Adkins: 'I don't think Reading can reach 100 goal target"

[Ian Royal]

That Ian is how I understood the Sigs issue, the big problem here though is the pre-window closing outputs from the club, Anton and his 7 siginings, Adkins 3 before the window closes, these arnt qoutes from some random "transfer rumours" site, these are statements reported directly from the horses mouth, our PR towards the fans is amazing in it's bullshit, even more this close season than we have previously been used to.

I don't get the issue. Anton said he expected about 7 signings, but that was before we sealed deals with Pearce and HRK who most of us expected to leave. I think fair to say that we could reasonably have expected Pog to go, and he would have if he'd got an offer he liked. Clearly, that cuts back on the new signings we needed.

Then the season started and as the end of the window approached Adkins said he wanted to bring in three players.

Yes, the window is disappointing and we didn't manage to bring in who we wanted. But Anton has been clear we'll be run the same as always, and saying he expected us to make about 7 signings doesn't change that. Adkins has repeatedly said he wants to bring in players that improve our first team and wants a squad stronger than last season. He's also said he doesn't want to bring in players just to pad out the numbers because he'd rather try the youth. We went for deals that would be really good for us, couldn't close them. We didn't panic buy mediocrity as a result.

We aren't looking for a striker better than Blackman, we're looking for a striker as good or better than Pog or ALF. It's a shame we couldn't keep Hunt, but then our ambitions were higher than him, so it's not unreasonable to have refused a two year contract.

The problem is that the second someone at the club says something positive or aspirational it's twisted by warped perceptions into meaning we're going to spend big or that its some sort of guarantee. The problem is fans with unrealistic expectations and agendas to push.

[P!ssed Off]

That Ian is how I understood the Sigs issue, the big problem here though is the pre-window closing outputs from the club, Anton and his 7 siginings, Adkins 3 before the window closes, these arnt qoutes from some random "transfer rumours" site, these are statements reported directly from the horses mouth, our PR towards the fans is amazing in it's bullshit, even more this close season than we have previously been used to.

I don't get the issue. Anton said he expected about 7 signings, but that was before we sealed deals with Pearce and HRK who most of us expected to leave. I think fair to say that we could reasonably have expected Pog to go, and he would have if he'd got an offer he liked. Clearly, that cuts back on the new signings we needed.

Then the season started and as the end of the window approached Adkins said he wanted to bring in three players.

Yes, the window is disappointing and we didn't manage to bring in who we wanted. But Anton has been clear we'll be run the same as always, and saying he expected us to make about 7 signings doesn't change that. Adkins has repeatedly said he wants to bring in players that improve our first team and wants a squad stronger than last season. He's also said he doesn't want to bring in players just to pad out the numbers because he'd rather try the youth. We went for deals that would be really good for us, couldn't close them. We didn't panic buy mediocrity as a result.

We aren't looking for a striker better than Blackman, we're looking for a striker as good or better than Pog or ALF. It's a shame we couldn't keep Hunt, but then our ambitions were higher than him, so it's not unreasonable to have refused a two year contract.

The problem is that the second someone at the club says something positive or aspirational it's twisted by warped perceptions into meaning we're going to spend big or that its some sort of guarantee. The problem is fans with unrealistic expectations and agendas to push.

Seriously let it go Ian Royal.
Adkins and Hammond know they mucked up. Zing knows he mucked.
Stop with the "I don't get it" spiel.
It's just tedious.

[Ian Royal]

When you lot stop whining, I'll stop telling you why you're overreacting.

[Royal Rother]

"We are looking at doing 2 or 3 deals to bring in some more players this transfer window but it is dependent on being the right deal for the club and on being able to offload 1 or 2 from the current wages bill"

HNA - "No ambition - blah blah blah. Anton hasn't got any money, and Hammond is useless."

---------------------

"We are looking at bringing in 2 or 3 more players this transfer window."

HNA - Gets collective hard-on.

And then we don't.

HNA - "No ambition - blah blah blah. Anton hasn't got any money, and Hammond is useless."

[P!ssed Off]

"We are looking at bringing in 2 or 3 more players this transfer window."

HNA - Gets collective hard-on.

And then we don't.

HNA - "No ambition - blah blah blah. Anton hasn't got any money, and Hammond is useless."

Inaccurate.
I believe we were looking to bring in 7 players during the transfer window.
This was scaled down to 3 for the last weekend of the window.

And what about this from Zingarevich (after the 3 initial signings):
"It is not the end in terms of signings," Zingarevich told BBC Radio Berkshire. "We have six weeks to go and we need to do a little bit more business."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23377556

"It is not the end in terms of signings" = a firm categorical statement that there will be more signings not an aim or an objective that the club is looking to make more signings.
Ian Royal -I'd like to hear your thoughts about how this was also not a failed promise form the club.

