ratio_decidendi

Can't help but think (and hope) that Guan's last comment is a reference to Rojo: "The fifth [signing] depends on the quality of the fourth, and their ability to play a second position." Is Rojo a CB first LB second, or the other way round?

TIL that the vast majority of SW members are horny OAPs. On topic: it seems like everything's gone quiet re: Vlaar? Would be a shame to miss out on that one.

That's fair enough - my assessment was merely based on what I saw the other night so take it or leave it as that!

worth a try..! But, to hazard one more guess, you're not talking about De Vrij, right? Guan did mention him as a potential target.

.... three signings tomorrow?

Erm... yep?

In my opinion I thought he was almost out of his depth, and this was against a defensive Swindon Town. The gulf between him and Shaw is remarkable. But, Targett is only 18, has lots of room for improvement, and it's a bit harsh to compare him to Shaw (who can be seen as something of a one of a kind). I'm not going to dispute what others are saying, but the only way I could describe Targett as impressive is in light of his distant future and not because he's ready to start against Liverpool (because he isn't).

Based on what I saw yesterday evening, Targett is no way up to PL quality. He will get eaten alive by Liverpool. So, with a different LB, Id be otherwise quite comfortable with that starting line up.

Nonsense. He might make a few mistakes (what player doesn't?) but his leadership ability within a first XI is worth it's weight in gold.

I think Caulker's one that, provided he's playing alongside an older and more experienced CB, has the potential to improve. He could have been a decent option to play alongside Lovren's replacement. But all in all it's not too gutting.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28365312 Caulker set for QPR medical. A shame, really.

Good riddance. His position at Southampton was entirely untenable. Perhaps this will open the door to the signing of another striker.

1. Pelle 2. Ramirez 3. Pelle 4. Davis 5. Gallagher 6. JWP

True, but there's time yet Maybe if we haven't signed a CB by deadline day!

And would be competing for a spot against two of our brightest right-backs (and don't tell me he's actually a centre back because if so, why didn't City use him as such?)

Remarkable. Genuine question: has this kind of transfer activity ever been seen before in the PL (i.e. one club buying four starters from another)?

Sure, it's not nice, but we support Southampton and not Villa, right? We want the club to do as well as possible and if that means unsettling a player a tiny bit then so be it. I for one would be more than happy with Vlaar.

I think this guy generally wants an audience for his *****ing and, as soon as I responded to him on matters which didn't involve Ings, I proved to be just as bad. I regret saying anything at all now.

Indeed!

I've said it before, but I would love for us to get Caulker. With time, he could be an England starter in the future.

If you didn't understand what I was trying to say, I'd recommend you just point that out instead of resorting to personal attacks and attempts to obfuscate. That way, we'd actually be able to have a sane and credible discussion. But, for what it's worth, I'm really not sure that I am boiling down the discussion into something simple (unless it were to enhance our own understanding from a conceptual perspective); of course I understand that the Ings process could play out in many different ways (originally I was merely expressing a desire, not a prediction); and what on earth are you going on about Boston for?

Really? I think you're working under the assumption that every player has an inherent transfer value (true) and that every club has the automatic and exclusive right to gain from that (false). If Burnley wanted their share of his fee they would do better to sell him now. As it is, however, they're willing to forgo that min order to benefit from his contribution on the pitch for another year.

I'm not sure that really answers my question, but I guess what you're suggesting all depends on the player. Some might want to give back to their club (I.e. loyalty) and see out their contract whereas others might jump ship at the first opportunity. Different circumstances will breed differing results.

I didn't know about the compensation to Burnley aspect if Ings were to leave at end of contract. So, I may be wrong on this but... Does Ings have the right to turn down a contract with a third party club and remain with Burnley until his current contract terminates? My assumption is yes, meaning that it's not entirely up to the club whether he's sold or not?

It's probably best to leave speculation to the realms of reality. What do you expect, that Burnley will force Ings to sign a new contract?