Phil

actually, if you have even half a brain, then you will realise your first line proves my statement to be 100% correct. Nolan obviously knows something YOU can't grasp. £14.3 million quid over 5 years might have had something to do with it smeg for brains in other words, West Ham showed him the money to match the talking over the table ? What exactly is wrong with that ? Another brainwashed shithead. Kevin Nolan had two years left on his contract, what do you think we should have offered him? +I never rated him as a player, so i may be biased, but I'd have thought offering him a long contract shows a lack of ambition. This is the Mevlüt Erdinç thread and you are talking about losing Nolan. Where's your ambition. sorry mate, but it wasn't me who sidetracked this thread. It isn't a question of whether YOU rate Kevin Nolan, or I rate Kevin Nolan, or CT's Dog rates Kevin Nolan. Why was Kevin Nolan sold with 2 years left on his contract if the manager did not want to sell him ? The point in question here, is NOT the selling of Kevin Nolan as a player, but the selling of him behind the managers back and not giving him the funds from the sale of players. THIS is indicative of a selling club, that sells to survive or to make profits for its owner rather than backing the manager to try and build a top football team. We still have the thick end of 40m quid the manager has to play with from sales to strengthen the team. Where is it ? Pardew said Nolan was sold because he thought his chances would be limited next season and his influence has the potential to be a negative if he's not included and the team arent getting results. Phil, that last bit. Can't say I've seen Paradiddle quoted on that myself ? To be understated, Nolan was surely an influential player behind the scenes , and contributed hugely in terms of the remains of team spirit built under CH that saw us through last season. On the back of that you seem to suggest (or say that Fuckdew said) Nolan would be disruptive to the club's welfare if he'd have stayed ?? That's so perilously close to the 'brainwashed shithead' trapdoor that you've in fact taken a diving header and launched freefalling into it . I may have read more into his BBC radio interview; http://www.nufcblog.com/2011/07/05/alan-pa...ld-kevin-nolan/ When i said negative I didn't mean intentionally. Pardew said Barton has been knocking on his door saying the results don't match his contribution. So I might have been putting two and two together and come up with five.

actually, if you have even half a brain, then you will realise your first line proves my statement to be 100% correct. Nolan obviously knows something YOU can't grasp. £14.3 million quid over 5 years might have had something to do with it smeg for brains in other words, West Ham showed him the money to match the talking over the table ? What exactly is wrong with that ? Another brainwashed shithead. Kevin Nolan had two years left on his contract, what do you think we should have offered him? +I never rated him as a player, so i may be biased, but I'd have thought offering him a long contract shows a lack of ambition. This is the Mevlüt Erdinç thread and you are talking about losing Nolan. Where's your ambition. sorry mate, but it wasn't me who sidetracked this thread. It isn't a question of whether YOU rate Kevin Nolan, or I rate Kevin Nolan, or CT's Dog rates Kevin Nolan. Why was Kevin Nolan sold with 2 years left on his contract if the manager did not want to sell him ? The point in question here, is NOT the selling of Kevin Nolan as a player, but the selling of him behind the managers back and not giving him the funds from the sale of players. THIS is indicative of a selling club, that sells to survive or to make profits for its owner rather than backing the manager to try and build a top football team. We still have the thick end of 40m quid the manager has to play with from sales to strengthen the team. Where is it ? Pardew said Nolan was sold because he thought his chances would be limited next season and his influence has the potential to be a negative if he's not included and the team arent getting results. I dont think the money we have is too relevant as player are being brought in. What is an issue is the lack of a talisman striker, unfortunately I dont think we can get the caliber of striker we need regardless of how much we offer clubs and players. Erdinç and Gervinho look like good players, but they are not in the same category of Sow, Hazard et al - who imo are currently out of our reach.

actually, if you have even half a brain, then you will realise your first line proves my statement to be 100% correct. Nolan obviously knows something YOU can't grasp. £14.3 million quid over 5 years might have had something to do with it smeg for brains in other words, West Ham showed him the money to match the talking over the table ? What exactly is wrong with that ? Another brainwashed shithead. Kevin Nolan had two years left on his contract, what do you think we should have offered him? +I never rated him as a player, so i may be biased, but I'd have thought offering him a long contract shows a lack of ambition. This is the Mevlüt Erdinç thread and you are talking about losing Nolan. Where's your ambition.

