PieEater Doesn't Convey play there for the US?
He may well do but you can't seriously believe that he could play there in The Championship.
First priority of a left-back.......tackling.
End of.
by Victor Meldrew » 24 Aug 2008 11:41
PieEater Doesn't Convey play there for the US?
by Archie's penalty » 24 Aug 2008 11:58
Platypuss It's come to a pretty poor pass when we are now entering the last week of the window and we still don't have a proper left back.
Shorey left more than 2 weeks ago FFS!
by rg6royal » 24 Aug 2008 12:36
by Smoking Kills Dancing Doe » 24 Aug 2008 12:37
Archie's penaltyPlatypuss It's come to a pretty poor pass when we are now entering the last week of the window and we still don't have a proper left back.
Shorey left more than 2 weeks ago FFS!
Have to agree.
Coppell will probably say we have Golbourne though!
by rg6royal » 24 Aug 2008 12:40
Smoking Kills Dancing DoeArchie's penaltyPlatypuss It's come to a pretty poor pass when we are now entering the last week of the window and we still don't have a proper left back.
Shorey left more than 2 weeks ago FFS!
Have to agree.
Coppell will probably say we have Golbourne though!
I hope your not suggesting we buy a player who would go into our 1st team and improve it.
Not the Reading way.
We will not sign a left back, if Coppell ever had any intention of doing so we would have signed one before Shorey left.
Excuses. That's all we get.
We don't need a centre half, we've got Cisse. Should have been sacked the second thos words left his mouth.
Time for Hammond to put his foot down and go over Coppell's head and bring some players in.
by Ian Royal » 24 Aug 2008 19:36
by Royalwaster » 24 Aug 2008 20:15
Ian Royal I'm confused, we really don't need a centreback!
What we need is a left back, possibly a right winger a decent partnership in midfield from what we have and some strikers with confidence to play.
Harper and Matejovsky = mediocre
Harper and Cisse = shit
Harper & Karacan or Harper & Bikey or Matejovsky & Bikey or Matejovsky & Karacan = balanced and potentially very promising.
Harper, Matejovsky & one of Cisse, Karacan and Bikey likewise.
Our two best midfielders are suited to 3 man central midfields the most IMO.
by Ian Royal » 25 Aug 2008 01:22
RoyalwasterIan Royal I'm confused, we really don't need a centreback!
What we need is a left back, possibly a right winger a decent partnership in midfield from what we have and some strikers with confidence to play.
Harper and Matejovsky = mediocre
Harper and Cisse = shit
Harper & Karacan or Harper & Bikey or Matejovsky & Bikey or Matejovsky & Karacan = balanced and potentially very promising.
Harper, Matejovsky & one of Cisse, Karacan and Bikey likewise.
Our two best midfielders are suited to 3 man central midfields the most IMO.
Who's talking about a centreback? A left-back yes, but a centreback?
But I agree with you that Harper and Matejovsky are not the ideal pairing - however, unfortunately SC will never drop Harper, so I guess that's what we'll get. Or Marek will get dropped and we'll have Cisse instead.
We don't need a centre half, we've got Cisse. Should have been sacked the second thos words left his mouth.
by Platypuss » 25 Aug 2008 08:24
by SCIAG » 25 Aug 2008 09:09
Ian Royal
Harper & Karacan or Matejovsky & Karacan = balanced and potentially very promising.
Harper, Matejovsky & one of Cisse, Karacan and Bikey likewise.
Our two best midfielders are suited to 3 man central midfields the most IMO.
by rg6royal » 25 Aug 2008 09:38
SCIAGIan Royal
Harper & Karacan or Matejovsky & Karacan = balanced and potentially very promising.
Harper, Matejovsky & one of Cisse, Karacan and Bikey likewise.
Our two best midfielders are suited to 3 man central midfields the most IMO.
I'd agree with you if Karacan could tackle!
by Streets » 25 Aug 2008 12:14
Platypuss Grounds for optimism, or just another one of those false dawns that we've become used to over the last 18 months?
"We're well aware of what's required in this division. I fully appreciate how difficult it is. It's not as if we were caught unawares - this was not a reality check nor a welcome to the Championship - we know what we were going to get.
"This defeat now forces us to bring in players with a little more urgency. Realistically the whole back four didn't defend well although it would be wrong to pick anybody out."
by Royalwaster » 25 Aug 2008 12:17
StreetsPlatypuss Grounds for optimism, or just another one of those false dawns that we've become used to over the last 18 months?
"We're well aware of what's required in this division. I fully appreciate how difficult it is. It's not as if we were caught unawares - this was not a reality check nor a welcome to the Championship - we know what we were going to get.
"This defeat now forces us to bring in players with a little more urgency. Realistically the whole back four didn't defend well although it would be wrong to pick anybody out."
Hope so! God knows that squad needs need.
by Royalee » 25 Aug 2008 14:13
Platypuss Grounds for optimism, or just another one of those false dawns that we've become used to over the last 18 months?
"We're well aware of what's required in this division. I fully appreciate how difficult it is. It's not as if we were caught unawares - this was not a reality check nor a welcome to the Championship - we know what we were going to get.
"This defeat now forces us to bring in players with a little more urgency. Realistically the whole back four didn't defend well although it would be wrong to pick anybody out."
by howser » 25 Aug 2008 14:52
by Arch » 25 Aug 2008 14:54
by Royalee » 25 Aug 2008 15:07
by IMAMATEOFJOVSKY » 25 Aug 2008 15:10
by Streets » 25 Aug 2008 15:38
howser Who do you folks on here see as the "transfer blocker" JM for not paying the fee or wages, admitted in his press interview last week, Coppell because he cant see beyond his loyalty glasses or Hammond because we are chasing unrealistic players who once they have their fee etc and personal demands fall outwith what we are prepared to pay. or is it a combination of all three just filling the press with, "we tried", "we couldn't get our target", we were unable to conclude the deal on time" just words to keep the fans of thier backs ??
by Platypuss » 25 Aug 2008 15:56
Royalee Coppell, anyone citing anyone else has no evidence to back up their claims.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 56 guests