Summer Transfer Window 2024

[benali-shorts]

23 minutes ago, Francis1947 said:

Can someone help me out here please and I apologise if I am being a bit thick in not comprehending Saints strategy regarding the Summer transfer business.

We gave been informed by many sources that after the sensible re-signing of Flynn and Harwood-Bellis our top transfer target was Matt O'Riley from Celtic. The stats looked good and Martin was personally aware of his effectiveness as a player plus his " character " after working with him previously.

In the last few weeks we have been informed that we have been unable or unwilling to meet Celtics vluation of 25 million for O'Riley and talks have eithe stalled or have ended.

We, supposedly offered around 15 million and would not go higher. My maths makes that a shortfall of 10 million.

And then out of the blue we learnt yesterday that Saints have signed a guy called Archer from Aston Villa for 10 million.

Forgive me but doesnt 15 million plus 10 million equal 25 million !

Now I'm not saying that we should pay Celtics valuation simply because that is an abitrary figure they have put on his head. However if he really was our number 1 target and Martins choice why have we gone ahead with the Archer deal ! A player many of us here have no knowledge about.

Factor in that it looks as though we will now be receiving a fee for Mara and Bella-Kotchap this doesnt make any sense to me at all.

Can someone please explain to this frazzled old 76 year old brain of mine !

Anyhows, onwards and upwards and looking forward to the new season and Saints at Newcastle this afternoon

 

 

We could buy both. Or we feel MO’R is overpriced and have moved on (or the player has opted to go elsewhere). I’d wait until the end of the window before overly analysing. Suspect we’ll get MOR once all is said and done. 

[LuckyNumber7]

20 minutes ago, Francis1947 said:

Can someone help me out here please and I apologise if I am being a bit thick in not comprehending Saints strategy regarding the Summer transfer business.

We gave been informed by many sources that after the sensible re-signing of Flynn and Harwood-Bellis our top transfer target was Matt O'Riley from Celtic. The stats looked good and Martin was personally aware of his effectiveness as a player plus his " character " after working with him previously.

In the last few weeks we have been informed that we have been unable or unwilling to meet Celtics vluation of 25 million for O'Riley and talks have eithe stalled or have ended.

We, supposedly offered around 15 million and would not go higher. My maths makes that a shortfall of 10 million.

And then out of the blue we learnt yesterday that Saints have signed a guy called Archer from Aston Villa for 10 million.

Forgive me but doesnt 15 million plus 10 million equal 25 million !

Now I'm not saying that we should pay Celtics valuation simply because that is an abitrary figure they have put on his head. However if he really was our number 1 target and Martins choice why have we gone ahead with the Archer deal ! A player many of us here have no knowledge about.

Factor in that it looks as though we will now be receiving a fee for Mara and Bella-Kotchap this doesnt make any sense to me at all.

Can someone please explain to this frazzled old 76 year old brain of mine !

Anyhows, onwards and upwards and looking forward to the new season and Saints at Newcastle this afternoon

 

 

First off we've payed 15m not 10m for Archer.

But the point is we simply can't afford to drop £25m on one player (at the moment). If we did that we'd have no funds to strengthen in the other areas that need attention, so no Archer or GK for example. Obviously this could change if we can bring some money in, which is why it's so important that we shift a few out now like ABK, Tall Paul, KWP etc.

Even if we had the money, O'Riley would still have to agree to come here, when it seems likely he has more attractive offers.

[Farmer Saint]

27 minutes ago, Francis1947 said:

Can someone help me out here please and I apologise if I am being a bit thick in not comprehending Saints strategy regarding the Summer transfer business.

We gave been informed by many sources that after the sensible re-signing of Flynn and Harwood-Bellis our top transfer target was Matt O'Riley from Celtic. The stats looked good and Martin was personally aware of his effectiveness as a player plus his " character " after working with him previously.

In the last few weeks we have been informed that we have been unable or unwilling to meet Celtics vluation of 25 million for O'Riley and talks have eithe stalled or have ended.

