Jump to content

Have we got enough? The embargo thread


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, The Captain said:

 

What’s fake about my opinion?

 

Unlike @ramone, I haven’t claimed that he’s “generally failed where ever he has been,”.  Because that would be a load of crap.

 

Fletcher’s goals tally and performances at Burnley and Wolves were perfectly respectable - that’s what got Fletcher his big-money move to Sunderland.

 

I was rather ambivalent towards the Fletcher signing in July 2016.  But I did think at the time, we are taking a massive financial gamble on an alright player, who’s resale value and ability is only going to decline now.

 

A 4 year contract was wreckless, should have been one or two years IMO.

The "fakery" wasn't aimed at you specifically,but it grips my nuts when we have fans all of a sudden saying "we shouldn't have signed fletcher" because of reason A thru to Z,a bad signing is a bad signing from day one,not eighteen months down the line because he's injured and the accounts are cack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BARMYARMY2010 said:

The "fakery" wasn't aimed at you specifically,but it grips my nuts when we have fans all of a sudden saying "we shouldn't have signed fletcher" because of reason A thru to Z,a bad signing is a bad signing from day one,not eighteen months down the line because he's injured and the accounts are cack.

 

Right, so fans aren’t allowed to change their opinions, or debate and evaluate situations based on ever-changing circumstances (the unsustainable amount of forwards we have now) or new information (the accounts) that comes to light after the events?

 

Might as well close the forum down then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Captain said:

 

Right, so fans aren’t allowed to change their opinions, or debate and evaluate situations based on ever-changing circumstances (the unsustainable amount of forwards we have now) or new information (the accounts) that comes to light after the events?

 

Might as well close the forum down then.

Now that'd be silly wouldn't it,lets take the guy who i said had said "fantastic signing",he denied saying that...............yes ?,so don't be denying whats been said when he signed,of course he/you/they can think differently,but say something along the lines of we should let fletcher go (if thats what ya think) because he's maybe a little too injury prone,we can't afford to carry him if we as a club maybe going in a different direction........you dig what i'm saying ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Not fussed about an embargo either way. We've got the players perfectly capable of getting us up next season. Besides, we have one thing going for us that will instantly rejuvenate the squad. 

 

The food of the gods. 

 

"Return of the Stripes" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, daztheowl said:

 

Not fussed about an embargo either way. We've got the players perfectly capable of getting us up next season. Besides, we have one thing going for us that will instantly rejuvenate the squad. 

 

The food of the gods. 

 

"Return of the Stripes" 

No way this squad could promote us, mentally or technically.

 

Min need big stopper and flying right winger, with massive motivation skills too - see Hutch Saturday but he's missing 50% of games.

 

May be points deduction, not embargo, so it is a big worry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎20‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 19:53, BARMYARMY2010 said:

The "fakery" wasn't aimed at you specifically,but it grips my nuts when we have fans all of a sudden saying "we shouldn't have signed fletcher" because of reason A thru to Z,a bad signing is a bad signing from day one,not eighteen months down the line because he's injured and the accounts are cack.

I don't think its a case of not or shouldn't have signed Fletcher, it just goes to show how naïve and inexperienced our chairman is in the length and cost of the contract handed to him. No sensible club would have given out anywhere near what our club have given him. If it had been 24 months on 15k a week hardly anyone would have raised an eyebrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The squad is not good enough as it stands, we do have some good young players who could improve and who knows how well we could do. If we allow young players to leave the old and broken players we have are far short of what is required to achieve a standard of respectability in league. Without injury we may get in top half but in view of injury record over last couple of seasons and squad being aged I think this is extremely unlikely

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real problem with some of the signings is length of contract given in relation to age and we appear to have had no regard of injury records of players.. I think everyone knows as you get older injuries become more common and you are slower to recover so buying someone late twenties on long contract is always likely to be an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CLswfc said:

I don't think its a case of not or shouldn't have signed Fletcher, it just goes to show how naïve and inexperienced our chairman is in the length and cost of the contract handed to him. No sensible club would have given out anywhere near what our club have given him. If it had been 24 months on 15k a week hardly anyone would have raised an eyebrow.

Thats kind of what i'm saying, no one, absolutely no one opposed the length of contract as of july 1st 2016,grips my nuts we now have fans saying "Ah well, we shouldn't have done this, that or tuther", hindsight is marvellous, foresight now theres a skill to have. 

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
×
×
  • Create New...