Be honest, should the £12m paid for GR been spent elsewhere?

[alpine_saint]

Maybe you also occasionally need to think about the way you put things then... if so many people are telling you that you come across as being negative, then it can't always be the fault of the reader...

 

Oh, give it a rest with the lecturing...

[tajjuk]

Would you have been happier if the title had stated " Was a player of the nature of GR really an important priority over other reinforcements for this summer ?"

 

No.

 

In my opinion and I believe the clubs, the only priority was to improve the squad. I believe they tried to do that in all areas but were only successful in some.

 

Would people have been happier if we hadn't have signed Ramirez (i.e the prolonged transfer negotiations collapsed) and then signed a few average defenders?

[Bearsy]

He dropped the ball in a positive way, like you know a golfer putting out

[alpine_saint]

Would people have been happier if we hadn't have signed Ramirez (i.e the prolonged transfer negotiations collapsed) and then signed a few average defenders?

 

Bit of a convenient comparison that, tbh.

 

If on one side we are talking about a world-class attacking player, why cant we talk about a world-class CB ?

[Minty]

Oh, give it a rest with the lecturing...

Not lecturing at all. 'Some people just read what they want.'

 

I'm merely making a suggestion. If don't want to take on board well-meaning constructive feedback, so be it. I'll leave it now.

[tajjuk]

Bit of a convenient comparison that, tbh.

 

If on one side we are talking about a world-class attacking player, why cant we talk about a world-class CB ?

 

That is my point, if no 'world-class CB' was available why would you give up the chance to sign 'world-class attacking player'? The squad needs improving, the squad has been improved.

 

I suppose what I am getting at is this:-

 

We spent £12-15m on Ramirez, the OP is suggesting whether it would have been better to spend elsewhere, specifically in defence, a recognised (by fans and manager) weakness area. Well working on the assumption that we didn't have any other budget left (and I think that's a big assumption considering our other reported bids) who do you buy? I can;t think of any 'world class' centre backs that would have come to us? A few for about half the price were mentioned - Curtis Davies, Huth, Rhys Williams, Dawson, but it seems that £6 million for one of them wasn't enough. So £9 million on Dawson (plus higher wages than Ramirez), £12 million for Rhys Williams? OR Gaston Ramirez? who would you have signed?

[Pilchards]

I love the fact that we have signed a superstar who should take us to the next level, those special talented footballers do help teams as United would tell you they would be 4 points worse off without RVP.

[Minsk]

I would just like to point out that I have not received a pm from Syd, and nor do I expect to! In fact, I don't even think my pm's are working at the moment as I have not yet renewed my membership (I am still considering whether or not to bother doing so when I am over in the UK in a couple of week's time).

 

Anyway, thanks to GLT and Wes for asking Syd to answer the questions posed - I didn't want to waste 1 of my 3 posts a day repeating myself.

 

So, as there was no answer I can only presume he cannot answer those questions which, as Wes pointed out, totally blows his OP out of the water.

 

It does always amaze me when people say they want to DISCUSS a certain point but when someone shows their original opinion to be flawed they ignore that particular post and just ***** at others who posts are easier to argue against - or just to whine about!! St Lard is one of the worst culprits for this, or at least he was this time last year. Alpine also has a habit of ignoring certain facts that fly in the face of his latest whine. Still, each to their own I guess.............

[Wes Tender]

I would just like to point out that I have not received a pm from Syd, and nor do I expect to! In fact, I don't even think my pm's are working at the moment as I have not yet renewed my membership (I am still considering whether or not to bother doing so when I am over in the UK in a couple of week's time).

 

Anyway, thanks to GLT and Wes for asking Syd to answer the questions posed - I didn't want to waste 1 of my 3 posts a day repeating myself.

 

So, as there was no answer I can only presume he cannot answer those questions which, as Wes pointed out, totally blows his OP out of the water.

 

It does always amaze me when people say they want to DISCUSS a certain point but when someone shows their original opinion to be flawed they ignore that particular post and just ***** at others who posts are easier to argue against - or just to whine about!! St Lard is one of the worst culprits for this, or at least he was this time last year. Alpine also has a habit of ignoring certain facts that fly in the face of his latest whine. Still, each to their own I guess.............

 

As you say Minsk, there is probably no confirmation coming from Syd to prove his hypothesis that money spent on Ramirez deprived us of the monies needed to buy defenders. Neither will we see any response to the other points you raised.

