Freedman out!

[boltonboris]

He wasn't as slow as made out. He had an awkward leggy style that made him look lumbering, but he covers the grass quicker than any other defenders we have (tallest dwarf thing, I know). But he was dominant. Positionally excellent, read the danger before strikers did and as you said, was a threat from set-pieces. It wasn't just that he was good. It's the fact that everyone alongside him improved. That's due to him being there, organising and leading by example.

[BWFC_Insane]

He wasn't as slow as made out. He had an awkward leggy style that made him look lumbering, but he covers the grass quicker than any other defenders we have (tallest dwarf thing, I know). But he was dominant. Positionally excellent, read the danger before strikers did and as you said, was a threat from set-pieces. It wasn't just that he was good. It's the fact that everyone alongside him improved. That's due to him being there, organising and leading by example.

This, absolutely. And crucially could read the game. He was basically Cahill with less pace and less ability on the ball......

[Lord Kangana]

Still a loan signing. If we couldn't have signed him permanently, its down to the manager to sort out an adequate replacement.

I also, by the way, remember both Sturridge and Wilshere being excellent. They were never our players. Neither is he.

[boltonboris]

Just goes to show that sometimes Loan signings can have an adverse effect.

It pretty much cost Clarke his job at West Brom.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Whilst we're on the subject, he also handed a new contract to Wheater.

And made Knight captain. Another bad decision.

Or doesn't that count for the sake of the argument?

I was going off Boris's list, which doesn't include extdned contracts.

You may have me mistaken for a binary arguer. There's plenty of them around here. I'm bored of the polarity diktat that you can only be 100% this or that; it reduces discussion to a black/white tickbox.

[Lord Kangana]

It wasn't reference to you in particular, that no list includes him. It should do.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

It wasn't reference to you in particular, that no list includes him. It should do.

OK, fair enough and sorry if I seemed jumpy.

Didn't Mark Davies also sign an extension under Dougie?

[Lord Kangana]

I think so. Which suggests, to me, that we're still dishing out decent contracts. (I don't particularly buy into the idea that they've all willingly taken massive pay-cuts. I think they're marketable enough to get a better-than-50%-deal elsewhere).

I'm just fed up, like many I suspect, that the downward momentum that started unde Sammy Lee is still pushing inexorably in one direction. It seems almost institutionalised. And with every day that passes, not only does it grow, but our chances of reversing grow dimmer. I have absolutely no faith that the current trier is up to the task of changing that.

[BWFC_Insane]

I think so. Which suggests, to me, that we're still dishing out decent contracts. (I don't particularly buy into the idea that they've all willingly taken massive pay-cuts. I think they're marketable enough to get a better-than-50%-deal elsewhere).

I'm just fed up, like many I suspect, that the downward momentum that started unde Sammy Lee is still pushing inexorably in one direction. It seems almost institutionalised. And with every day that passes, not only does it grow, but our chances of reversing grow dimmer. I have absolutely no faith that the current trier is up to the task of changing that.

Given how desperate we are to get rid of most, and according to the BN have circulated availability with few if any bites and certainly none prepared to match their salaries paid here, I'd suggest that isn't the case.

Isn't it supposedly assumed that Knight re-signed for us cos no other bugger would have him on anything like what he was being offered here?

[Bruce Rioja]

Isn't it supposedly assumed that Knight re-signed for us cos no other bugger would have him on anything like what he was being offered here?

From what I heard no-one else came in for him whatsoever, so he came back to us, tail between legs, but without another bidder in the room, coyle re-signed him on top Dollar!

[StaffsTrotter]

He wasn't as slow as made out. He had an awkward leggy style that made him look lumbering, but he covers the grass quicker than any other defenders we have (tallest dwarf thing, I know). But he was dominant. Positionally excellent, read the danger before strikers did and as you said, was a threat from set-pieces. It wasn't just that he was good. It's the fact that everyone alongside him improved. That's due to him being there, organising and leading by example.

This, absolutely. And crucially could read the game. He was basically Cahill with less pace and less ability on the ball......

might explain why a) he can't get in the wba team and b) I've never heard speculation about him wrt bigger teams.

perhaps our system and players just 'fitted' him

[Lord Kangana]

Why would we resign him then? That makes no sense whatsoever. He couldn't force us to, we gave him the deal.

[StaffsTrotter]

Why would we resign him then? That makes no sense whatsoever. He couldn't force us to, we gave him the deal.

perhaps it was a devil you know type signing. I can't believe he wasn't offered reduced wages.

