Abdoulaye's going t'Souk transfer thread

[thebish]

smokin was bemoaning the fact that we won't have Cravies, Sordell and N'gog - he's consistent - fair play. (though, we still do have cravies, don't we? or did i miss something?)

[Harry Genshaw]

Add-one come to a miserable 150 grand. Piss poor negotiating IMO. my hope is that we never paid the full fee due to missed success targets. And they must have all been missed I assume.

I think it is a minor miracle we got anything for him whatsoever.

I think if you're taking that big a hit on the fee you at least hedge your bets a bit more effectively than that. Don't get me wrong, we're well rid, but if his supposed talent reappears, we're going to look even stupider than we did for signing the feck.
Anyway, more likely they'll get relegated, gift him to AFC Wimbledon and we'll get promoted with his replacement blitzing defences, so good riddance. Tw@t.

What should we have done? Turned it down and let him run his contract down?

Clubs were hardly lining up. Club can't win. Personally irrespective of how he does there I think we've done very well to get that sort of deal for him.

The mistake was spending any sort of money on him in the first place.

Why not give him another chance? His goalscoring record was fine for us and whilst he isn't the greatest player, we're short up front as it is and even if we get Jutkiewicz, we still don't have a natural goalscorer. Sordell is more likely to get us 20 goals a season than any other striker we have or are rumoured to want, so there was an upside to keeping him.

I think a partnership of Jutkiewicz and Sordell would have been effective, personally. Both need a partner with attributes that the other has.

We couldn't afford to give him any more chances. You can't keep paying one of your highest earners god knows how much in the hope he might come good one day. I'd have hoped we learnt that lesson from Ngog.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I think that if we'd have [done something we now can't do] and [bought somebody we don't own and possibly can't afford] then we'd piss this league.

And you'll never be able to disprove that.

So I win the internet.

[bobo the clown]

I think that if we'd have [done something we now can't do] and [bought somebody we don't own and possibly can't afford] then we'd piss this league.

And you'll never be able to disprove that.

So I win the internet.

You're welcome to it. It's broken.


... and it's only a small black box. I've seen it. It's rubbish.

[bwfcdan94]

Bye Bye Marvin.

[bwfcdan94]

The mistake was spending any sort of money on him in the first place.[/quote]
Why not give him another chance? His goalscoring record was fine for us and whilst he isn't the greatest player, we're short up front as it is and even if we get Jutkiewicz, we still don't have a natural goalscorer. Sordell is more likely to get us 20 goals a season than any other striker we have or are rumoured to want, so there was an upside to keeping him.

I think a partnership of Jutkiewicz and Sordell would have been effective, personally. Both need a partner with attributes that the other has.[/quote]

And that particular sentence is based on...what, exactly? Because from what I've seen, he's another striker that would struggle to get ten. Or are you just being contrary for the hell of it?[/quote][/quote][/quote]

Idiocy, even beyond the realms of some of the things I come out with.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

At least he can quote properly

[bobo the clown]

↑↑↑ I think someone underestimates themselves.

[bwfcdan94]

At least he can quote properly

, I always have been sh*t at quoting.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

At least he can quote properly

, I always have been sh*t at quoting.

At least your punctuation is improving.

[Bruce Rioja]

At least he can quote properly

, I always have been sh*t at quoting.

At least your punctuation is improving.

Can we forgive the split infinitive though?

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

At least he can quote properly

, I always have been sh*t at quoting.

At least your punctuation is improving.

Can we forgive the split infinitive though?

I don't bother with such pickiness personally

[thebish]

At least he can quote properly

I can quote properly...

oooofffff... errrrrr... ffffffffffffffffppphhhhh... that'll be £600 for the fitting plus VAT, plus mileage, plus incidentals, plus service charge, plus parts, plus general unknowns, plus a bit for my mate tony who might be helping out, plus scaffolding, plus insurance damage waiver damage insurance waiver cover...

errrr..... shall we say £5,800?

[bobo the clown]

At least he can quote properly

I can quote properly...

oooofffff... errrrrr... ffffffffffffffffppphhhhh... that'll be £600 for the fitting plus VAT, plus mileage, plus incidentals, plus service charge, plus parts, plus general unknowns, plus a bit for my mate tony who might be helping out, plus scaffolding, plus insurance damage waiver damage insurance waiver cover...

errrr..... shall we say £5,800?

No eye-wateringly punative 'contract variation' clause ??

Sheesh, you know nothing.

[thebish]

At least he can quote properly

I can quote properly...

oooofffff... errrrrr... ffffffffffffffffppphhhhh... that'll be £600 for the fitting plus VAT, plus mileage, plus incidentals, plus service charge, plus parts, plus general unknowns, plus a bit for my mate tony who might be helping out, plus scaffolding, plus insurance damage waiver damage insurance waiver cover...

errrr..... shall we say £5,800?

No eye-wateringly punative 'contract variation' clause ??

Sheesh, you know nothing.

that's billed seperately in this instance!

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

You also forgot the call out charge. Send the bill to Dan...

[thebish]

You also forgot the call out charge. Send the bill to Dan...

that was billed before he even got out his tape measure to quote for the job!

[SmokinFrazier]

I think it is a minor miracle we got anything for him whatsoever.

I think if you're taking that big a hit on the fee you at least hedge your bets a bit more effectively than that. Don't get me wrong, we're well rid, but if his supposed talent reappears, we're going to look even stupider than we did for signing the feck.
Anyway, more likely they'll get relegated, gift him to AFC Wimbledon and we'll get promoted with his replacement blitzing defences, so good riddance. Tw@t.

What should we have done? Turned it down and let him run his contract down?

Clubs were hardly lining up. Club can't win. Personally irrespective of how he does there I think we've done very well to get that sort of deal for him.

The mistake was spending any sort of money on him in the first place.

Why not give him another chance? His goalscoring record was fine for us and whilst he isn't the greatest player, we're short up front as it is and even if we get Jutkiewicz, we still don't have a natural goalscorer. Sordell is more likely to get us 20 goals a season than any other striker we have or are rumoured to want, so there was an upside to keeping him.

I think a partnership of Jutkiewicz and Sordell would have been effective, personally. Both need a partner with attributes that the other has.

And that particular sentence is based on...what, exactly? Because from what I've seen, he's another striker that would struggle to get ten. Or are you just being contrary for the hell of it?

The only time he got a chance for us, he scored 8 goals in 16 starts and that was without being a consistent starter or playing in a settled system. That's an impressive goalscoring record and if he had a partner who suited him, I see no reason why he wouldn't continue with, or even improve on, his 1 in 2 ratio when starting.

Sordell only looked well out of his depth when playing as a lone striker. His work rate isn't good enough and it doesn't work and won't do, but played alongside someone who can provide him chances and he'll take them. he's a better striker than Beckford and Jutkiewicz and more effective in front of goal, so there is an upside to him, he just needs his limitations to be covered by a partner.

[bobo the clown]

Anyway. He's gone now. So "there".

NEXT !!!

[LeverEnd]

What should we have done? Turned it down and let him run his contract down?

Clubs were hardly lining up. Club can't win. Personally irrespective of how he does there I think we've done very well to get that sort of deal for him.

The mistake was spending any sort of money on him in the first place.

No, I agree we were right to get rid. I just thought we could have driven a harder bargain than that. If that's all that was on the table then fair enough. It's unknowable and irrelevant now I suppose.