 

But based on the calibre of response on this thread, I hope that you do renew your membership, as you have made valuable contributions to the debates.

[Golac's Cunning Stunts]

No.

 

In my opinion and I believe the clubs, the only priority was to improve the squad. I believe they tried to do that in all areas but were only successful in some.

 

Would people have been happier if we hadn't have signed Ramirez (i.e the prolonged transfer negotiations collapsed) and then signed a few average defenders?

 

Given a finite budget and finite time, you cannot just blandly improve the club "in all areas". The list of improvements must therefore be prioritised. I would say priority should have been the oft quoted LB\CB\GK positions. We got in 1 CB and I don't think that's enough. Fantastic ambition to go for Ramirez and all that and I do hope he enables us to score more goals in some games than we are inevitably going to concede.

 

If we do get relegated this season and it is because we let in too many goals, I think you would seriously have to question Adkins / Cortese and their strategy for this year, or at lest hope they learn a lesson for the future.

[Sidney Fudpucker the 3rd]

I would just like to point out that I have not received a pm from Syd, and nor do I expect to! In fact, I don't even think my pm's are working at the moment as I have not yet renewed my membership (I am still considering whether or not to bother doing so when I am over in the UK in a couple of week's time).

 

Anyway, thanks to GLT and Wes for asking Syd to answer the questions posed - I didn't want to waste 1 of my 3 posts a day repeating myself.

 

So, as there was no answer I can only presume he cannot answer those questions which, as Wes pointed out, totally blows his OP out of the water.

 

It does always amaze me when people say they want to DISCUSS a certain point but when someone shows their original opinion to be flawed they ignore that particular post and just ***** at others who posts are easier to argue against - or just to whine about!! St Lard is one of the worst culprits for this, or at least he was this time last year. Alpine also has a habit of ignoring certain facts that fly in the face of his latest whine. Still, each to their own I guess.............

 

I did try and send you a PM but I got a message saying that my message could not be sent. FYI I've had a death in the family so I'm sure you can understand that I've got more important things to be dealing with at this moment in time.

[alpine_saint]

I notice the usual morons are mobbing any of those with a different opinion, demanding justifcation, evidence, circumstance, motivation, joined-up writing, etc. like we are in a court of f**king law.

[Minty]

If we do get relegated this season and it is because we let in too many goals' date=' I think you would seriously have to question Adkins / Cortese and their strategy for this year, or at lest hope they learn a lesson for the future.[/quote']

Only if we know that the strategy was to not sign those players. Once again we are back to the question of knowing what the transfer policy/'priority' was... we don't, and given Adkins' quotes about wanting to sign defenders, I personally think our strategy quite clearly involved bringing in more defensive players, but for some reason that did not happen. That MAY have been partly down to the club, but equally it may NOT. We simply cannot know so I believe it is wrong to make that assumption.

 

I notice the usual morons are mobbing any of those with a different opinion, demanding justifcation, evidence, circumstance, motivation, joined-up writing, etc. like we are in a court of f**king law.

lol, come on Alps, those 'morons' (no need for that, as you keep telling us) are simply asking questions because the whole premise for the thread is that the Ramirez money could/would have been spent on a defender if we hadn't signed Ramirez. Do you think that is the case? Simple enough question, and all part of what the forum is here for after all.

[badgerx16]

Ramirez and Mayuka will be taking pressure off the defence as we will be playing keep ball in the oppo's half.

[Dig Dig]

Only if we know that the strategy was to not sign those players. Once again we are back to the question of knowing what the transfer policy/'priority' was... we don't, and given Adkins' quotes about wanting to sign defenders, I personally think our strategy quite clearly involved bringing in more defensive players, but for some reason that did not happen. That MAY have been partly down to the club, but equally it may NOT. We simply cannot know so I believe it is wrong to make that assumption.

 

 

lol, come on Alps, those 'morons' (no need for that, as you keep telling us) are simply asking questions because the whole premise for the thread is that the Ramirez money could/would have been spent on a defender if we hadn't signed Ramirez. Do you think that is the case? Simple enough question, and all part of what the forum is here for after all.

 

You couldn't make it up really. A side from the Moron comment which just shows what an utter hypocrite he is, he's effectively saying that he wants free reign to post as much bile as possible without the need for anyone else to ask questions or ask him to justify it.