We, supposedly offered around 15 million and would not go higher. My maths makes that a shortfall of 10 million.

And then out of the blue we learnt yesterday that Saints have signed a guy called Archer from Aston Villa for 10 million.

Forgive me but doesnt 15 million plus 10 million equal 25 million !

Now I'm not saying that we should pay Celtics valuation simply because that is an abitrary figure they have put on his head. However if he really was our number 1 target and Martins choice why have we gone ahead with the Archer deal ! A player many of us here have no knowledge about.

Factor in that it looks as though we will now be receiving a fee for Mara and Bella-Kotchap this doesnt make any sense to me at all.

Can someone please explain to this frazzled old 76 year old brain of mine !

Anyhows, onwards and upwards and looking forward to the new season and Saints at Newcastle this afternoon

 

 

The £15m was reused on Archer - however if we sell some players then it is (highly) likely we will go for O'Riley (he is still our top target this window). 

We are O'Riley's top choice. 

Edited August 17 by Farmer Saint

[hypochondriac]

Also worth considering that solanke has just gone to spurs for 60 million and did naff all for anyone until he scored significantly less for Bournemouth in the championship than Che did last year when he was 24. It was only last season that he did anything in the prem and he will be 27 in a couple of weeks. Archer is 22 and there's real potential there, particularly with Martin who has a good history of improving players. 

[Sheaf Saint]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Che had never played in the premier league at 22. At 20 he scored 7 goals in 40 appearances in the championship. At the same age Archer scored 11 in 20 in the championship which is a better ratio than Che's best ever season in the championship which he had for Birmingham at 22 which is the same age as Archer. 

That's not a guarantee he will be better but it's certainly encouraging

Yeah I'm not knocking Archer here. I'm quite enthused about him from what I've seen. I just think there was a bit of confusion in the way Saint_clark worded his post, that's all.

I messaged a Villa supporting mate yesterday and asked if this signing was something I should be excited about. He replied: "Excited might be a bit strong, but he works hard and is a tidy finisher". 

On that basis he would appear to be an upgrade on Che, and certainly on Mara.

[CampionSaint]

22 minutes ago, Francis1947 said:

Can someone help me out here please and I apologise if I am being a bit thick in not comprehending Saints strategy regarding the Summer transfer business.

We gave been informed by many sources that after the sensible re-signing of Flynn and Harwood-Bellis our top transfer target was Matt O'Riley from Celtic. The stats looked good and Martin was personally aware of his effectiveness as a player plus his " character " after working with him previously.

In the last few weeks we have been informed that we have been unable or unwilling to meet Celtics vluation of 25 million for O'Riley and talks have eithe stalled or have ended.

We, supposedly offered around 15 million and would not go higher. My maths makes that a shortfall of 10 million.

And then out of the blue we learnt yesterday that Saints have signed a guy called Archer from Aston Villa for 10 million.

Forgive me but doesnt 15 million plus 10 million equal 25 million !

Now I'm not saying that we should pay Celtics valuation simply because that is an abitrary figure they have put on his head. However if he really was our number 1 target and Martins choice why have we gone ahead with the Archer deal ! A player many of us here have no knowledge about.

Factor in that it looks as though we will now be receiving a fee for Mara and Bella-Kotchap this doesnt make any sense to me at all.

Can someone please explain to this frazzled old 76 year old brain of mine !

Anyhows, onwards and upwards and looking forward to the new season and Saints at Newcastle this afternoon

 

 

I think Celtic were probably looking for near £30m.  Personally I think this is dead now.  We will hopefully loan Ramsdale (as Lis has gone) and that will be about it unless we get a lot of money for Alcaraz / Bella Kothchap.  They seemed to have a strategy of waiting for someone to leave (or is leaving) then replace unless it's a small amount.  BBD for Che, Archer for Mara, Ronnie for Lyanco, Wood for Duleta Car.  Sugawara was brought in as it seemed like KWP was leaving and was low risk because of cost and he's likely to be 1st choice RB atm.

