I Would Sell Shane Long

[SarniaSaint]

I think people understand how contracts work perfectly well, thanks.

 

What people are getting at with regard to Long is why we were so keen buy someone another club had just signed on a long term deal, so much so we had to pay double what they paid six months before. We had to pay that much because his contract was huge, but we didn't have to sign Shane Long at all.

 

If fees didn't matter then no one would ever describe any players as a "bargain" either now would they. But, guess what, they do.

 

All that said, we've signed worse for more or similar amounts. And he's pretty lovable our Shane what with all the running and that.

 

So what are trying to say ?? .................he cost the going rate or we over paid........

[austsaint]

Long is pretty crap. Better without the ball than with it.

 

But he hasn't really disappointed me because me was 27 when we signed him and had never been more than an average lower half PL player so he has performed to the level he has within him.

 

Not sure Koeman is convinced by him at all, would have been better to wait a couple of weeks in hindsight and let Koeman get someone in he truely wanted.

 

Fans like someone who hares around and chases defenders so his complete lack of a first touch and composure often goes unnoticed by the "get stuck in" brigade.

 

For someone who cops a lot of stick, you make a lot of sense. If we'd only paid 4-5 mill for him and weren't relying on him quite so much lately, this thread probably wouldn't have come up.

[Saint Garrett]

Think you've hit the nail on the head when you say he's better without the ball, his touch is frighteningly bad.

[John Cool]

I like Long but his days are numbered due to the SFC policy to sell players with names beginning with "L" (Lallana, Lambert, Lovren, Luuuuuuke) which could perhaps be why Morgan Schneiderlin was not sold. I imagine Sheffield Weds would be delighted to take the talented Lloyd Isgrove off our hands...