[alpine_saint]

lol, come on Alps, those 'morons' (no need for that, as you keep telling us) are simply asking questions because the whole premise for the thread is that the Ramirez money could/would have been spent on a defender if we hadn't signed Ramirez. Do you think that is the case? Simple enough question, and all part of what the forum is here for after all.

 

Minty, the howl that goes up if you do less than ejaculate on here over any action from the club at the moment is just plain ridiculous.

 

Do I think Ramirez is a good buy that will measurably improve the team performance ? Yes

Do I think the Ramirez money prevented the pursuit of adequate defensive signings ? No

Do I think the obsession/determination to sign Ramirez got in the way of focusing on more urgent areas of team strengthening ? Yes

Do I think our transfer activity addressed the real squad issues and weaknesses in balanced mannner ? No

Do I think we've done our very best with our transfer activity to stay up in the PL ? No

Do I think we've done our best with our transfer activity to play sexy entertaining football ? Yes

[tajjuk]

Given a finite budget and finite time, you cannot just blandly improve the club "in all areas". The list of improvements must therefore be prioritised. I would say priority should have been the oft quoted LB\CB\GK positions. We got in 1 CB and I don't think that's enough. Fantastic ambition to go for Ramirez and all that and I do hope he enables us to score more goals in some games than we are inevitably going to concede.

 

If we do get relegated this season and it is because we let in too many goals, I think you would seriously have to question Adkins / Cortese and their strategy for this year, or at lest hope they learn a lesson for the future.

 

Assumptions:- "finite budget" - we have no evidence of this, for all we know the board will pay any amount they deem is value for money based on each target. Goes back to my point about Ramirez seeming good value at £12 million, and Rhys Williams at the same price not.

 

"I would say priority should have been the oft quoted LB\CB\GK positions." - again how do you know it wasn't. One of our first signings was a Right Back, we were linked with a bid for Buttner (a left backl) and Dann (a centre back) far before any talk of Ramirez.

 

I also at no point think that club has been thinking of replacing Kelvin, all the keepers we have looked at signing have been young keepers, like Butland, so replacements in the future for Kelvin, not this season.

 

"we are inevitably going to concede.", based on our performance against two of the best attacks in Europe and without our new defender?

 

"If we do get relegated this season and it is because we let in too many goals, I think you would seriously have to question Adkins / Cortese and their strategy for this year, or at lest hope they learn a lesson for the future" - again more assumptions, lot of ifs there.

[alpine_saint]

You couldn't make it up really. A side from the Moron comment which just shows what an utter hypocrite he is, he's effectively saying that he wants free reign to post as much bile as possible without the need for anyone else to ask questions or ask him to justify it.

 

One persons "bile" is another persons "opinion".

 

Your comments speak volumes for the kind of person you are.

[Dig Dig]

And what kind of person are you Alpine? We've established that I'm a moron so in essence it's not my fault. What's your excuse?

[alpine_saint]

"I would say priority should have been the oft quoted LB\CB\GK positions." - again how do you know it wasn't.

.

.

.

 

"If we do get relegated this season and it is because we let in too many goals, I think you would seriously have to question Adkins / Cortese and their strategy for this year, or at lest hope they learn a lesson for the future" - again more assumptions, lot of ifs there.

 

If priority had been given, we would have been a lot more successful.

 

The last part is bizarre. This site is full of assumptions, speculation, conjecture, just like you just trying to infer that priority was given defensive strengthening.

[alpine_saint]

And what kind of person are you Alpine? We've established that I'm a moron so in essence it's not my fault. What's your excuse?

 

I'm not going to give you the honour of putting you on ignore, then whine in an attention-seeking manner at everyone else for daring to quote you, but seeing as the majority of your posts for the last few days have been just trying to provoke an infractable offence out of me, this will be the last time I respond to you.

[Minty]

Minty, the howl that goes up if you do less than ejaculate on here over any action from the club at the moment is just plain ridiculous.

What's that go to do with my quite simple (IMO) question?

 

Do I think Ramirez is a good buy that will measurably improve the team performance ? Yes

Do I think the Ramirez money prevented the pursuit of adequate defensive signings ? No

Do I think the obsession/determination to sign Ramirez got in the way of focusing on more urgent areas of team strengthening ? Yes

Do I think our transfer activity addressed the real squad issues and weaknesses in balanced mannner ? No

Do I think we've done our very best with our transfer activity to stay up in the PL ? No

Do I think we've done our best with our transfer activity to play sexy entertaining football ? Yes

Thank you. That's all Minsk was asking in the first place.