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Yeah I'm not knocking Archer here. I'm quite enthused about him from what I've seen. I just think there was a bit of confusion in the way Saint_clark worded his post, that's all.

I messaged a Villa supporting mate yesterday and asked if this signing was something I should be excited about. He replied: "Excited might be a bit strong, but he works hard and is a tidy finisher". 

On that basis he would appear to be an upgrade on Che, and certainly on Mara.

I think the exciting g bit is the pote trial to have quite a few threats going forward and hopefully a more dynamic attack as a unit. Particularly if we get o'riley or an equivalent. 

[Saint_clark]

14 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Eh? The most Adams ever scored in the prem was 9!

Didn't phrase it well, I didn't mean the second part at age 22 just that he has scored more than Archer in the Prem on 4 occasions. 

My overall point being that if the expectation is he will be an improvement on Adams, as you said "shouldn't be that difficult", then people will most likely be disappointed. I would be amazed if he manages to get the 10 goals we need from a striker this season - i'd imagine he will end up more like Armstrong when he first signed for us, getting 3/4 at most. 

[Sheaf Saint]

1 minute ago, Saint_clark said:

Didn't phrase it well, I didn't mean the second part at age 22 just that he has scored more than Archer in the Prem on 4 occasions. 

My overall point being that if the expectation is he will be an improvement on Adams, as you said "shouldn't be that difficult", then people will most likely be disappointed. I would be amazed if he manages to get the 10 goals we need from a striker this season - i'd imagine he will end up more like Armstrong when he first signed for us, getting 3/4 at most. 

And that's OK, as long as BBD and Arma get a few between them, as well as the midfielders chipping in. 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, Saint_clark said:

Didn't phrase it well, I didn't mean the second part at age 22 just that he has scored more than Archer in the Prem on 4 occasions. 

My overall point being that if the expectation is he will be an improvement on Adams, as you said "shouldn't be that difficult", then people will most likely be disappointed. I would be amazed if he manages to get the 10 goals we need from a striker this season - i'd imagine he will end up more like Armstrong when he first signed for us, getting 3/4 at most. 

Well he got 4 last year in a team that you would hope are a fair bit worse than we will be this year even if we do go down. The point is that Adam's record was worse than archers is at the same age. Yes Adams has more seasons of scoring goals in the prem but he's seven years older! Again it's not a guarantee but neither is adna being older and therefore having more opportunities a negative for Archer. 

[SuperSAINT]

44 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

I think one of Sulemana, Edozie, SAA would have to ship out first

We never replaced Brooks though.

Sule & Edozie wernt fully trust in the championship.

[OldNick]

1 minute ago, SuperSAINT said:

We never replaced Brooks though.

Sule & Edozie wernt fully trust in the championship.

Brooks hardly set the world alight

[Saint_clark]

1 minute ago, Sheaf Saint said:

And that's OK, as long as BBD and Arma get a few between them, as well as the midfielders chipping in. 

True. But it's not an improvement on Adams.

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Well he got 4 last year in a team that you would hope are a fair bit worse than we will be this year even if we do go down. The point is that Adam's record was worse than archers is at the same age. Yes Adams has more seasons of scoring goals in the prem but he's seven years older! Again it's not a guarantee but neither is adna being older and therefore having more opportunities a negative for Archer. 

Adams record wasn't worse at 22 though?

[hypochondriac]

13 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

True. But it's not an improvement on Adams.

Adams record wasn't worse at 22 though?

Well it depends what you mean by worse and how you value championship records compared to Premier league ones. Adams scored more goals in the championship at 22 but the goals to games ratio was slightly lower than Archer achieved in the championship for arguably a worse team at age 20. It's unknown how many Archer could have scored had he been playing regularly in the championship at 22 but I expect it would have been a fair amount given what he achieved two years previously but I accept that's speculation. 