[Ian Royal]

I don't get the issue. Anton said he expected about 7 signings, but that was before we sealed deals with Pearce and HRK who most of us expected to leave. I think fair to say that we could reasonably have expected Pog to go, and he would have if he'd got an offer he liked. Clearly, that cuts back on the new signings we needed.

Then the season started and as the end of the window approached Adkins said he wanted to bring in three more players on top of what we'd got.

Yes, the window is disappointing and we didn't manage to bring in who we wanted. But Anton has been clear we'll be run the same as always, and saying he expected us to make about 7 signings doesn't change that. Adkins has repeatedly said he wants to bring in players that improve our first team and wants a squad stronger than last season. He's also said he doesn't want to bring in players just to pad out the numbers because he'd rather try the youth. We went for deals that would be really good for us, couldn't close them. We didn't panic buy mediocrity as a result.

We aren't looking for a striker better than Blackman, we're looking for a striker as good or better than Pog or ALF. It's a shame we couldn't keep Hunt, but then our ambitions were higher than him, so it's not unreasonable to have refused a two year contract.

The problem is that the second someone at the club says something positive or aspirational it's twisted by warped perceptions into meaning we're going to spend big or that its some sort of guarantee. The problem is fans with unrealistic expectations and agendas to push.

Already done it about three or four posts up.

"It's not the end in terms of signings" This is your problem. It's clear that is short hand for "we intend to make more signings and will be doing more business, as always the usual rules apply, we won't be held to ransom and we won't buy mediocrity for the sake of it" It's not like we shut up shop and made no effort. We were active until the last hour or so.

And we are still capable of making more signings.

[AirRaidSiren]

"We are looking at bringing in 2 or 3 more players this transfer window."

HNA - Gets collective hard-on.

And then we don't.

HNA - "No ambition - blah blah blah. Anton hasn't got any money, and Hammond is useless."

Inaccurate.
I believe we were looking to bring in 7 players during the transfer window.
This was scaled down to 3 for the last weekend of the window.

What about this from Zingarevich (after the 3 initial signings):
"It is not the end in terms of signings," Zingarevich told BBC Radio Berkshire. "We have six weeks to go and we need to do a little bit more business."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23377556

"It is not the end in terms of signings" = a firm categorical statement that there will be more signings not an aim or an objective that the club are looking to make more signings.
Ian Royal -I'd like to hear your thoughts about how this was also not a failed promise from the club.

Corrected for you. Now, if we were in a bar and you spoke like that, I'd have to point out your poor English. Just sayin'.

[Royal Rother]

"We are looking at bringing in 2 or 3 more players this transfer window."

HNA - Gets collective hard-on.

And then we don't.

HNA - "No ambition - blah blah blah. Anton hasn't got any money, and Hammond is useless."

Inaccurate.

It wasn't supposed to pass forensic analysis, just making a point about how things are.

[P!ssed Off]

"It's not the end in terms of signings" This is your problem. It's clear that is short hand for "we intend to make more signings and will be doing more business, as always the usual rules apply, we won't be held to ransom and we won't buy mediocrity for the sake of it" It's not like we shut up shop and made no effort. We were active until the last hour or so.

And we are still capable of making more signings.

Behave.
"It's not the end in terms of signings" means there will be more signings. If he meant we will try to make more signings then he should have said this.
If people at the club are stupid enough to make categorical statements then the fans have a right to hold them to them.
i.e. if Adkins says "We will win the league" instead of "We can win the league" then people have a right to hold him to his statement if we didn't then win the league.

I was only really interested in a reply to the specific quote I provided rather than the whole general spiel.

And also the paragraph in whole was:
"It is not the end in terms of signings," Zingarevich told BBC Radio Berkshire. "We have six weeks to go and we need to do a little bit more business."
As Zing made this statement on 19 July it is safe to say that the six weeks, in which he said we would make a signing, have now passed.

[P!ssed Off]

"We are looking at bringing in 2 or 3 more players this transfer window."

HNA - Gets collective hard-on.

And then we don't.

HNA - "No ambition - blah blah blah. Anton hasn't got any money, and Hammond is useless."

Inaccurate.
I believe we were looking to bring in 7 players during the transfer window.
This was scaled down to 3 for the last weekend of the window.

What about this from Zingarevich (after the 3 initial signings):
"It is not the end in terms of signings," Zingarevich told BBC Radio Berkshire. "We have six weeks to go and we need to do a little bit more business."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23377556

"It is not the end in terms of signings" = a firm categorical statement that there will be more signings not an aim or an objective that the club are looking to make more signings.
Ian Royal -I'd like to hear your thoughts about how this was also not a failed promise from the club.

