scotty Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I seem to recall that Jimmy Hill had a professional football career... Jimmy Hill appears in Viz every five weeks. Therefore, he is a legend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I seem to recall that Jimmy Hill had a professional football career... He also took Coventry from the 3rd Division to the first when he was their manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suewhistle Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 Quite ridiculous. I am beginning to understand how you in your own way cause so much irritation. Now apply that same process to understanding why you yourself cause so much irritation and we'll be getting places. Do you honestly not see you cause far more aggravation here whilst doing the martyred dying swan act whenever people express their irritation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaSaint Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I seem to recall that Jimmy Hill had a professional football career... And Cortese had a career in banking and finance. Did it ever occur to you that it might have been a financial decision rather than a football decision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 If Cortese is directly attempting to involve hinself in tactics and team decisions then of course this is bad news however this 'info' doesnt really say this in my eyes. Who is to say that as has been said Nigel twisted his words to Billy and Billy interpreted them slightly, or, perhaps dependant on the relationship between Lordshill and Billy, Billy thought he could embelish the truth slightly and in turn save a bit of face. All in all Im not going to get my knickers in a twist over something to which calidity cannot be proven TBH. Nor am I massively worried about Sharps departure, Im not sure he has much to offer us certainly in a 433 and neither in the prem in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALWAYS_SFC Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 And Cortese had a career in banking and finance. Did it ever occur to you that it might have been a financial decision rather than a football decision? That is probably right coupled with the probability that Billy would only play a small part, he was offered the chance to play a larger role at another club and to his credit took the offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 Lordswood - are you saying Cortese, not Adkins, told Sharp he was going. And Adkins told Sharp he wanted him to stay? Just want to check we're reading this right? Nah I reckon it went down like this: NA calls in Sharp and Adkins is saying "I can't guarantee you starts at the moment Billy. I would have liked you to stay in case the situation changes or whatever, but we've signed another striker today and NC has accepted an offer from Forest to take you on loan." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I seem to recall that Jimmy Hill had a professional football career... And Cortese had a career in banking and finance. Did it ever occur to you that it might have been a financial decision rather than a football decision? I'm led to believe Nottingham Forest are paying 75% of Sharp's wages. That is a lot of money we are saving for a player that probably wouldn't be in the matchday squad of 18 that often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 Sharp is quickly becoming as good as alan shearer Shearer: Played 158, scored 43 Sharp: Played 17, scored 10 Better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasoneuelllfanclub Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I do think Mayuka signing has cortesi written all over it. thats not to say he wont be any good or will add quality to the team but it is my opinion cortesi has a significant input on team affairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpturner Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I do think Mayuka signing has cortesi written all over it. thats not to say he wont be any good or will add quality to the team but it is my opinion cortesi has a significant input on team affairs.Right - so we are changing his name as well now then?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 And Cortese had a career in banking and finance. Did it ever occur to you that it might have been a financial decision rather than a football decision? This is another angle altogether. Adkins - Id love Mayuka, Rodriguez and Ramirez of course but Id like to keep Billy aswell. Cortese - Yes but we cant afford to have well paid Strikers that are just going to sit on the bench, make a decision who you woukd rather Adkins - Ok, well send him out on loan, but may have a rethink in jan to see where we are Few days later Adkins to Billy Adkins - We have come to the decision financially we cant afford you hanging around earning XXX with little playing time, its a shame as you may have made an impact but you probably wouldnt start, we shall have a rethink in Jan Just a thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madruss Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I'm led to believe Nottingham Forest are paying 75% of Sharp's wages. That is a lot of money we are saving for a player that probably wouldn't be in the matchday squad of 18 that often. Exactly this! I'm sure Nigel would have wanted Billy to stay, and that the OP is 100% telling the truth, but Nicola controls the finances and if he tells Nige that an expensive striker needs to go out on loan rather than playing for the reserves, then that's fine. Billy is 5th choice striker, and would not currently make the bench, all others being fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALWAYS_SFC Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 This is another angle altogether. Adkins - Id love Mayuka, Rodriguez and Ramirez of course but Id like to keep Billy aswell. Cortese - Yes but we cant afford to have well paid Strikers that are just going to sit on the bench, make a decision who you woukd rather Adkins - Ok, well send him out on loan, but may have a rethink in jan to see where we are Few days later Adkins to Billy Adkins - We have come to the decision financially we cant afford you hanging around earning XXX with little playing time, its a shame as you may have made an impact but you probably wouldnt start, we shall have a rethink in Jan Just a thought Very rational but some may not agree... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I do think Mayuka signing has cortesi written all over it. thats not to say he wont be any good or will add quality to the team but it is my opinion cortesi has a significant input on team affairs. Yoshida, Ramirez and Mayuka were all Cortese signings. As you say, doesn't mean they won't be good players though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 Exactly this! I'm sure Nigel would have wanted Billy to stay, and that the OP is 100% telling the truth, but Nicola controls the finances and if he tells Nige that an expensive striker needs to go out on loan rather than playing for the reserves, then that's fine. Billy is 5th choice striker, and would not currently make the bench, all others being fit. He wasn't 5th choice striker though was he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manji Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 This is another angle altogether. Adkins - Id love Mayuka, Rodriguez and Ramirez of course but Id like to keep Billy aswell. Cortese - Yes but we cant afford to have well paid Strikers that are just going to sit on the bench, make a decision who you woukd rather Adkins - Ok, well send him out on loan, but may have a rethink in jan to see where we are Few days later Adkins to Billy Adkins - We have come to the decision financially we cant afford you hanging around earning XXX with little playing time, its a shame as you may have made an impact but you probably wouldnt start, we shall have a rethink in Jan Just a thought NO NO NO it cant be like that we need someone to blame ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madruss Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 He wasn't 5th choice striker though was he? No, and if we hadn't signed mayuka, Billy probably wouldn't have gone out on loan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manji Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 Billy Sharp is on loan FFS that is all. Anyway it shows how far we have come that we can loan out quality players like Billy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibizasaint Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I thought everyone was happy we got Mayuka as we wanted some pace in the attack? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 Things like this are not black and white. Left to them managers want dozens of players for every situation, so it's no surprise that NA may have wanted to keep Billy even though he's way down the pecking order. It's no surprise that a Chairman looking to live within our means, wants a fringe player moved on, and acceptted an offer. What is being implied here is that NA really wanted to keep Sharp, but that NC decided he couldn't and somehow moved him on against NA wishes. Had NA desperately wanted to keep Billy and considered him a major part of his plans then NC loaning him out becomes a resignation issue. Had NA insisted Sharp stayed then no doubt NC would have asked dhim to move someone else on to trim the squad. NA's stock has never been higher, there are plenty of Championship Chairman who would jump at the chance to employ him. If things were so bad that NC was dictating which formations and which players he has to play, then NA's name would be linked with jobs. His agent would be basically tipping the wink, that he's up for a move and some papers would be reporting "club x are thinking of replacing Manager Y with NA who is unsettled at SFC". There's nothing, not a thing in the papers or any other media. Do people really think that NA is such a patsy, that he sits there and lets NC dump a load of shiete on him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itchen Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 This is another angle altogether. Adkins - Id love Mayuka, Rodriguez and Ramirez of course but Id like to keep Billy aswell. Cortese - Yes but we cant afford to have well paid Strikers that are just going to sit on the bench, make a decision who you woukd rather Adkins - Ok, well send him out on loan, but may have a rethink in jan to see where we are Few days later Adkins to Billy Adkins - We have come to the decision financially we cant afford you hanging around earning XXX with little playing time, its a shame as you may have made an impact but you probably wouldnt start, we shall have a rethink in Jan Just a thought Don't come round here with your rationality. You, you, you Cortese Luvvie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alanh Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 He wasn't 5th choice striker though was he? You could argue that based on us playing 4-3-3 with one central striker that RL and JR are first and second choice while Mayuka, Guly and Lee can also play there, so you could argue that Billy was 5th choice. I don't believe NA sees the squad in terms of 1st, 2nd choice etc, but rather as a group who are each capable of delivering something different. I reckon the conversations was something along the lines of NA saying that he wanted to keep BS but couldn't guarantee match time. At the same time an offer had come in from Forest which NC was happy with which they felt duty bound to tell BS about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 You could argue that based on us playing 4-3-3 with one central striker that RL and JR are first and second choice while Mayuka, Guly and Lee can also play there, so you could argue that Billy was 5th choice. I don't believe NA sees the squad in terms of 1st, 2nd choice etc, but rather as a group who are each capable of delivering something different. I reckon the conversations was something along the lines of NA saying that he wanted to keep BS but couldn't guarantee match time. At the same time an offer had come in from Forest which NC was happy with which they felt duty bound to tell BS about. No, Sharp was ahead as a striker of all of them except Lambert. Of course Adkins has first choice players. Who is our first choice keeper? Or right back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildgoose Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I think Billy is a good player and loved his contribution last season. I was concerned how he might fit into the team because of his style even before the season started and could really only see him coming off the bench to make an impact, especially when it was clear we would play 4-3-3 and 4-5-1. He's a poacher but his touch is probably not good enough? Would have loved him to stay and be part of the squad but my first thought was that he's gone to help balance the books as he was the obvious choice in some ways. Very tough on him though, all the same, since he had only just come to Saints, scored regularly and thought he was here to stay. Probably feels a bit used..