Adams score 4,5,7 and 9 for us in the prem. I feel confident that Archer could get similar numbers gi en that he got 4 last year at a younger age than Adams did. 

In fact if you want to get geeky about it, their goals to game ratio at the same age are strikingly similar except that Archer has played less games overall than Che although Archer has played an entire Premier league season, something that Che had not done at that point. 

Edited August 17 by hypochondriac

[SuperSAINT]

10 minutes ago, OldNick said:

Brooks hardly set the world alight

True, but Brooks replaced Tella — who we never replaced. Would be astonished if we don’t sign another one.

[Kermitzasaint]

25 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Also worth considering that solanke has just gone to spurs for 60 million and did naff all for anyone until he scored significantly less for Bournemouth in the championship than Che did last year when he was 24. It was only last season that he did anything in the prem and he will be 27 in a couple of weeks. Archer is 22 and there's real potential there, particularly with Martin who has a good history of improving players. 

Who has Martin improved exactly? 

[S-Clarke]

17 minutes ago, SuperSAINT said:

We never replaced Brooks though.

Sule & Edozie wernt fully trust in the championship.

We're down Fraser as well. Could certainly see another wide player.

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, Kermitzasaint said:

Who has Martin improved exactly? 

Armstrong 

THB 

Downes 

Aribo 

I'd say they've all improved over the season albeit it was in a level below where some of the other people were previously playing. 

By all accounts Woods played the best football of his career under Martin. 

Edited August 17 by hypochondriac

[S-Clarke]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Armstrong 

THB 

Downes 

Aribo 

I'd say they've all improved over the season albeit it was in a level below where some of the other people were previously playing. 

Bednarek and Smallbone as well, but like you say with the big caveat that it's at the level below we were using them in before.

[Saint_clark]

14 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Well it depends what you mean by worse and how you value championship records compared to Premier league ones. Adams scored more goals in the championship at 22 but the goals to games ratio was slightly lower than Archer achieved in the championship for arguably a worse team at age 20. It's unknown how many Archer could have scored had he been playing regularly in the championship at 22 but I expect it would have been a fair amount given what he achieved two years previously but I accept that's speculation. 

Adams score 4,5,7 and 9 for us in the prem. I feel confident that Archer could get similar numbers gi en that he got 4 last year at a younger age than Adams did. 

In fact if you want to get geeky about it, their goals to game ratio at the same age are strikingly similar except that Archer has played less games overall than Che although Archer has played an entire Premier league season, something that Che had not done at that point. 

Arguably worse? He played for Boro who finished 4th, Adams scored his 22 goals for Birmingham who finished 17th. 

Only time will tell. I don't think he makes us stronger than we were last season however. 

[S-Clarke]

Just now, Saint_clark said:

Arguably worse? He played for Boro who finished 4th, Adams scored his 22 goals for Birmingham who finished 17th. 

Only time will tell. I don't think he makes us stronger than we were last season however. 

He was at PNE when he was 20, not Boro.

Boro was his second loan the following January.

[Saint_clark]

Just now, S-Clarke said:

He was at PNE when he was 20, not Boro.

Boro was his second loan the following January.

Well if that's the loan he's referring to then his goals to game ratio wasn't better. Adams got 22 in 46, Archer got 7 in 20. 

[SuperSAINT]

7 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

We're down Fraser as well. Could certainly see another wide player.

I’m sure RM has even said in a presser or during pre-season we would.  You could possibly argue BBD loosely covers it, but he’ll be needed up top at times.  Almost certain it’ll be a right sided player. (Although your namesake at Sunderland keeps getting linked, and he’s left-sided.)

The Rak-Sakyi link for example wasn’t just made up

[Pengi]

46 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

The £15m was reused on Archer - however if we sell some players then it is (highly) likely we will go for O'Riley (he is still our top target this window). 

We are O'Riley's top choice. 

