name me one please. The likes of Moore and Bramble were never rated anyway (except by some dozy Australian kangaroo shaggers). So even if we added bodies to the team, players should be above their ability. Or at least I would excuse the shortcomings from youngsters from the reserves, but not if it is someone picking up good wages 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