 

As for the question/answer in red, I'm not quite sure on what you base this, which is the other main point being raised here... trying to understand how and why people have this feeling that the Ramirez signing in some way detracted from other negotiations when the evidence suggests that the signings of Mayuka and Yoshi were able to be conducted and completed at the same time...?

 

And the questions in green, I actually agree with, but the follow on suggestion from these by yourself and some others is that this is the fault of the club, whereas we simply don't know why we didn't make other signings which Adkins alluded to and it would appear (I accept I cannot know for certain) we were trying to make at the same time.

[alpine_saint]

What's that go to do with my quite simple (IMO) question?

 

 

Thank you. That's all Minsk was asking in the first place.

 

As for the question/answer in red, I'm not quite sure on what you base this, which is the other main point being raised here... trying to understand how and why people have this feeling that the Ramirez signing in some way detracted from other negotiations when the evidence suggests that the signings of Mayuka and Yoshi were able to be conducted and completed at the same time...?

 

And the questions in green, I actually agree with, but the follow on suggestion from these by yourself and some others is that this is the fault of the club, whereas we simply don't know why we didn't make other signings which Adkins alluded to and it would appear (I accept I cannot know for certain) we were trying to make at the same time.

 

Why do some of you refuse to accept any culpability of the club ? Why is our lack of defensive strength/cover automatically someone elses fault ?

 

"Because we must have been looking" ?

 

Rightyho....

[tajjuk]

If priority had been given, we would have been a lot more successful.

 

 

Why exactly? Is there an endless supply of quality defenders that want to play for us and are value for money?

 

We could have made 40 bids for defenders and 3 bids for attacking players, just because the attacking ones resulted in transfers doesn't mean that priority wasn't given to defence.

 

"The last part is bizarre. This site is full of assumptions, speculation, conjecture, just like you just trying to infer that priority was given defensive strengthening."

 

I'm not trying to infer anything, I'm just showing a different possibility, you are trying to infer that priority wasn't given to defensive signings and use this as a basis to criticise the club, you base this train of thought on essentially the fact that you think that we didn't sign enough players in those positions, even though we have signed a GK, RB, CB, CM, AM, WINGER, STR. 3 defensive signings, 1 Midfield signing and 3 attacking signings, as well as you know nothing of what bids we made.

 

The other poster is essentially saying we should question the club's transfer policy in this based on IF we get relegated and IF our relegation is caused by bad defenders. 35 games before we can answer any of those questions. That's too many assumptions and IFs in my opinion to form a valid point.

[DT]

Who cares about priorities? The outcomes were poor as they left us without adequate cover or skill in much needed areas. We can argue about semantics and whether the club 'tried' in various places, but we are where we are. Which is in a position with lots going forward, and precious little to stop them going in at the other end. The Premier League all know this.

[ALWAYS_SFC]

Who cares about priorities? The outcomes were poor as they left us without adequate cover or skill in much needed areas. We can argue about semantics and whether the club 'tried' in various places, but we are where we are. Which is in a position with lots going forward, and precious little to stop them going in at the other end. The Premier League all know this.

 

Yeah! we are doomed...it`s all over...

[Sidney Fudpucker the 3rd]

A simple answer to the question: 'Do you think the signing of a CB was in some way prevented/denied because of the money spent on Ramirez?' is all many of us are asking.

 

And if the answer is yes, how did you come to this conclusion?

 

No. Read what I said. This talk of it preventing the potential signing of a CB has been generated as the thread has progressed. I asked if the money could've been better spent elsewhere. ie, on the signing of 2 or maybe 3 players rather than 1. As I said, it could've added more depth to the squad. I admit that I think the defence is an area that could've been improved but the point I'm trying to make is that would we have been better signing the likes of Phillips and Ince with that mone? And before people start, I'm using Phillips and Ince purely as an example.

[Minty]

Why do some of you refuse to accept any culpability of the club ? Why is our lack of defensive strength/cover automatically someone elses fault ?

 

"Because we must have been looking" ?

 

Rightyho....

I don't. I said, barely a few posts up:

 

I personally think our strategy quite clearly involved bringing in more defensive players, but for some reason that did not happen. That MAY have been partly down to the club, but equally it may NOT. We simply cannot know so I believe it is wrong to make that assumption.

I fully accept the club may be at fault. But it is wrong to assume so IMO.