Edited August 17 by Pengi
Mistake please delete

[Pengi]

44 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

The £15m was reused on Archer - however if we sell some players then it is (highly) likely we will go for O'Riley (he is still our top target this window). 

We are O'Riley's top choice. 

[suewhistle]

I'll leave the comparison of stats arguments to the more nerdy amongst you, but viewing the videos it does seem that Archer has decent strength and the ability to ride challenges as well as the use of both feet and is a decent finisher, which are all cause for optimism. I appreciated edited videos can be deceptive, so we'll all be looking forward to seeing him actually play for us.

It's woth noting that Lesley U also has that degree of physicality that seems necessary in the Premiership. Roll on the Forest game and whatever dodgy stream we can find for this afternoon!

[FarehamSaintJames]

Football will implode one day because of the finances, and when it does it’ll be catastrophic.

It only takes someone like Sky to pull out and say “We aren’t interested anymore” and that kills off probably half the Premier League immediately.

Clubs depend on TV money.

The money being thrown around for some pretty average players is a sign of things spiralling out of control.

[RedArmy]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Armstrong 

THB 

Downes 

Aribo 

I'd say they've all improved over the season albeit it was in a level below where some of the other people were previously playing. 

By all accounts Woods played the best football of his career under Martin. 

Not sure he improved Armstrong, he just found his level again. 

[Matthew Le God]

2 hours ago, FarehamSaintJames said:

Football will implode one day because of the finances, and when it does it’ll be catastrophic.

It only takes someone like Sky to pull out and say “We aren’t interested anymore” and that kills off probably half the Premier League immediately.

Clubs depend on TV money.

The money being thrown around for some pretty average players is a sign of things spiralling out of control.

Why would they do that when it is fundamental to their business model? Even if they did do that, another broadcaster would take the contract, the public isn't going to lose interest.

The Premier League would likely make a lot more money than they currently do if they made a PremFLix subscription service and cut out the middle man. I think this will eventually happen as the revenue would be huge, it just may take a while before they do it and would need to wait for deals to run out.

 

Edited August 17 by Matthew Le God

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, RedArmy said:

Not sure he improved Armstrong, he just found his level again. 

Maybe. Will be interesting to see how he does this year. 

[Saint Matty 76]

1 hour ago, Kermitzasaint said:

Who has Martin improved exactly? 

You've been desperate to hate him the entire time, and your post history is full of claims he won't get us up, his football doesn't work etc etc. 

How about admitting you were wrong rather than asking stupid questions on the day of our first game back in the Prem? Something which you, and a lot of people on here deemed would be a tough task, yet now proceed to give him no credit for?

On 07/04/2024 at 12:25, Kermitzasaint said:

Russell Martin is exactly what we were told he was. An average coach who has an obsession with playing a certain style with a zeal that borders on mental illness. 

I got plenty of abuse over not embracing his style and personality. Even during our unbeaten streak I was never convinced. As a coach his style doesn't suit our budget so had we gotten promoted we would get slaughtered. I don't think we will win in the play off's and I think RM has had Saints under perform massively. 

It was cursed to fail as soon as he was chosen. So far the season highlight has been Gio's freak out. 

[Daft Kerplunk]

24 minutes ago, FarehamSaintJames said:

Football will implode one day because of the finances, and when it does it’ll be catastrophic.

It only takes someone like Sky to pull out and say “We aren’t interested anymore” and that kills off probably half the Premier League immediately.

Clubs depend on TV money.

The money being thrown around for some pretty average players is a sign of things spiralling out of control.

These things have been said for the past 30 years so an implosion may not be imminent. 

Edited August 17 by Daft Kerplunk

[OldNick]

27 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Why would they do that when it is fundamental to their business model? Even if they did do that, another broadcaster would take the contract, the public isn't going to lose interest.

The Premier League would likely make a lot more money than they currently do if they made a PremFLix subscription service and cut out the middle man. I think this will eventually happen as the revenue would be huge, it just make take a while before they do it and would need to wait for deals to run out.

