Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4,739 Excellent


About frastheowl

  • Rank
    AFC Owlstalk - Double Premiership Champions
  • Birthday 17/09/1986

Profile Information

  • Location
    Wadsley, S6

Recent Profile Visitors

5,363 profile views
  1. Really? Surprised by that. Fancy them to mount a challenge this season. Good squad, and O'Neill will get them organised. Might have a little nibble on them, as an each way chance, if that odds are big enough.
  2. He was a damn sight better player that many fans believed he was. But, he also wasn't anything irreplaceable. He was a good, solid Championship defender. Athletic, strong, reliable. Hence why one of next season's promotion favourites have signed him. But certainly not somebody to be breaking the bank over. And also, if we're to carry on playing the 3-5-2/3-4-3 system, you'd suspect he'd become part of the centre half combinations. Doesn't suit the wing back role.
  3. Fair play to Fox. He's got himself a deal which no doubt will be more lucrative than we would've offered him, and also for a longer period. No chance we'd have been able to match Stoke's offer, nor would be have given him a three year deal.
  4. Yeah, I've been constant defender of both of them (particularly Dawson), but the stats do show that perhaps its an area of concern. Until the 12 point deduction, I was 100% behind backing one of them to be the number one, in which was likely to be a season of transition, with little to no expectation. But, given now, that every single point will be vital, I've changed my tact. Can we afford to give one of them a period of learning, given the intensity they'll be under? I think I'd be looking for a Number One, with genuine Championship credentials. There's a time and a place for blooding youngsters, and next season is not it. Staying in the Championship is a must.
  5. I've been trying to search for the tweet, but I can't seem to find it.
  6. Saw a stat on Twitter the other day, which compared the Championship goalkeeper to the "average" keeper. Dawson was below average, and Wildsmith was bottom (or next to) of the entire list. Certainly suggests, that a lot of our goals were "saveable." I can't remember too many clangers, but in a lot of games, it did seem as though teams didn't have too many chances, yet often scored a number of goals.
  7. We drew both games. 1-1 at Hillsborough. 0-0 at the KC (when FF got sent off)
  8. Sounds like a deal that might end up (love) biting us in the backside.
  9. I don't disagree. My point was, Rowett, was almost universally shunned by the fanbase when he was touting himself for the job less than a year ago.
  10. I've been constant defenders of Dawson (and to a lesser extent Wildsmith), but you're right, from a stats point of view, Wildsmith has been amongst the worst whenever he's played on a consistent basis for us, and Dawson was well below the average for the division. I felt this season would've been a good year for one of them to become genuine number one, and be allowed the opportunity to play games without too much pressure upon them. But, given the 12 points deduction, those margins for errors have just become so much smaller. I know there's a desire to introduce youngsters into the side, and I absolutely agree with it. But the need for results has just become so much more important than it did a couple of days ago.
  11. How many were saying that about 11 months ago when he desperately wanted the Wednesday job? There wasn't too many, I seem to recall.
  12. Of course, we are all surmising until the documents are released. But given that the biggest points deduction available for exceeding allowable losses is 12 points, and any extra deductions given is for aggravation (which we've been cleared of), it would tie into that scenario.
  13. My understanding was, that there was a defined matrix in terms of Points Deduction and Exceeded Allowable Losses. And our loss, minus the sale of Hillsborough in the 2017-18 Accounts, meant our P&S allowable losses for the previous three seasons exceeded the upper limit of £15m, and therefore have been deducted that number. Unless the club can someone convince them that the exceeded losses for that period is lower (it'd have to be between £10m-£12m, to be deducted 8 points), then I'm not sure what other option the panel has got. It seems simple enough...either the stadium sale was allowed in that accounting period and we avoid any points deduction, OR it isn't, and we get 12 points deducted (plus possible additional deductions for aggravation). Not sure how appealing will reduce the penalty...it seems like it's an all-or-nothing scenario to me.
  14. I don't disagree that a fresher look is required. My point is, if we just bring in players fitting the "young" "potential resale value" tags, we could find ourselves creating an environment in which these sort of players just cannot flourish. I'd imagine we'll be looking to bring in 7-8 players this summer. We could achieve a much younger, vibrant looking squad, whilst ensuring we bring in some experience in also. Three players who have been there and done it, and four or five players that fit a similar mould to the kid from Man City that looks to be on his way.
  • Create New...