Corrected for you. Now, if we were in a bar and you spoke like that, I'd have to point out your poor English. Just sayin'.

As far as I am aware, my "poor English" was starting a sentence with "And".
I feel duty bound, as a fellow fan, to inform you that it is, in fact, a grammar myth that you cannot start a sentence with conjunctions such as 'and' and 'but'.
Look it up if you don't believe me.
HTH

[AirRaidSiren]

@P!ssed off

I also corrected your mispelling of the word 'from' and the use of the word 'is'.

Fickle stuff this, but has to be said considering I had a post of mine ripped to shreds for saying 'done ok' instead of 'did ok'. Local dialect around these parts 'n all that.

Personally, I couldn't give a hoot how people speak or spell, but are some on here who are obsessed with how others do, rather than what the post was about. Hint hint.

Enjoy your day.

[P!ssed Off]

@P!ssed off

I also corrected your mispelling of the word 'from' and the use of the word 'is'.

Fickle stuff this, but has to be said considering I had a post of mine ripped to shreds for saying 'done ok' instead of 'did ok'. Local dialect around these parts 'n all that.

Personally, I couldn't give a hoot how people speak or spell, but are some on here who are obsessed with how others do, rather than what the post was about. Hint hint.

Enjoy your day.

You got me on the "form" typo, well played.

Even so, 2 of the 3 corrections were failures.
Have a read of this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_noun under the section 'Metonymic merging of grammatical number'.
It says this:
"In British English, it is generally accepted that collective nouns can take either singular or plural verb forms depending on the context and the metonymic shift that it implies. For example, "the team is in the dressing room" (formal agreement) refers to the team as an ensemble, whilst "the team are fighting among themselves" (notional agreement) refers to the team as individuals."

It's safe to say that when I said "the club is looking to make more signings" at that particular moment I was referring to the club as an ensemble (one unit) rather than the club as individuals.

[AirRaidSiren]

@P!ssed off

I also corrected your mispelling of the word 'from' and the use of the word 'is'.

Fickle stuff this, but has to be said considering I had a post of mine ripped to shreds for saying 'done ok' instead of 'did ok'. Local dialect around these parts 'n all that.

Personally, I couldn't give a hoot how people speak or spell, but are some on here who are obsessed with how others do, rather than what the post was about. Hint hint.

Enjoy your day.

You got me on the "form" typo, well played.

Even so, 2 of the 3 corrections were failures.
Have a read of this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_noun under the section 'Metonymic merging of grammatical number'.
It says this:
"In British English, it is generally accepted that collective nouns can take either singular or plural verb forms depending on the context and the metonymic shift that it implies. For example, "the team is in the dressing room" (formal agreement) refers to the team as an ensemble, whilst "the team are fighting among themselves" (notional agreement) refers to the team as individuals."

It's safe to say that when I said "the club is looking to make more signings" at that particular moment I was referring to the club as an ensemble (one unit) rather than the club as individuals.

Love it. Thank you teacher

[Royal Rother]

Hobnob at its best!!

[P!ssed Off]

@P!ssed off

I also corrected your mispelling of the word 'from' and the use of the word 'is'.

Fickle stuff this, but has to be said considering I had a post of mine ripped to shreds for saying 'done ok' instead of 'did ok'. Local dialect around these parts 'n all that.

Personally, I couldn't give a hoot how people speak or spell, but are some on here who are obsessed with how others do, rather than what the post was about. Hint hint.

Enjoy your day.

You got me on the "form" typo, well played.

Even so, 2 of the 3 corrections were failures.
Have a read of this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_noun under the section 'Metonymic merging of grammatical number'.
It says this:
"In British English, it is generally accepted that collective nouns can take either singular or plural verb forms depending on the context and the metonymic shift that it implies. For example, "the team is in the dressing room" (formal agreement) refers to the team as an ensemble, whilst "the team are fighting among themselves" (notional agreement) refers to the team as individuals."

It's safe to say that when I said "the club is looking to make more signings" at that particular moment I was referring to the club as an ensemble (one unit) rather than the club as individuals.

Love it. Thank you teacher

You're welcome. As long as you promise not to say "Reading has the worst fans in the country" again, I will stop correcting your English.

[Cypry]

"It's not the end in terms of signings" This is your problem. It's clear that is short hand for "we intend to make more signings and will be doing more business, as always the usual rules apply, we won't be held to ransom and we won't buy mediocrity for the sake of it" It's not like we shut up shop and made no effort. We were active until the last hour or so.