 

In the 80's when football violence spread, the attendances fell dramatically. People were turned off the game. I know things are different but the tide could turn, not that im expecting it to

[OldNick]

2 hours ago, Kermitzasaint said:

Who has Martin improved exactly? 

I as with you at the start of the season, but what impressed me was that he did change and became more pragmatic. The play offs and final showed that he was prepared to change his principles a bit

[Toadhall Saint]

39 minutes ago, FarehamSaintJames said:

Football will implode one day because of the finances, and when it does it’ll be catastrophic.

It only takes someone like Sky to pull out and say “We aren’t interested anymore” and that kills off probably half the Premier League immediately.

Clubs depend on TV money.

The money being thrown around for some pretty average players is a sign of things spiralling out of control.

Same thing has been said season after season - nothing has changed. 

[Lighthouse]

17 minutes ago, OldNick said:

In the 80's when football violence spread, the attendances fell dramatically. People were turned off the game. I know things are different but the tide could turn, not that im expecting it to

What has violence forty years ago got to do with Sky viewing figures? If anything football is going the other way, the PL are selling bigger TV deals to more countries than ever. As more countries emerge economically and more people around the world have disposable income, the trend is only going to keep going. 

[Saint_Ash]

1 hour ago, Daft Kerplunk said:

These things have been said for the past 30 years so an implosion may not be imminent. 

Indeed. I remember when Leeds were paying average players ridiculous money under Ridsdale, 20 odd years ago people were saying the same thing. 

[Saint_clark]

40 minutes ago, Saint_Ash said:

Indeed. I remember when Leeds were paying average players ridiculous money under Ridsdale, 20 odd years ago people were saying the same thing. 

One of my favourite stories was from Seth Johnson, he said him and his agent went into negotiations thinking they'd fight tooth and nail to get £30,000 a week and Leeds' opening offer was £45,000 a week. 

[Turkish]

14 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

One of my favourite stories was from Seth Johnson, he said him and his agent went into negotiations thinking they'd fight tooth and nail to get £30,000 a week and Leeds' opening offer was £45,000 a week. 

You want to listen to Danny Mills story it’s even better

he was on about £20k a week I think it was, hr had a clause in his contract that if he got ten England caps he’s get a pay rise. He achieved that at the 2002 World Cup so afterwards they went into renegotiate his deal. They were originally going to ask for £30k a week by the time they got the meeting they’d decided to ask for £60k, they walked out with £65k and new fish tank. Fingers might be a slightly out but the story is accurate Leeds was a basket case 

[Saint_clark]

Just now, Turkish said:

You want to listen to Danny Mills story it’s even better

he was on about £20k a week I think it was, hr had a clause in his contract that if he got ten England caps he’s get a pay rise. He achieved that at the 2002 World Cup so afterwards they went into renegotiate his deal. They were originally going to ask for £30k a week by the time they got the meeting they’d decided to ask for £60k, they walked out with £65k and new fish tank. Fingers might be a slightly out but the story is accurate Leeds was a basket case 

Difficult to tell younger people about them these days as those figures don't seem so ridiculous. Comparably I guess it would be like Villa offering £150,000 a week as an opening offer.

[Jonnyboy]

Sorry I haven't paid much attention, can anyone summarise for me the ins and outs this summer? (I don't mean Russ and Pinder)

Or is there a good link out there? Cheers

 

[Kermitzasaint]

3 hours ago, Saint Matty 76 said:

You've been desperate to hate him the entire time, and your post history is full of claims he won't get us up, his football doesn't work etc etc. 

How about admitting you were wrong rather than asking stupid questions on the day of our first game back in the Prem? Something which you, and a lot of people on here deemed would be a tough task, yet now proceed to give him no credit for?

How am I wrong? We under performed under RM in my opinion. His tactics and strategies are often flawed and his complete inability to organise a defence is well known. 

Its easily argued that the players he 'improved' are playing to their expected level in a lower league. 

