PLYMOUTH'S stupendously all singing dancing transfer thread!

[Lord Kangana]

He made Knight captain, handed Wheater a whole new shiny extended contract, and prioritised both fullback positions, when we had one of them adequately filled, spent his transfer budget on another defensive midfielder and a bunch of kids. If it works great, but how anyone can conclude from that that it was out of his hands is beyond me.

[thebish]

He made Knight captain, handed Wheater a whole new shiny extended contract, and prioritised both fullback positions, when we had one of them adequately filled, spent his transfer budget on another defensive midfielder and a bunch of kids. If it works great, but how anyone can conclude from that that it was out of his hands is beyond me.

thing is - because none of us REALLY knows what actually goes on - we can all take different sets of information and discard others and perm them to back up pretty much any kind of theory that currently floats our boat...

[Burnden Paddock]

The whole inference in that article appears to be that DF has NOW concluded that we are short on quality in the centre half position.

For me that article gives no insight whatsoever into the thoughts of Freedman, rather it's a journalist reworking old news to fill column inches. It's a story any of us might have written.

The fact that Freedman loaned Dawson in January is evidence that he's well aware of our defensive frailty. I would imagine he has since expended much energy trying to move current incumbents out and replacements in. The fact that there has been no movement in either direction cannot be taken as evidence that he is in any way blind to the problem.

It's no news. He's been looking to shift Mills and Ream for ages. It could be he's added the other 2 wasters to his bin-list but that's gthe only difference.

As for Baird, did you see his 2nd yellow for NI last night? Jesus, made Wheater look elegant. To be fair he's not played for a while though, but he's not likely to come in and turn that shower of shite around overnight..

Er, wrong Chris! It was Brunt that was shown a second yellow. I made the same mistake initially tbf.

[Prufrock]

yet he also said that he didn't want offers to come in for any of the players...

he's having his cake and eating it....

It's not really though, is it? He's not going to say, when asked about Mills, that he thinks he's shite and can't wait to get rid. For one thing, Leeds might be listening! Makes it tricky if he doesn't go too!

At most, you might say he's guilty of not always telling the truth to the press, but that's a good thing! How much less daft would PG have looked if he'd never mentioned that fax he had in his pocket .

except i thought that was what he was supposed to have said - that after our last performance players that didn't want to be at the club would be out of the door on monday... yet - nobody left...

my point was simpler, though - if dougie was lying to the media about not wanting any clubs to come in for any of his players - then simply quoting dougie as if that proves something or backs up a personal opinion - is not as solid a tactic as you might think... he may also have been lying then!

What did Freedman actually say though? IIRC he said that if people didn't want to be here they could go. Later that night some randomer said three were going. I think people put two and two together and decided Dougie was saying that there were, in fact, people who didn't want to be here. It might be that he actually decided that they all DO want to be here, which is worrying in its own way, but doesn't mean he wa lying.

I do take your second point, but it's too simple to say 'well, you can't consider that as he might be lying'. We can guess at the probability of his truth-telling. I think it's obvious that he's probably more likely to lie about players he wants to buy or sell than, for instance, what he thought about the referee's performance. Not definite, but probable.

[LeverEnd]

Er, wrong Chris! It was Brunt that was shown a second yellow. I made the same mistake initially tbf.

Ah! my mistake. thanks for pointing that out. Thank goodness. I can only now conclude that he IS in fact going to make our defensive dreams come true. Phew.

[thebish]

yet he also said that he didn't want offers to come in for any of the players...

he's having his cake and eating it....

It's not really though, is it? He's not going to say, when asked about Mills, that he thinks he's shite and can't wait to get rid. For one thing, Leeds might be listening! Makes it tricky if he doesn't go too!

At most, you might say he's guilty of not always telling the truth to the press, but that's a good thing! How much less daft would PG have looked if he'd never mentioned that fax he had in his pocket .

except i thought that was what he was supposed to have said - that after our last performance players that didn't want to be at the club would be out of the door on monday... yet - nobody left...

my point was simpler, though - if dougie was lying to the media about not wanting any clubs to come in for any of his players - then simply quoting dougie as if that proves something or backs up a personal opinion - is not as solid a tactic as you might think... he may also have been lying then!

What did Freedman actually say though? IIRC he said that if people didn't want to be here they could go. Later that night some randomer said three were going. I think people put two and two together and decided Dougie was saying that there were, in fact, people who didn't want to be here. It might be that he actually decided that they all DO want to be here, which is worrying in its own way, but doesn't mean he wa lying.

I do take your second point, but it's too simple to say 'well, you can't consider that as he might be lying'. We can guess at the probability of his truth-telling. I think it's obvious that he's probably more likely to lie about players he wants to buy or sell than, for instance, what he thought about the referee's performance. Not definite, but probable.

my point was that simply quoting the manager's public utterances as if they irrefutably prove the point you are trying to make - especially when the manager has also said the precise opposite - is a mug's game!

(but I think you pretty much agree!)

my first paragraph was not an accusation that dougie was lying - but was supposed to offer a counterbalance to your point that managers are almost always bound to say nice things in public about their players...

[Prufrock]

yet he also said that he didn't want offers to come in for any of the players...

he's having his cake and eating it....

It's not really though, is it? He's not going to say, when asked about Mills, that he thinks he's shite and can't wait to get rid. For one thing, Leeds might be listening! Makes it tricky if he doesn't go too!

