NH on Radio Berkshire

[Hoop Blah]

A striker would improve our side, but we haven't got the money for one, but we can offer stupid wages for a cdm that to be honest we don't really need that just happens to be a free. Just saying

Can't see any logic there. If we're throwing stupid wages at him then he isn't free and isn't costing less than the mythical forward that would improve our side. I think you're looking for something that isn't there if you think the only reason we were interested in Sissoko was because there was no transfer fee involved.

We don't know what we've offered Sissoko or what we were looking to spend on a forward, so I don't see how you can compare what was available for one deal or another.

It may be that Adkins felt that adding Sissoko would strengthen us more than adding the forward most of us think we need because it would make the team more effective or the forwards jobs more easier and so less requirement for a new forward. Alternatively, he may have also have had a deal lined up for a forward that didn't go through and it wasn't a case of spending the money on one or the other.

[Royalclapper]

A striker would improve our side, but we haven't got the money for one, but we can offer stupid wages for a cdm that to be honest we don't really need that just happens to be a free. Just saying

Can't see any logic there. If we're throwing stupid wages at him then he isn't free and isn't costing less than the mythical forward that would improve our side. I think you're looking for something that isn't there if you think the only reason we were interested in Sissoko was because there was no transfer fee involved.

We don't know what we've offered Sissoko or what we were looking to spend on a forward, so I don't see how you can compare what was available for one deal or another.

It may be that Adkins felt that adding Sissoko would strengthen us more than adding the forward most of us think we need because it would make the team more effective or the forwards jobs more easier and so less requirement for a new forward. Alternatively, he may have also have had a deal lined up for a forward that didn't go through and it wasn't a case of spending the money on one or the other.

Or it could be that Adkins is not as influential in deciding who he wants as we might like to think.

[Extended-Phenotype]

It's an exaggeration of those calling for the (1) sacking of Hammond and (2) questioning the intentions of the club, (3) calling out all sorts of conspiracy theories and generally talking a load of crap over the last day or so.

(1) Not too OTT considering this is what, the third transfer window where the club has fallen short of what they promised? Mong Rating = 2/5
(2) Fair enough, considering the club outlined it's intentions "bring in 7 players" and instead brought in 3 and shipped two good ones. Mong Rating = 1/5
(3) That's HobNob. Mong Rating 5/5.

[nevo1970]

It was interesting to see that we could not even attract a Southampton reserve striker. Cant believe the difference between us and a club like Southampton who were pretty much in the same position when we went up from the champ

Even with the parachute payments we can't really compete on wage with a Premier League teams wages for new players this season.

Generally I think the reason we've struggled to close deals for the players we've been after is just because we've been aiming at a higher quality of player. We've not just been looking to bring in the likes of Akpan, Le Fondre and Blackman. We're actually looking to improve our team and not just add more average players to the squad.

For me that's the right way to go with the squad we have right now.

^ this

For all those saying "splash the cash", it really isn't that simple.

I suspect we thought that we had Hooper tied up earlier in the window - terms agreed with Celtic, but then Norwich came in and the player chose the Premier League over the Championship.
I also reckon we were close to Lambert, but then he got the England call up, and scored, and realised that he might have a chance to go to Brazil (but not if he was playing in the Championship).

We aimed high earlier in the window and tried to bring in some quality - the money is there to buy the players, but you can't make them come if they don't want to.

But what about the parachute payments I hear the mongs shout....

Well, what about them? As someone pointed out, they're there to help soften the blow to players wages when teams drop to the Championship, not to fund transfer activities...

Well, what about Wigan and QPR, they both spent money scream the uneducated....

Yes, they did, but QPR made over £13M in player sales (and spent some £16M so a net spend of just £3M) and Wigan made over £20M in sales and spent just £6M - WHERE'S THE MONEY GONE WHELAN?

Those slating Anton, NH etc and trying to stir up protests are simply spoilt, ignorant twats IMO; products of a generation who want the World on a plate, and want it now.....

Get behind the team and support it rather than undermining it....

+1

[fruits]

"We are still aware that there was an expectation from the supporters, I understand that and there may be a little bit of disappointment,"

This was caused in the main by hype from the Russian and NA. The club should not lie, mislead their fans

Mislead =
delude ,cheat ,deceive, defraud,cozen,bilk, take in,
overreach,outwit, ensnare ,trick,enmesh,entangle,victimize,lure,beguile,inveigle, hoax,dupe, gull,bait,misrepresent, bluff,give a bum steer, throw off the scent,lead one on a merry chase, bamboozle,scam,humbug, hoodwink, double-cross.

I think the club et all did all those things.

[Hoop Blah]

1, Hammond has been a central figure in the most successful period the club has ever seen and has worked wonders in the transfer market and overseen the establishment of a pretty successful academy. None of us know the constraints he has to work within and so it's a bit daft to scream for his sacking from a position of total ingnorance.
2, The questioning has been about the club lieing to the fans or not really wanting to add players. Thats ridiculous. The problem has really been that they've been too open with the fans about how many they wanted to bring in and so the failure to do that is more obvious.
3, Obviously

Calling out ill-informed dicks for being dicks and having ill-informed opinions is all part of HNA too. It's not creating straw man arguments, it's exaggeration for effect to show how wide of the mark a significant proportion of the opinion has been.

[PieEater]

It does seem odd that we've made an offer to Sissoko who I see as a bit of a luxury addition, but there's no sign of a striker who is essential because we can't afford one. We are spending money on the wrong players.

[fruits]

I would think we must be very careful in future about how contracts are worded. The Pig situation is a disgrace, the guy is earning money under false pretences, he has basically withdrawn his labour from his employer. He never could jump, but now he doesn´t even run.