Although it would probably knock a sizeable hole in our transfer target shortlist (it would probably obliterate it) I'd like to see the arbitration panel set a precedent here, by awarding Swansea something close to their valuation - swing the pendulum back into the favour of chairman who have begrudgingly agreed to such terms in the first place. Player agents only need to mention the word 'Bosman' already, to engineer a move away from an unwilling seller well before a contract's expiration ie. see Mandic mentioning 'we'll do a Bosman', to force Leeds' hand to get Kewell to Liverpool when there were better offers on the table - from other clubs. The Webster Rule is another that allows a powershift in the favour of players & agents. Players & agents already have too much ammunition at their disposal. Ashley's backers will no doubt praise our cleverness (by acquiring another target for peanuts) but minimum fee triggers/clauses further undermine the sanctitiy of a contract, and in the case of derisory amounts shits all over any financial rewards reaped in by developing players, and the transfer market is the cornerstone for the financial stability of lower league outfits/and low profile clubs with little in the way of income streams who yo-yo between divisions. It's a concern that we will leave another aggrieved club in our wake, due to our 'clever' way of doing business. As a club that's worth doing business with, our reputation as a respectful dealer has been muddied. Why do you assume we are in the wrong. What on Earth is a "talk" clause. There must be a dodgy contract template going around. As Naylor and his agent were both under the impression it was a release clause. Contract law is clear, any ambiguity at all and the party who drew up the contract loses, which is most likely Swansea. The arbitration judgement will be interesting and probably set a precedent. I think you'll find within clubs we have a good reputation. We recently paid over a six figure sum in compensation to Anichebe for the Kevin Nolan tackle. link

if there not an added contribution from a midfield position i dont class that as replacing nolans goals , i expect those kinda numbers at least from our strikers , 10+ from a midfielder is going tobe a big miss if nobody steps up . why do i get the feeling this lad's knee is gonna play up on us for his full contract . Nolan scored 10 of his goals while playing upfront last season. Pardew said Nolans influence may have become a negative if he's not playing.

Not sure, sounds as though it might be permanent. http://www.clicklancashire.com/sport/black...ed-starlet.html 2 goals in 49games. i new he was crap but o dear (i know that stat makes it sound worse then it is) . how much you reckon? 250k Not exactly a fair stat. Almost all of them were as a sub.

I hope its only on loan. Holloway get the best out of his players. It'd be pointless to sell him for loose change.

Where you pulling this figure of £30m from? Wickham - £8m Dong Won - Less than £1m Larsson - Free Vaughan - Free Gardner - £5m Brown - £1m O'Shea - £5m Westwodd - Free £20m is a more realistic figure? Which is just the Henderson money re-invested, never mind the £24m we got for Bent in January. Although you can take £6m off that from the aquisition of Sessegnon. You wont see any of the Bent money this season. Disco pants said selling Bent meant you had to pay spurs what was outstanding and Villa were paying over three years? Your also missing Elmohamady.

Pardew and Llambias have both confirmed that the club are 're-investing' the Carroll money in transfer fees, wages, the training ground, and other assorted projects. So what is being 'bought into' here? Wages That isn't an answer. Is the Carroll money being re-invested into wages or is it not? If it is, what's being 'bought into?' If it isn't, and people are 'buying into' the idea that it is, then why are Pardew and Llambias saying that it is? Is that supposed to be some sort of smokescreen? Unless you think we pay players five years in advanced the Carroll money is going into the bank, which means paying off the over draft.

Pardew and Llambias have both confirmed that the club are 're-investing' the Carroll money in transfer fees, wages, the training ground, and other assorted projects. So what is being 'bought into' here? Wages

Assuming we don't sell them first. This whole wages thing is winding me right up. Not that the club are saying it, but that some people are that stupid they buy into it.

if only we had a slow clap smiley.