The other angle is that perhaps y'know some players want to /like play for us. He might have had better offers but didn't want the unknown challenge or to uproot etc - don't we all weigh up things in the round

[bobo the clown]

He wasn't as slow as made out. He had an awkward leggy style that made him look lumbering, but he covers the grass quicker than any other defenders we have (tallest dwarf thing, I know). But he was dominant. Positionally excellent, read the danger before strikers did and as you said, was a threat from set-pieces. It wasn't just that he was good. It's the fact that everyone alongside him improved. That's due to him being there, organising and leading by example.

This, absolutely. And crucially could read the game. He was basically Cahill with less pace and less ability on the ball......

might explain why a) he can't get in the wba team and b) I've never heard speculation about him wrt bigger teams.

perhaps our system and players just 'fitted' him

I've wondered al that & whether we saw a mirage. But if we did we ALL saw it.

[StaffsTrotter]

He wasn't as slow as made out. He had an awkward leggy style that made him look lumbering, but he covers the grass quicker than any other defenders we have (tallest dwarf thing, I know). But he was dominant. Positionally excellent, read the danger before strikers did and as you said, was a threat from set-pieces. It wasn't just that he was good. It's the fact that everyone alongside him improved. That's due to him being there, organising and leading by example.

This, absolutely. And crucially could read the game. He was basically Cahill with less pace and less ability on the ball......

might explain why a) he can't get in the wba team and b) I've never heard speculation about him wrt bigger teams.

perhaps our system and players just 'fitted' him

I've wondered al that & whether we saw a mirage. But if we did we ALL saw it.

hence my comment about the rose tints. If you think about it, most of us admit that our great run didn't actually have many great/ dominant peformances, so the level of transformation should be kept in perspective. we did look better than before he signed and we did obviously win games but lets not create another messiah complex. The pool of centre halfs we have, have previous records which suggest they are more than capable at this level but for whatever reason people want to throw in, they are underperforming.

[BWFC_Insane]

He wasn't as slow as made out. He had an awkward leggy style that made him look lumbering, but he covers the grass quicker than any other defenders we have (tallest dwarf thing, I know). But he was dominant. Positionally excellent, read the danger before strikers did and as you said, was a threat from set-pieces. It wasn't just that he was good. It's the fact that everyone alongside him improved. That's due to him being there, organising and leading by example.

This, absolutely. And crucially could read the game. He was basically Cahill with less pace and less ability on the ball......

might explain why a) he can't get in the wba team and b) I've never heard speculation about him wrt bigger teams.

perhaps our system and players just 'fitted' him

I've wondered al that & whether we saw a mirage. But if we did we ALL saw it.

hence my comment about the rose tints. If you think about it, most of us admit that our great run didn't actually have many great/ dominant peformances, so the level of transformation should be kept in perspective. we did look better than before he signed and we did obviously win games but lets not create another messiah complex. The pool of centre halfs we have, have previous records which suggest they are more than capable at this level but for whatever reason people want to throw in, they are underperforming.

People keep saying stuff like this, but what does it really mean?

We have a centre half who has played for England and has the most "impressive" past CV of all 4, so if you go by that his record suggests he is more than good enough for this and the level above. Yet since being here has regularly under the direction of 3 managers plus a couple of caretakers been described as "absolute rubbish" by a lot if not a majority of our fans.

So I'm not sure what previous records matter to be honest?

[StaffsTrotter]

hence my comment about the rose tints. If you think about it, most of us admit that our great run didn't actually have many great/ dominant peformances, so the level of transformation should be kept in perspective. we did look better than before he signed and we did obviously win games but lets not create another messiah complex. The pool of centre halfs we have, have previous records which suggest they are more than capable at this level but for whatever reason people want to throw in, they are underperforming.[/quote]

People keep saying stuff like this, but what does it really mean?

We have a centre half who has played for England and has the most "impressive" past CV of all 4, so if you go by that his record suggests he is more than good enough for this and the level above. Yet since being here has regularly under the direction of 3 managers plus a couple of caretakers been described as "absolute rubbish" by a lot if not a majority of our fans.

So I'm not sure what previous records matter to be honest?[/quote]

isn't it just a bit like ebay or trip advisor feedback - the opinions of others is the only thing you have other than your own opinion and is simply used to reassure of the pedigree and de-risk the gamble of a purchase.

Don't always work, particularly if something major has happened e.g. injury, but isn't a version of it at play in terms of england team selection - if one of the big 4 have bought you, it seems a given you must be good and worthy of a call up

[bwfcdan94]

It is past sacking time now - I wonder how many heavy defeat we will need to suffer before he goes, I am going to go for at least 3.

[Bruce Rioja]

It'll be sometime towards Christmas before we 'might' see the back of Douglas, I reckon.

Ridiculous, I know, but that's what I reckon.

[Lord Kangana]

Last christmas?