[Golac's Cunning Stunts]

Assumptions:- "finite budget" - we have no evidence of this, for all we know the board will pay any amount they deem is value for money based on each target. Goes back to my point about Ramirez seeming good value at £12 million, and Rhys Williams at the same price not.

 

"I would say priority should have been the oft quoted LB\CB\GK positions." - again how do you know it wasn't. One of our first signings was a Right Back, we were linked with a bid for Buttner (a left backl) and Dann (a centre back) far before any talk of Ramirez.

 

I also at no point think that club has been thinking of replacing Kelvin, all the keepers we have looked at signing have been young keepers, like Butland, so replacements in the future for Kelvin, not this season.

 

"we are inevitably going to concede.", based on our performance against two of the best attacks in Europe and without our new defender?

 

"If we do get relegated this season and it is because we let in too many goals, I think you would seriously have to question Adkins / Cortese and their strategy for this year, or at lest hope they learn a lesson for the future" - again more assumptions, lot of ifs there.

 

Hmmm. Don't follow your reasoning. We obviously will have a finite budget as we don't have an infinite amount of money. Therefore priorities are needed. "Get a new left back" would be high up the list. And surely this wouldn't mean, try and get a new left back, if you fail, give up and buy a creative midfielder/winger?

 

When I say the "goals we will inevitably concede" I base this on 3 games, one of which was Wigan to whom we conceded 2 goals at home. And apart from 2 of the worst pens I have ever seen, the goals against column would have been 2 higher.

 

So yes, hopefully Ramirez will help us score more goals than we will inevitably concede in the games that count.

 

If we do lost too many games and get relegated, I would fully expect NA/NC to learn the lesson for next time.

[Minty]

No. Read what I said. This talk of it preventing the potential signing of a CB has been generated as the thread has progressed. I asked if the money could've been better spent elsewhere. ie, on the signing of 2 or maybe 3 players rather than 1. As I said, it could've added more depth to the squad. I admit that I think the defence is an area that could've been improved but the point I'm trying to make is that would we have been better signing the likes of Phillips and Ince with that mone? And before people start, I'm using Phillips and Ince purely as an example.

Fair enough, it was my interpretation (and obviously some others) that the inference was that it was an either/or scenario.

 

Before the season started I would genuinely have been happy with either option, and would be happy to leave it to Adkins' judgement. It's only hindsight that has allowed me to see the progress JWP has made, and Puncheon's improvement which now leads me to think that we didn't need as many new players in midfield as I perhaps thought previously, and so the addition of one TOP quality player such as Ramirez, is the icing on the cake, as opposed to signing two slightly (supposedly) lesser players.

[Golac's Cunning Stunts]

The other poster is essentially saying we should question the club's transfer policy in this based on IF we get relegated and IF our relegation is caused by bad defenders. 35 games before we can answer any of those questions. That's too many assumptions and IFs in my opinion to form a valid point.

 

My fault for being unclear. I would expect NA/NC to learn the lessons regardless of where we finish at the end of the season. Why are we left short of quality at the back? Didn't offer a good enough deal? Didn't have a good list of targets? Not good enough at negotiating? Didn't go after the targets early enough? blah blah blah

 

WHat ever the reason, learn from it and do it better next time. Not rocket science.

[alpine_saint]

I don't. I said, barely a few posts up:

 

 

I fully accept the club may be at fault. But it is wrong to assume so IMO.

 

So the premise cant be discussed ?

[Minty]

So the premise cant be discussed ?

 

I fear you're just being deliberately mischievous now alps.

 

Of course it can. Bring on some quality debate... but without any particular evidence (correct me if I'm wrong) then the debate is likely to simply end up being 'I think we f*cked up', vs 'I don't'... hardly much quality in that!

 

So, please, go ahead... what do you think the club did wrong whilst trying to sign additional players, that caused them to not sign?

[Minty]

My fault for being unclear. I would expect NA/NC to learn the lessons regardless of where we finish at the end of the season. Why are we left short of quality at the back? Didn't offer a good enough deal? Didn't have a good list of targets? Not good enough at negotiating? Didn't go after the targets early enough? blah blah blah

 

WHat ever the reason, learn from it and do it better next time. Not rocket science.

 

Completely agree that we should always learn from all our experiences, but it could be that we were gazumped/went for a player with unrealistic demands/greedy agent or other reasons not *directly* in our control? All just as possible. (And no, alps, that doesn't mean I'm exonerating the club, merely providing alternate possibilities.)