Paddocklad is suggesting that Carr is acting as a sort of DoF, see above. I don't disagree with your analysis of Llambias, although I bet he enjoys calling the shots. The question is whether Pardew has much involvement in transfers in and out; as time wears on I've become more convinced he doesn't play any significant part in either, although I expect his opinion would be canvassed at some point especially regarding incomings and squad needs. It's inconceivable that he'd be totally in the dark but the Carroll episode suggests he knew fuck all about his transfer out, similarly he said consistently he'd like to keep Nolan, only to see him sold. He seems to be up to speed with Enrique and Barton's situtationa but that's possibly because nothing has happened yet. I suspect he's loosely kept in the loop from time to time but has no say in outgoings and probably very little on incomings. That's what the current situation suggests to me anyway based on his public comments vs what actually happens. Regarding his stubborness, it depends on whether you think he signed up to this way of doing things when he took on the job. If he did, he's got nothing to be stubborn about, imo. He'll be presented with the final squad on 31 Aug and he'll get on with his job in the meantime. Interesting concept, that the head scout reports to Llambias. Can't see it myself, but I can buy into Llambias getting a run down on what scope there is for development (increasing resale value). I totally buy into Pardew having little say on out goings - Saylor being the obvious exception.

I don't think this is relevant to the current situation. I reckon Pardew was desperate for the toon job, in fact couldn't believe his luck, and was/is prepared to do exactly as he's told in return for the chance to prepare and picking the team. These DoF type arrangements would have been made crystal clear when he negotiated his contract (in the weeks leading up to the sacking of Hughton, when Pardew claimed he wasn't even speaking to the club). The board would have gone to lengths to avoid a Keegan Mk II scenario in this respect. I reckon the primary reason Pardew was brought in was his willingness to work within this DoF structure. We've probably had this m.o. all along, it just went underground with Wise's departure. I wouldn't be surprised if Hughton increasingly wanted to call the shots on incomings/outgoings and was frozen out and then sacked as a result (not sure how the Perch/best signings fit in with this view mind you). I also wouldn't be surprised if this was one of the main reasons Shearer didn't get the job following our relegation. All conjecture of course. Pardew has shown he's a stubborn guy, so it has to be relevant to people claiming he's little to no input on transfers. The F in DoF stand for Football, and Wise went ages ago. Llambias only cares about the money. While this may seem like splitting hair to most people, as the result is the same (the manager doesn't have total control). There is actually a massive difference. A DoF wants to control and shape the team, so has a vested interest in players. Llambias interest imo stops at will they have a resale value.

The manager has to earn the right. SAF can't be cited as the norm.

Are there many managers who have much more control? I doubt there are many premiership managers with less say. imo we have a contintental system, which was the original idea when Ashely came on board, where the manager coaches/picks the team and the transfers/infrastructure issues are handled by a director of football. Our director of football used to be Wise and is now Derek Llambias. In reality I expect Pardew has an input on what's needed but not much more than that. I expect Graham Carr has a major say but I suspect it's the brains trust of Llambias and Ashley that's shaping the squad and our transfer policy. This is all purely conjecture on my part of course but I just get the feeling about Pardew that he's a bullshitter. He always seems to be catching up on the news - Carroll, Barton, Enrique, Nolan etc - as though he's had no real involvement in decisions. Pardew publicly got in a huff at West Ham over Tevez and Mascherano being signed over his head, so he will certainly be involved. I think the only thing Pardew doesn't have any say on is contracts. Llambias is certainly calling the shots over the Barton saga. Which is how it should be, Barton needs to earn it.

last i heard Colin Calderwood was off to either Birmingham or Forrest

cwarr07 = Colin, Warrington, aged 7

Apparently his 1m release is worded similar to Phi Jones, and Swansea say it only allow us to talk to him.

Overall a very good keeper. Has similar flaws to Forster - doesn't command his defense (quiet/ignored), slow to release the ball and doesn't like to come for crosses.

Its rare you get a keeper of Harpers ability that will happily sit on the bench. Selling him would be daft. Forster or Krul need to be loaned out until we can you out which is better.

http://nufc-ashlies.blogspot.com/2011/06/t...ike-ashley.html What have I missed

We are three weeks into the window and have signed four players. I'm glad he hasn't blown the lot to appease muppets like you.

Dekka offered Michael Owen 130k, so not sure why we wouldn't pay 80k for Sturridge.