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I thought everyone was happy we got Mayuka as we wanted some pace in the attack? I certainly am and I am not bothered at all about Sharp going out in loan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobM Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I certainly am and I am not bothered at all about Sharp going out in loan. Likewise. I'd love Sharp to have become a massive success here, but he just isn't quite up to it. Instead we've got an international striker with pace, who gives us another option that we lack now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dig Dig Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 Yoshida, Ramirez and Mayuka were all Cortese signings. As you say, doesn't mean they won't be good players though. Who is advising Cortese though? I can't imagine he's scouting out players like Yoshida by himself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 Who is advising Cortese though? I can't imagine he's scouting out players like Yoshida by himself... Our scouting network, bit of agent input, Les Reed I'd guess. I'd imagine all the Del Piero interest came from NC as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 I do think Mayuka signing has cortesi written all over it. thats not to say he wont be any good or will add quality to the team but it is my opinion cortesi has a significant input on team affairs. Don't agree, and the evidence is that we have a weak defence. it is apparent for everyone to see. If Cortese influenced team matters we would be more defensively minded with better players in that department, which is not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dig Dig Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 Don't agree, and the evidence is that we have a weak defence. it is apparent for everyone to see. If Cortese influenced team matters we would be more defensively minded with better players in that department, which is not the case. How did you come to this conclusion?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 5 September, 2012 Share Posted 5 September, 2012 Yoshida, Ramirez and Mayuka were all Cortese signings. are they? Why do you say that? The way Adkins talked up Ramirez it didn't sound as though it was a player imposed upon him. I thought there was a group that worked on signings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandwichsaint Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 TBF if Cortese spotted (or was tipped off about) Waigo and Gully as League1 players he's got a pretty good eye (or contacts) for a player. Does anybody think Waigo or Gully were scouted directly by Pardew, or Read, or by anybody else at SFC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostBoys Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 I still do not fully understand why he has been released for a season (or longer). He played well for us with his only problems being a bit unfit when he arrived and bad misses at West Ham and Blackpool. It now appears he did not want to go. The value of the decision can only be assessed depending on how well we do this season and how many he scores for Forest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostBoys Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 Things like this are not black and white. Left to them managers want dozens of players for every situation, so it's no surprise that NA may have wanted to keep Billy even though he's way down the pecking order. It's no surprise that a Chairman looking to live within our means, wants a fringe player moved on, and acceptted an offer. What is being implied here is that NA really wanted to keep Sharp, but that NC decided he couldn't and somehow moved him on against NA wishes. Had NA desperately wanted to keep Billy and considered him a major part of his plans then NC loaning him out becomes a resignation issue. Had NA insisted Sharp stayed then no doubt NC would have asked dhim to move someone else on to trim the squad. NA's stock has never been higher, there are plenty of Championship Chairman who would jump at the chance to employ him. If things were so bad that NC was dictating which formations and which players he has to play, then NA's name would be linked with jobs. His agent would be basically tipping the wink, that he's up for a move and some papers would be reporting "club x are thinking of replacing Manager Y with NA who is unsettled at SFC". There's nothing, not a thing in the papers or any other media. Do people really think that NA is such a patsy, that he sits there and lets NC dump a load of shiete on him? A small point is there are still players in the named squad who needed to be moved on before Mr Sharp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 I still do not fully understand why he has been released for a season (or longer). He played well for us with his only problems being a bit unfit when he arrived and bad misses at West Ham and Blackpool. It now appears he did not want to go. The value of the decision can only be assessed depending on how well we do this season and how many he scores for Forest. nope. the value of the decision will be if the other strikers at SFC score goals. If they don't then we may as well have stuck with Sharp. We all know he will score a few in the Championship, but this is the premiership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 A small point is there are still players in the named squad who needed to be moved on before Mr Sharp you can only move players if there are suitors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jam Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 you can only move players if there are suitors ...and if the player wants to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 6 September, 2012 Author Share Posted 6 September, 2012 Should we have kept him and given him a chance in the Prem? IMO yes probably. But as soon as we brought in J-Rod and Mayuka, Lee coming back to full fitness, one of the 'main strikers' were going to go. That wasn't going to be Lambert...and not surprised it was him. Are J-Rod & Mayuka better than Sharp? Time will tell but they do give us better options. Yes we all love Billy, he was fantastic for us and he is a very likeable bloke who clearly enjoyed being here. But thats not enough to stay in a Prem club. If he's not going to get games, then I would have thought he'd rather go and play at a massive club like Forest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fish fingers Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 I'm confused. Do we hate Mayuka now? I need to make sure i boo the correct person next Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 6 September, 2012 Author Share Posted 6 September, 2012 I'm confused. Do we hate Mayuka now? I need to make sure i boo the correct person next Saturday. Yer, our fans are racist. Make sure you keep booing Guly and also Clyne if he does the slightest thing wrong. And Puncheon is a given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 ...and if the player wants to go. Well, thats strange, because apparently Billy didnt want to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 nope. the value of the decision will be if the other strikers at SFC score goals. If they don't then we may as well have stuck with Sharp. We all know he will score a few in the Championship, but this is the premiership. Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 Well, thats strange, because apparently Billy didnt want to go. Thats funny I have read that he is looking forward to the challenge and agreed because its O'Drisscol and Forest wanted him. Plus he doesnt hinself have to agree to the loan. Obviously I know that doesnt sit with any preconcieved agendas...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALWAYS_SFC Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 Thats funny I have read that he is looking forward to the challenge and agreed because its O'Drisscol and Forest wanted him. Plus he doesnt hinself have to agree to the loan. Obviously I know that doesnt sit with any preconcieved agendas...... Look!! its like this with Alpine, If someone says "Billy didn`t want to go" he believes it because it suits his opinion/agenda If someone says " we were actively trying to secure some more defensive options" he doesn't believe it because i does not suit his opinion/agenda He simply must have something to complain about Sorry Alpine but it`s true...sad but true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 Thats funny I have read that he is looking forward to the challenge and agreed because its O'Drisscol and Forest wanted him. Plus he doesnt hinself have to agree to the loan. Obviously I know that doesnt sit with any preconcieved agendas...... In fairness I doubt he wanted to go he probably wanted a crack at the PL (I'm guessing he was promised that when he signed)...However he was told he was unlikely to get one at saints so he has made the best of what was offered to him. He is hardly likely to rock up at Forest and say "Well I don't want to be here really but it was this or not even making the bench at Saints" I always thought he was signed to get us over the line last season...but I did reckon he'd be given a chance this season. The decision to change our style of play rather rainned on Billy's parade I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 Thats funny I have read that he is looking forward to the challenge and agreed because its O'Drisscol and Forest wanted him. Plus he doesnt hinself have to agree to the loan. Obviously I know that doesnt sit with any preconcieved agendas...... Well, that contradicts what jam was saying which was the point of my post. Which kind of means I was agreeing with you, but WTF, lets bash Alpine again, eh ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordswoodsaints Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 The problem I have with the whole thing is that billy sharp played a big part in the pre season games and scored a few goals where others didn't,I didn't go to any of the games but what I hear from people who did,sharp was one of our best players,and even a couple of days before the transfer deadline he scored in the Stevenage game. After speaking to billy yesterday it seems either Adkins is spinning him a yarn,or NC is deciding who stays and who goes either way it sits a bit uncomfortably with me but the club is owned by a private family and I accept they can do what they want and get whoever they want to make the decisions....I suppose it all comes down to wether or not Adkins can accept it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 The problem I have with the whole thing is that billy sharp played a big part in the pre season games and scored a few goals where others didn't,I didn't go to any of the games but what I hear from people who did,sharp was one of our best players,and even a couple of days before the transfer deadline he scored in the Stevenage game. After speaking to billy yesterday it seems either Adkins is spinning him a yarn,or NC is deciding who stays and who goes either way it sits a bit uncomfortably with me but the club is owned by a private family and I accept they can do what they want and get whoever they want to make the decisions....I suppose it all comes down to wether or not Adkins can accept it. So in the course of this short thread, you've lied, Billy's lied, and Adkins has lied Why is it so painful for some to concede that Rupert Lowe is alive and well at SFC ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 6 September, 2012 Share Posted 6 September, 2012 Well, that contradicts what jam was saying which was the point of my post. Which kind of means I was agreeing with you, but WTF, lets bash Alpine again, eh ? Applogees, sarcasm doesnt traverse the internet very well. Strange though I assumed you were being negative, no idea where I could have cone to that conclusion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now