[Golac's Cunning Stunts]

Completely agree that we should always learn from all our experiences, but it could be that we were gazumped/went for a player with unrealistic demands/greedy agent or other reasons not *directly* in our control? All just as possible. (And no, alps, that doesn't mean I'm exonerating the club, merely providing alternate possibilities.)

 

Agreed, but of course, there are still lessons there. There are actions that can be taken to prepare for all of the eventualities that you mention.

[tajjuk]

Hmmm. Don't follow your reasoning. We obviously will have a finite budget as we don't have an infinite amount of money. Therefore priorities are needed. "Get a new left back" would be high up the list. And surely this wouldn't mean, try and get a new left back, if you fail, give up and buy a creative midfielder/winger?

 

When I say the "goals we will inevitably concede" I base this on 3 games, one of which was Wigan to whom we conceded 2 goals at home. And apart from 2 of the worst pens I have ever seen, the goals against column would have been 2 higher.

 

So yes, hopefully Ramirez will help us score more goals than we will inevitably concede in the games that count.

 

If we do lost too many games and get relegated, I would fully expect NA/NC to learn the lesson for next time.

 

No club has an infinite amount of money not even Man CIty, at the same time we don't know how much the budget (even if we had a specifc one) was, personally I think if a quality centre back was available for a decent price then we would have bought him. I just don't go with this we had X amount and we spent Y amount one player, therefore we had X - Y left to spend on other players and this wasn't enough. I think we made bids for players we thought would improve the defence, such as Curtis Davies, but then these clubs came back either saying no or saying they wanted £15 million (just look at Middlesborugh fans valuation of Rhys Williams) so we didn't pursue those targets. Whereas with Ramirez I think we made an enquiry, quickly cottoned that Bologna needed the money and that they would accept a valuation close to what we thought he was worth, saw it as a great opportunity to sign a player a club of our stature doesn't usually get.

 

Get a new left back was obviously high up the list, we had one almost signed and bids for several others.

 

"I base this on 3 games, one of which was Wigan to whom we conceded 2 goals at home. And apart from 2 of the worst pens I have ever seen, the goals against column would have been 2 higher." I made a post the other day that highlighted that 9 clubs conceded more than 3 goals to either Man Utd or Man City and they all stayed up, none of those clubs scored 2 goals either. So has is it "inevitable" that we will concede goals against other teams? Seems a bit unfair to write off our defence as not good enough based on 3 games, let alone that two of those games were against the best two teams in the league. Wigan maybe, but then we conceded one goal on the counter, were unlucky not to score one ourselves and then conceded a late one chasing the game. There is more to it than just the fact be conceded two goals at home to wigan.

Edited 5 September, 2012 by tajjuk

[Sidney Fudpucker the 3rd]

And now to answer the OP:

 

1. I am amazed that any Saints fan could have felt 'annoyed' over the signing of such a highly rated player.

 

Why? Everybody is entitled to an opinion. It's annoying as I believe that we could've signed other 'players' who would have added more depth than adding one player.

 

2. Yes, there were, and still are, other areas that needed attention. In particular goalkeeper and defence. However, we did sign two goalkeepers (admittedly one was for the development squad), an England U21 international RB and a full Japanese international CB. So we didn't exactly ignore those areas.

 

No, fair comment. But do you feel that either of those are capable of stepping up should Davies get injured? Now, I'm not saying that they're not good enough, just that it's the Premier league and it's a tough place for a young, inexperienced goalkeeper. Look at teams like Villa, Spurs and even QPR. They've all got 2 keepers fighting for the No.1 shirt. I don't believe we have.

 

3. You state we ignored those areas in favour of 'unknown' strikers and attacking midfielders. I presume you mean 'unknown to you' as I had certainly heard of all our signings before they were recruited. In fact, I am sure the majority of posters on here had heard of Ramirez (the prime 'annoyance' of yours) and Mayuka before they were linked with us.

 

I'd never heard of Mayuka. I'd seen Yoshida & Ramierez play. I wonder just how many people can hand on heart say that they had heard of Ramirez prior to him being linked with Saints? You say that the majority of forum users would have been familiar with him. I have to disagree. My guess is that less than 50% would have known who he was. I say this because I work with a huge number of Liverpool supporters and when they we're linked with him only 1 or 2 knew who he was. You'd have thought he'd be better known to Liverpool supporters as they've been playing european football more than saints? The reality is that we'll never know as I doubt anybody is going to admit it now.

