Jump to content

January Transfers 2015


salsaman7
 Share

Recommended Posts

Can't say I'm massively arsed about any of the players that have gone (except MYM who I still think could be a good player wit the right partner). We had three senior leftbacks on the books and I'm surprised that's been alowed to continue for so long. Is Santon better than the other two? Possibly due to more experience but not by a great deal and I've never been happy with having a first choice leftback who's right footed. Yes he provided cover for Janmaat too but you can understand he's not really going to want to be here just for that reason. It basically boils down to us having Dummett/Haidara as first choice with the other behind then Raylor and Colback who can both cover there if needed. At rightback we have Janmaat and Raylor as backup with Anita who can cover this season and then Saylor who can play there when he's fit. Whilst I don't think any of our fullbacks other than Janmaat are really good players (Haidara has pottential though), the reality is we are actually as well off in those positions as we are for any in the team.

The (much) bigger problem is at centreback. For the rest of the season we have Colo and Williamson as first choice with Dummett (is he a fullback, is he a centreback?) as the only relatively senior cover. After that we're down to Good (never played a game for us and been injured most of the season) and Satka (who's never played anywhere more senior than Slovakia's U19's). It's a disgrace that we've done nothing to address this but not at all surprising. We just have to hope we have four out of the five of Janmaat/Colo/Williamson/Dummett/Haidara fit for most of the rest of the season or we could really get caught out.

 

The loan of players (with the possible exception Mbabu) is just a complete waste of time for us other than it possibly opening up spaces in the U21's for younger players to try and step up in to the places that have been occupied by players who seem to have no possible future with us at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 412
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Scotland is a great place to live. Decent NHS with no creeping privatisation, good schools, free university education, good clean air, very good restaurants and bars here in Glasgow and lot's of countryside near by even for big cities.

 

Fair play :good:

 

Think I'll see how Derry born Shane Ferguson gets on with his new err "supporters" before I go completely along with your glowing analysis...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to cheer oursleves up, anyone know the name of the poster who booked the day off work to watch skysports news for 15 hours a few years back?...and has he posted a sentence on here since? :lol:

No, that was me. I was joking, my boss is too much of a cunt to give me a day off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The loan of players (with the possible exception Mbabu) is just a complete waste of time for us other than it possibly opening up spaces in the U21's for younger players to try and step up in to the places that have been occupied by players who seem to have no possible future with us at all.

 

Streete can not be excited with this move since he will not be able to receive match minutes. He has already been in the Port Vale side and our U21 squad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not bothered about the 5 younger players being farmed out on loan. Don't really think letting Santon go on loan helps us in anyway though.

 

Sounds like it's a deal with an obligation to buy after a certain number of games, but I can't imagine the fee will be more than £5m? So at best we're loaning out a good fullback, and saving c£40k a week on wages, to a club who will, at the end of the season buy him for a moderate fee?

 

Same as MYM, I don't understand this transfer.

 

 

I would have preferred the young lads going to play at a higher standard than Rangers, but I suppose every game will be the oppositions' Cup Final?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Santon deal is largely about saving money on wages. We're safe from relegation and we've got a few other players who can play there. Him being a good player is neither here nor there as far as the decision making went.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Santon deal is largely about saving money on wages. We're safe from relegation and we've got a few other players who can play there. Him being a good player is neither here nor there as far as the decision making went.

That's on the assumption Inter are paying his wages. Even if they are, c£40k isn't that big a deal for Newcastle United, is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's on the assumption Inter are paying his wages. Even if they are, c£40k isn't that big a deal for Newcastle United, is it?

Howay, man. They're bound to be paying most of his wages at least. And Ashley loves owt like that, big deal or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Howay, man. They're bound to be paying most of his wages at least. And Ashley loves owt like that, big deal or not.

 

I'm not saying they definitely aren't paying his wages, I was using it more for rhetoric. MYM was farmed out because Pardew wasn't playing him despite being fit (and arguably our best defender), but Santon was just injured.

 

Unless the expectation is that Santon won't play often due to injuries and it's better for him to be paid to lay upon Inter's treatment table than upon ours?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm not saying they definitely aren't paying his wages, I was using it more for rhetoric. MYM was farmed out because Pardew wasn't playing him despite being fit (and arguably our best defender), but Santon was just injured.

 

Unless the expectation is that Santon won't play often due to injuries and it's better for him to be paid to lay upon Inter's treatment table than upon ours?

I think we're hoping to move him on but if that doesn't happen we've saved some money. He's fit again, I think, but we don't need him (barring an injury crisis). Even if we do 'need' hm it doesn't matter because we won't go down. Applying what I see as the owner's 'logic' here, obviously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're hoping to move him on but if that doesn't happen we've saved some money. He's fit again, I think, but we don't need him (barring an injury crisis). Even if we do 'need' hm it doesn't matter because we won't go down. Applying what I see as the owner's 'logic' here, obviously.

 

I think I'd understand it better if we'd just sold him. I don't see the saving on his wages as worth it. But I guess even if he were to remain it's unlikely we'd finish higher in the league because of it.

 

I'm eager for the Post-Ashley party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think I'd understand it better if we'd just sold him. I don't see the saving on his wages as worth it. But I guess even if he were to remain it's unlikely we'd finish higher in the league because of it.

 

I'm eager for the Post-Ashley party.

Makes sense from a selling point of view though. His stock isn't particularly high so anyone buying would want a cheap deal. Inter may be prepared to pay something like what they sold him for if he does well in the loan spell there. At present they'd want him for next to nowt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently there's an automatic trigger in the deal where they have to sign him if he plays so many games. If that's the case it's probably a reasonable deal for us if they're paying most of his wages until then (and probably a loan fee too). It's not like we were desperate for the funds to be able to sign anyone ourselves was it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That surely conflicts with rules from just about every level of footballs governing bodies.

 

On the other hand at least he won't have to worry about playing Vuckic

 

TBF they are a million times better than what he has and it could be the board stopping him being a cunt about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone think this might be part of the final push to sell the club?

 

£3.5mil for Pardew

£3.5mil for Santon

£5mil for Mbiwa

Ben Arfa off the wage bill

No players bought

No Manager brought in

Rangers paying for 5 of our squad players

 

He could be maximising his profits prior to a sale and subsequent Rangers buyout.

 

Probably wishful thinking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I was listening to a top notch footballing podcast where the panelists were discussing that ashleys movements lately line up with a clear exit strategy

But then The Fish started talking so it could be bollocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That surely conflicts with rules from just about every level of footballs governing bodies.

 

On the other hand at least he won't have to worry about playing Vuckic

 

Apparently it isn't an uncommon clause in loan agreements but obviously the situation involving five players is highly unusual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.