And we are still capable of making more signings.

Behave.
"It's not the end in terms of signings" means there will be more signings. If he meant we will try to make more signings then he should have said this.
If people at the club are stupid enough to make categorical statements then the fans have a right to hold them to them.
i.e. if Adkins says "We will win the league" instead of "We can win the league" then people have a right to hold him to his statement if we didn't then win the league.

I was only really interested in a reply to the specific quote I provided rather than the whole general spiel.

And also the paragraph in whole was:
"It is not the end in terms of signings," Zingarevich told BBC Radio Berkshire. "We have six weeks to go and we need to do a little bit more business."
As Zing made this statement on 19 July it is safe to say that the six weeks, in which he said we would make a signing, have now passed.

Sorry, but you're being ridiculous...

AZ is Russian, and whilst his English is better than some on here, there's no way that you can construe what he said about doing more business as a promise...

You're taking what he said far too literally....

[Ian Royal]

Absolutely Cypry. Everything said is about intent. It is not a concrete prediction of the future that sets it in stone.

We intended to sign more players, we didn't intend that our business was done. We failed in our intention. It's that simple.

[P!ssed Off]

"It's not the end in terms of signings" This is your problem. It's clear that is short hand for "we intend to make more signings and will be doing more business, as always the usual rules apply, we won't be held to ransom and we won't buy mediocrity for the sake of it" It's not like we shut up shop and made no effort. We were active until the last hour or so.

And we are still capable of making more signings.

Behave.
"It's not the end in terms of signings" means there will be more signings. If he meant we will try to make more signings then he should have said this.
If people at the club are stupid enough to make categorical statements then the fans have a right to hold them to them.
i.e. if Adkins says "We will win the league" instead of "We can win the league" then people have a right to hold him to his statement if we didn't then win the league.

I was only really interested in a reply to the specific quote I provided rather than the whole general spiel.

And also the paragraph in whole was:
"It is not the end in terms of signings," Zingarevich told BBC Radio Berkshire. "We have six weeks to go and we need to do a little bit more business."
As Zing made this statement on 19 July it is safe to say that the six weeks, in which he said we would make a signing, have now passed.

Sorry, but you're being ridiculous...

AZ is Russian, and whilst his English is better than some on here, there's no way that you can construe what he said about doing more business as a promise...

You're taking what he said far too literally....

He went to school in England ffs. You can't play the 'foreign owner doesn't speak very good English' card.

Based on the owner of the club stating on the radio "It is not the end in terms of signings", were the fans behaving reasonably in expecting the club to make another signing?
In my opinion it is entirely reasonable.

If the club says "We want to sign three players" then I expect the club to attempt to sign three players.
If the club says "It is not the end in terms of signings" then I expect the club to sign at least one more player.

I am allowed to hold the club to what they 'literally' say. If you make a categorical statement in seriousness then people are entitled to take you literally. If Zingarevich doesn't want to be taken literally then he should be more careful what he says.

Hypothetically, If Zingarevivch was to say "Reading will win the league this season" then I am entitled to ask "Why didn't you win the league?", if Reading were to fail to do so.

Let this be a lesson for Zingarevich.

[P!ssed Off]

Absolutely Cypry. Everything said is about intent. It is not a concrete prediction of the future that sets it in stone.

We intended to sign more players, we didn't intend that our business was done. We failed in our intention. It's that simple.

No.

To show intention he could/should have said "We would like to sign at least one more player" or "We will try to sign one more player"

"It is not the end in terms of signings" is a categorical, not conditional, statement.

If someone at the club is foolish enough to make a categorical statement, then I will hold them to it.
If he's not 100% sure that the club will make another signing, which obviously he wasn't because we didn't, then he shouldn't say "It is not the end in terms of signings".

[Ian Royal]

Absolutely Cypry. Everything said is about intent. It is not a concrete prediction of the future that sets it in stone.

We intended to sign more players, we didn't intend that our business was done. We failed in our intention. It's that simple.

No.

To show intention he could/should have said "We would like to sign at least one more player" or "We will try to sign one more player"

"It is not the end in terms of signings" is a categorical, not conditional, statement.

If someone at the club is foolish enough to make a categorical statement, then I will hold them to it.
If he's not 100% sure that the club will make another signing, which obviously he wasn't because we didn't, then he shouldn't say "It is not the end in terms of signings" .

Some people don't decide to caveat absolutely every statement they make with get out clauses and loop holes, just so that if something unexpected goes wrong, they don't have to expect people to realise the blindingly obvious.

Christ that would be a long winded and tedious world to live in where all statements were delivered by lawyers with full qualifying debrief on the simple message trying to be given.