 

4. Why do people still think that the signing of any and all new players at football clubs, and particularly at Saints, is all down to the manager? That sort of thing went out of the window many years ago at most clubs. It has been widely stated that Saints have a committee for the recruitment of new players. I am sure Adkins does have a high degree of say in that committee but it is not all down to him to identify players, negotiate with them and their agents and hen to get them to sign on the dotted line. This does not mean anyone is a Cortese signing either; it is a group effort. And, in any case, Adkins clearly admitted, on a number of occasions, that he wanted to bring in 2 CBs; it is also pretty clear that he would have also liked to bring in a new LB, so any criticism of him 'not buying enough defenders' is well off IMO.

 

4. Sadly, I don't think all signings are down to the manager. Personally I believe they should be as he's the one who is in direct contact with the players and knows the team better than anyone else. I don't recall saying that we hadn't signed 'enough defenders' as you put it. I'm disappointed that we've not strengthened in those areas and I think that the performances and results show that we do have an issue.

 

5. I have kept the most pertinent answer to your post until last......... Where has anybody said that Ramirez was signed at the expense of signing other possible options, especially in other positions (i.e. CB and LB). How do you collate, and justify, our signing of a fantastic young creative attacking player as being the reason we didn't sign any other defenders apart from the full international CB and the U21 international RB? Please find me a statement from Adkins or Cortese that says this is so. Also, please give me a list of all the players we asked about or negotiated with and the reasons as to why these deals didn't come off, particularly indicating those that were scratched solely because of the funds being used to purchase Gaston!

 

I don't believe that his signing was at the expense of other possible options (CB & LB). I also don't recall saying that it was the signing of GR for £12m that led to us not signing defenders - That is how people have chosen to interpret what I asked. I asked if the £12m could've been better spent elsewhere. For example, Phillips & Ince maybe? £12m on one player in a squad like ours is a lot and if he can't settle or gets injured then we're back to square one. Had we signed 2 or 3 players then maybe we'd be in a better position to cover this kind of event should it occur.

[Golac's Cunning Stunts]

No club has an infinite amount of money not even Man CIty, at the same time we don't know how much the budget (even if we had a specifc one) was, personally I think if a quality centre back was available for a decent price then we would have bought him. I just don't go with this we had X amount and we spent Y amount one player, therefore we had X - Y left to spend on other players and this wasn't enough. I think we made bids for players we thought would improve the defence, such as Curtis Davies, but then these clubs came back either saying no or saying they wanted £15 million (just look at Middlesborugh fans valuation of Rhys Williams) so we didn't pursue those targets. Whereas with Ramirez I think we made an enquiry, quickly cottoned that Bologna needed the money and that they would accept a valuation close to what we thought he was worth, saw it as a great opportunity to sign a player a club of our stature doesn't usually get.

 

Get a new left back was obviously high up the list, we had one almost signed and bids for several others.

 

"I base this on 3 games, one of which was Wigan to whom we conceded 2 goals at home. And apart from 2 of the worst pens I have ever seen, the goals against column would have been 2 higher." I made a post the other day that highlighted that 9 clubs conceded more than 3 goals to either Man Utd or Man City and they all stayed up, none of those clubs scored 2 goals either. So has is it "inevitable" that we will concede goals against other teams? Seems a bit unfair to write off our defence as not good enough based on 3 games, let alone that two of those games were against the best two teams in the league. Wigan maybe, but then we conceded one goal on the counter, were unlucky not to score one ourselves and then conceded a late one chasing the game. There is more to it than just the fact be conceded two goals at home to wigan.

 

Not being unfair. Our current defence is plainly not up to it and we also lack strength in depth. Other Prem teams will all feel confident they can score against us.

[West End Saint]

without seeing him play it is unfair to judge however if I was given the choice of him at 12m or a couple of 6m centre backs I would go for the defenders all day & everyday it seems clear our problems will be at the heart of our defence

[alpine_saint]

without seeing him play it is unfair to judge however if I was given the choice of him at 12m or a couple of 6m centre backs I would go for the defenders all day & everyday it seems clear our problems will be at the heart of our defence

 

What an outrageous opinion

[alpine_saint]

I fear you're just being deliberately mischievous now alps.

 

Of course it can. Bring on some quality debate... but without any particular evidence (correct me if I'm wrong) then the debate is likely to simply end up being 'I think we f*cked up', vs 'I don't'... hardly much quality in that!

 

So, please, go ahead... what do you think the club did wrong whilst trying to sign additional players, that caused them to not sign?