[andrew1957]

It does seem odd that we've made an offer to Sissoko who I see as a bit of a luxury addition, but there's no sign of a striker who is essential because we can't afford one. We are spending money on the wrong players.

The only logic would be that we would play 4-1-2-3 with Sisokko sitting in front of the back 4 allowing probably Guthrie and Williams to get forward more to support a front 3 with only one striker (probably say Pog or ALF) plus say Drenthe and McAnuff.

[ManchesterRoyals]

It does seem odd that we've made an offer to Sissoko who I see as a bit of a luxury addition, but there's no sign of a striker who is essential because we can't afford one. We are spending money on the wrong players.

Agreed

[Hoop Blah]

It does seem odd that we've made an offer to Sissoko who I see as a bit of a luxury addition, but there's no sign of a striker who is essential because we can't afford one. We are spending money on the wrong players.

Which makes me just think that something else is going on with a forward or two that hasn't come out in the public domain. There have of course be heavy links to Billy Sharp and we had Akpala here for a trial, so it's not that we're not looking at forwards.

The Sissoko deal may be seen as long term investment and a good opportunity to get in some extra quality of course. A forward is perhaps a more pressing and short term requirement though.

[Extended-Phenotype]

1, Hammond has been a central figure in the most successful period the club has ever seen and has worked wonders in the transfer market and overseen the establishment of a pretty successful academy. None of us know the constraints he has to work within and so it's a bit daft to scream for his sacking from a position of total ingnorance.
2, The questioning has been about the club lieing to the fans or not really wanting to add players. Thats ridiculous. The problem has really been that they've been too open with the fans about how many they wanted to bring in and so the failure to do that is more obvious.
3, Obviously

Calling out ill-informed dicks for being dicks and having ill-informed opinions is all part of HNA too. It's not creating straw man arguments, it's exaggeration for effect to show how wide of the mark a significant proportion of the opinion has been.

1. Totally agree. Just saying it's understandable.
2. You don't think they have been misleading? I mean, they must have KNOWN it would have been hard. ("Yes, seven players... bloody hell, why didn't anyone tell me the transfer window was going to be difficult??")
3. Natch.
(4). No, it's avoiding the more difficult rational arguments and making up one you can win. Tbh, it's more than fair enough.

[andrew1957]

I would think we must be very careful in future about how contracts are worded. The Pig situation is a disgrace, the guy is earning money under false pretences, he has basically withdrawn his labour from his employer. He never could jump, but now he doesn´t even run.

Harsh - he probably has not played yet as we hoped he was off. If he now gest a chance at this level he may yet come good. If he refuses to play (very unlikely) the club could legitimately fine him. I don't think his effort was in doubt last season but we did not play to his strengths.

Only time will tell.

[Hoop Blah]

2. You don't think they have been misleading? I mean, they must have KNOWN it would have been hard. ("Yes, seven players... bloody hell, why didn't anyone tell me the transfer window was going to be difficult??")

It would only be misleading if they didn't want to, or expect to, get those players in.

Never, as far as I'm aware, have they said WE WILL get x number of players or that they'll spend a certain amount in the transfer window. All they've done is set out what they'd like to do.

They've failed to get all their targets and then didn't want to bring in dross for the sake of bringing in dross. That's not misleading, it's just an unfortunate failure to add (so far) the quality players they were hoping to.

[sandman]

Good to know a former Valencia, Liverpool, Juve and PSG player is asking for such a pittance.

[No Hoops]

I'm going to wait until we see who we get on loan before moaning about anything



Now, back to anything else for some sensible banter

[ManchesterRoyals]

Good to know a former Valencia, Liverpool, Juve and PSG player is asking for such a pittance.

OMG I'm agreeing with you

[LoyalRoyalFan]

Out of interest, how are you (or they) quantifying "over the odds"? Over the odds according to who?

The clubs financial structure, which is controlled by AZ. If he doesn't feel that the money should be spent in the transfer market, or a deal isn't viable, it's his decision and not that of Hammond.

No, I appreciate that - not saying Hammond is at fault at all. I'm asking for clarification of this overused vocable "over the odds" and how exactly it justifies a failure to sign a needed player.

If the club set the odds, surely anything can be declared "over the odds". If everyone keeps asking for "over the odds", perhaps our valuation of the "odds" is wrong.

Not in disagreement with you in principle, just find this phrase utterly meaningless.

Very much so. How do we determine the right value for a player?

That is a puzzler.

[sandman]

I'm going to wait until we see who we get on loan before moaning about anything



Now, back to anything else for some sensible banter

Agreed a 90 day loan is really going to help "build a team" and "change the style". Forget loan deals and just go with the Youngsters whether they're good enough or not.

[Extended-Phenotype]

2. You don't think they have been misleading? I mean, they must have KNOWN it would have been hard. ("Yes, seven players... bloody hell, why didn't anyone tell me the transfer window was going to be difficult??")

It would only be misleading if they didn't want to, or expect to, get those players in.

Never, as far as I'm aware, have they said WE WILL get x number of players or that they'll spend a certain amount in the transfer window. All they've done is set out what they'd like to do.

They've failed to get all their targets and then didn't want to bring in dross for the sake of bringing in dross. That's not misleading, it's just an unfortunate failure to add (so far) the quality players they were hoping to.

Cool. Then it comes back to my original post then; either the club were misleading with their intent, or the intent was there but mistakes were made in the transfer window - targeting the wrong players, not targeting enough players, wrong valuation; doesn't matter - if you say you need/want seven players and only manage three, someone somewhere has f/cked up.

In which case, the club are more than open to some criticism in my opinion.