At most, you might say he's guilty of not always telling the truth to the press, but that's a good thing! How much less daft would PG have looked if he'd never mentioned that fax he had in his pocket .

except i thought that was what he was supposed to have said - that after our last performance players that didn't want to be at the club would be out of the door on monday... yet - nobody left...

my point was simpler, though - if dougie was lying to the media about not wanting any clubs to come in for any of his players - then simply quoting dougie as if that proves something or backs up a personal opinion - is not as solid a tactic as you might think... he may also have been lying then!

What did Freedman actually say though? IIRC he said that if people didn't want to be here they could go. Later that night some randomer said three were going. I think people put two and two together and decided Dougie was saying that there were, in fact, people who didn't want to be here. It might be that he actually decided that they all DO want to be here, which is worrying in its own way, but doesn't mean he wa lying.

I do take your second point, but it's too simple to say 'well, you can't consider that as he might be lying'. We can guess at the probability of his truth-telling. I think it's obvious that he's probably more likely to lie about players he wants to buy or sell than, for instance, what he thought about the referee's performance. Not definite, but probable.

my point was that simply quoting the manager's public utterances as if they irrefutably prove the point you are trying to make - especially when the manager has also said the precise opposite - is a mug's game!

(but I think you pretty much agree!)

my first paragraph was not an accusation that dougie was lying - but was supposed to offer a counterbalance to your point that managers are almost always bound to say nice things in public about their players...

I do agree that it's a mug's game to just say 'it's true coz Dougie said it'.

I think there's an important difference between the two comments. I think managers are almost always bound to say nice things in public about individual players. There's a big difference between saying 'anyone who doesn't want to be here can go', and 'Wheater and Knight are shit'.

[Lord Kangana]

Wasn't it Sir Bruce de Rioch who put an entire teams worth of players on the transfer list after a poor performance in the cup? Its not like Dougie is the first manager to have it out in public with the team. Ultimately, the context of the comments will become important. Win loads of games, get promoted = just the kick up the backside the players needed, what a genius. Of course, should we fail to improve significantly, and bob along in the lower reaches = he's lost the dressing room because of those comments.

[BWFC_Insane]

Wasn't it Sir Bruce de Rioch who put an entire teams worth of players on the transfer list after a poor performance in the cup? Its not like Dougie is the first manager to have it out in public with the team. Ultimately, the context of the comments will become important. Win loads of games, get promoted = just the kick up the backside the players needed, what a genius. Of course, should we fail to improve significantly, and bob along in the lower reaches = he's lost the dressing room because of those comments.

Allardyce did it I think.

Including Hierro....

Listed about 11, don't think he sold any in the end.

[LeverEnd]

Wasn't it Sir Bruce de Rioch who put an entire teams worth of players on the transfer list after a poor performance in the cup? Its not like Dougie is the first manager to have it out in public with the team. Ultimately, the context of the comments will become important. Win loads of games, get promoted = just the kick up the backside the players needed, what a genius. Of course, should we fail to improve significantly, and bob along in the lower reaches = he's lost the dressing room because of those comments.

He's pretty measured with his comments, can't see how any of the players having anything to complain about there.
Rioch did that after a win! 2-1 at Tranmere where Aiden Davidson saved loads of 1 on 1s and we thought we had the new Gordon banks.

[jaffka]

Wasn't it Sir Bruce de Rioch who put an entire teams worth of players on the transfer list after a poor performance in the cup? Its not like Dougie is the first manager to have it out in public with the team. Ultimately, the context of the comments will become important. Win loads of games, get promoted = just the kick up the backside the players needed, what a genius. Of course, should we fail to improve significantly, and bob along in the lower reaches = he's lost the dressing room because of those comments.

I think it was after an Anglo-Italian cup game.

The players included Steve Fulton, who he had signed.

[IggyTheDawgster]

Haven't QPR offered Baird a contract?

If so, I don't think we could compete with them wage wise.

[ChrisC]

Haven't QPR offered Baird a contract?

If so, I don't think we could compete with them wage wise.

No yet apparently.. Wheater off to Boro on loan and Baird in is the word on the grapevine.

[bobo the clown]

Haven't QPR offered Baird a contract?

If so, I don't think we could compete with them wage wise.

No yet apparently.. Wheater off to Boro on loan and Baird in is the word on the grapevine.

Well it needs to hurry up .... this thread's shite (page 5, I believe I'm allowed).

[plymouth wanderer]

Hey! BWFCI said Sparkys like a new signing

I'm claiming that one

[Lord Kangana]

Seems a bit mental to hand Wheater a new contract then loan him out straightaway.

[Vertigo]

He was better than Knight before his injury, but hasn't reached that form since coming back from it. A loan could be a good idea.

[LeverEnd]

He was better than Knight before his injury, but hasn't reached that form since coming back from it. A loan could be a good idea.

I agree. He's only 26, and a bad injury like that and so few games in the last 2 years could be genuine reasons for his appalling play recently. Knight is a lost cause at his age and will only get worse, Wheater not necessarily so. Someone will always ahev a punt on a player of his previous calibre, so I think the contract was a no-lose situation and preferable than risking him leaving for nothing if he found his form.
Makes sense to try to let him get over his shitness at another club, enabling us to bring in new blood at centre half or give Mills a go. Then ditch Knight at end of contract and try to get him playing well for us again.
Hopeful theory, but better than letting him continue to be the disaster he currently is in a white shirt.

[BWFC_Insane]

Wheater can only go for 90 days so it's not like we'd be sending him forever. Chance for him to get sorted. I'm guessing we will only loan him if absolutely necessary to do so in order to bring someone in.

[jimbo]

When does this loan window open anyway?