 

If we managed to convince Ramirez, we should have been capable of convincing a couple of high-quality CBs. I simply think we didnt try hard enough, because we were concentrating on other things.

[Bearsy]

One super-quality player can make a big difference at club. #MLT

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Minty, the howl that goes up if you do less than ejaculate on here over any action from the club at the moment is just plain ridiculous.

 

Do I think Ramirez is a good buy that will measurably improve the team performance ? Yes

Do I think the Ramirez money prevented the pursuit of adequate defensive signings ? No

Do I think the obsession/determination to sign Ramirez got in the way of focusing on more urgent areas of team strengthening ? Yes

Do I think our transfer activity addressed the real squad issues and weaknesses in balanced mannner ? No

Do I think we've done our very best with our transfer activity to stay up in the PL ? No

Do I think we've done our best with our transfer activity to play sexy entertaining football ? Yes

 

This is exactly my opinion on it. We needed 2 x CB's and 1 x LB. We didn't get that.

 

However, I am very happy we've signed Ramirez, he really is ace.

[Wes Tender]

What an outrageous opinion

Not outrageous at all, Alps.

 

In fact it is exactly in line with this proposal for debate made by you:-

 

Would you have been happier if the title had stated " Was a player of the nature of GR really an important priority over other reinforcements for this summer ?"

 

If we were debating that hypothetical scenario, there wouldn't be a problem, beyond establishing whether in fact Ramirez had indeed been prioritised before defenders. The problem arose when the OP suggested that the expenditure on Ramirez meant that less money was available to buy in the defenders that we needed.

 

Sid has tried to backtrack from the OP, saying that the progression of the thread had altered the thrust of the OP, but it seems clear enough to me that the wording in the OP was very suggestive that money spent on Ramirez meant that it was not available elsewhere.

 

Personally I was annoyed by the signing as there were other areas that desperately needed attention and £12m would have gone a long way to solving our problems.

 

Most took that the way that I did, that the £12 million was therefore not available to spend on other players.

[Dalek2003]

I notice the usual morons are mobbing any of those with a different opinion, demanding justifcation, evidence, circumstance, motivation, joined-up writing, etc. like we are in a court of f**king law.

 

The beige brigade !

[hassan kachloul]

Danny Gabbidon is available on a free. He's not great but a safer bet than Dan Seaborne as back up.

[brmbrm]

Could have signed me for £15M. I could play CB for £15M.

 

Would keep idiots like Sid and Alpine happy because we splashed lots of money on a CB. Plus I am available!

 

Would the squad have improved? Sheet no!

 

basically I trust people who know what they are doing, who do it full time, who are paid to do it in a highly competitive market, and who have porven track records to get it right. OK, some of the miserable trolls on here can have their opinion, but the fact that they can express theor opinion doesn't make them any less of sub-moronic ***s.

 

But they do end up spoiling what should be a decent forum. Just so they cabn feel "mr big". jeez - back to the fishing forum then

[alpine_saint]

Could have signed me for £15M. I could play CB for £15M.

 

Would keep idiots like Sid and Alpine happy because we splashed lots of money on a CB. Plus I am available!

 

Would the squad have improved? Sheet no!

 

basically I trust people who know what they are doing, who do it full time, who are paid to do it in a highly competitive market, and who have porven track records to get it right. OK, some of the miserable trolls on here can have their opinion, but the fact that they can express theor opinion doesn't make them any less of sub-moronic ***s.

 

But they do end up spoiling what should be a decent forum. Just so they cabn feel "mr big". jeez - back to the fishing forum then

 

Bye then...

[Chez]

if we'd signed only defenders and goalkeepers the same `unhappy' people would be pointing to the lack of investment in creativity.

 

We have signed a lot of good players including a right back, centre back and a keeper. All areas of the park including the defence were addressed.

[alpine_saint]

if we'd signed only defenders and goalkeepers the same `unhappy' people would be pointing to the lack of investment in creativity.

 

We have signed a lot of good players including a right back, centre back and a keeper. All areas of the park including the defence were addressed.

 

Well I wouldnt have. I dont understand what the need for J-Rod AND Mayuka AND Ramirez was when we were already capable of scoring goals (as has been demonstrated against the 2 Manchesters without them..)

 

And I dispute that the defence has been strengthened sufficiently. I also dispute that we have a sufficiently capable back-up or successor to Kelvin at the moment (maybe in time, which we might not have...)