Implying that I'm desperate to hate him is odd. I hate his way of football and his obsession that his way is best. I'm not alone in that opinion. 

Today's game is exactly what RM is known for. Ponderous and slow possession  football with little attacking threat and suicidal defending. No surprise when we've conceded against 10 men after Diaz cheating. 

 

[Whitey Grandad]

7 minutes ago, Kermitzasaint said:

How am I wrong? We under performed under RM in my opinion. His tactics and strategies are often flawed and his complete inability to organise a defence is well known. 

Its easily argued that the players he 'improved' are playing to their expected level in a lower league. 

Implying that I'm desperate to hate him is odd. I hate his way of football and his obsession that his way is best. I'm not alone in that opinion. 

Today's game is exactly what RM is known for. Ponderous and slow possession  football with little attacking threat and suicidal defending. No surprise when we've conceded against 10 men after Diaz cheating. 

 

Agreed.

[trousers]

8 minutes ago, Kermitzasaint said:

Diaz cheating. 

😂

[trousers]

Despite a good overall performance (so far) vs Newcastle, it's put a spotlight on  the two positions we haven't upgraded yet during this window.... i.e. keeper and centre forward... Address that in the next two weeks and we're comfortably a mid-table side i reckon...

Oh, and we need to keep KWP... Worth much more to us this season if he goes on a free next year than if we get a few bob for him now....

Edited August 17 by trousers

[Saint Fan CaM]

Forget O’Riley (if he was ever a possibility). After seeing that shocking performance by McCarthy you’ve got to say the priority must be to get a decent keeper in above all else…more than a playmaker ACM or a striker. Don’t do that and we don’t compete at this level.

[jamesfp1]

Stuart Armstrong is a free agent

[MarkSFC]

9 minutes ago, Saint Fan CaM said:

Forget O’Riley (if he was ever a possibility). After seeing that shocking performance by McCarthy you’ve got to say the priority must be to get a decent keeper in above all else…more than a playmaker ACM or a striker. Don’t do that and we don’t compete at this level.

Nothing new there. We've needed a top keeper for years. 

[East Kent Saint]

13 minutes ago, Saint Fan CaM said:

Forget O’Riley (if he was ever a possibility). After seeing that shocking performance by McCarthy you’ve got to say the priority must be to get a decent keeper in above all else…more than a playmaker ACM or a striker. Don’t do that and we don’t compete at this level.

It was said on here that he was having a good game until he followed orders and unfortunately made a a mistake , lets not join in with modern misinformation mob rule ffs .

[Gloucester Saint]

1 hour ago, trousers said:

Despite a good overall performance (so far) vs Newcastle, it's put a spotlight on  the two positions we haven't upgraded yet during this window.... i.e. keeper and centre forward... Address that in the next two weeks and we're comfortably a mid-table side i reckon...

Oh, and we need to keep KWP... Worth much more to us this season if he goes on a free next year than if we get a few bob for him now....

Yep, pretty much it, although I’d say it’s Keeper/Winger and then striker if KWP moves on (not that I want it to be).

The Bazanu obsession has to be ended today - he is a League 1 keeper at best, and he may have to re-start lower still post-injury. The idea that Alex was keeping the seat warm is nonsense as today shows yet again. If Ramsdale loan is too costly, then Johnston. Let’s stop the fannying about, my impression was at the fans forum that Martin does want to upgrade so he needs to push it with Dragan. New keeper starting v Forest a bare minimum.

Speaking of ex-City youngsters the club dream about being £50m players not grounded in reality, Edozie is another. He’s far better than Gavin, and looked decent at times in the Champ. A few top 10-12 outfits there still wanting wide players, Samuel needs to play week in week out and be encouraged to attack the full back and work on his deliveries. At least he could be an asset next term.

There should be the winger option in the loan market (Fraser saga has gone on too long now) as I’m not Ramsdale will happen. 

 

Edited August 17 by Gloucester Saint