The Transfer Window 2: Electric Boogaloo

grey_til_I_dye

So, if the board don't back the manager, and fail to bring in who he wants, they are a disgrace.

If they back the manager and bring in who he wants, and we don't rate them, they are a disgrace.

It's not looking too good for them, is it?

Cuz1

My issue would be why back the manager signing a player who months earlier the board had said we won’t sign players in that age bracket, the amount of game time evra had backs up this theory imo

MrsGrey

The only question (for me) that's relevant about using an Academy player to cover injury is, are they good enough to play in the PL. If not, I think it's right not to play them.

If we play them when they aren't ready => critics will say it's bad because it's damaging their confidence by throwing them in when they aren't ready. And the board are cheapskates/don't back the manager with funds for new transfers.

If we don't play them, critics will say =>damaging their confidence by not showing they are trusted.



Either way, there's plenty of ammunition for critics.


I'd be interested to hear from those people who have previously argued for a transfer policy which involves buying cover when someone picks up a longer-term injury. (I know there must be some, because I've argued against them in the past.)

MrsGrey

Cuz1 said:

My issue would be why back the manager signing a player who months earlier the board had said we won’t sign players in that age bracket, the amount of game time evra had backs up this theory imo

Did they really say that?

billybondsbeard

https://www.dreamteamfc.com/c/news-gossip/378075/david-sullivan-patrice-evra/
Yes

MrsGrey

;ok

Clearly he was referring to the upcoming (January) transfer window. And it was a statement of intent. What actually happened in the window?

Evra was an emergency signing after the transfer window was closed. We needed someone quickly, not attached to a club, and who would sign on a short-term deal. Personally, I think that's fair enough. I also think it's self-serving to take that one quote, and only that one quote, and out of context, and ignoring all other circumstances.

I also think that the quote is a good example of why Sully should not give interviews. Like all of us, what you say isn't always a fully formulated manifesto, with caveats and clarifications built in. But the quote gets taken as gospel, without any opportunity for him to say 'what I mean is...' (which is what everybody else is able to do) and then if there is any perceived deviation from it he gets accused of being a liar.



cuz, I think if you look at the transfers in recent years you will see that the policy has been to sign younger players on longer contracts, while older players have been short-term deals.

Plus, any transfer policy that is so set in stone that you can't adapt to changing circumstances is a recipe for disaster. (imo)

Cuz1

For me it’s not about the recent years it was the evra signing a waste of time and money imo and if was moyes decision I’m glad he’s not here now,

MrsGrey

Genuine question, because I can't recall if you expressed an opinion at the time.

If we had signed a different player, would you have been OK with it? (I'm getting at - did you not want any cover at all, or was it just the actual signing you weren't happy with?)

baracks_a_hammer

Personally I’d rather have signed no-one - signing Evra made no sense even if we didn’t have the benefit of hindsight

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years

grey_til_I_dye said:

So, if the board don't back the manager, and fail to bring in who he wants, they are a disgrace.

If they back the manager and bring in who he wants, and we don't rate them, they are a disgrace.

It's not looking too good for them, is it?

When did I call them a disgrace

I didn't like the signing.... just because I don't blindy back every decision the owners don't make doesn't assume I think they are a disgrace

Given his wages, his age, his performances actually when he did get on the pitch (thought he was poor), the time Masuaku was actually suspended for, the fact we literally didn't bother renew his contract and that we have a highly rated young LB who could've filled in if need be then yea I think its a waste of a transfer and a very poor one

Yet I give praise for the freebie signing of Fredericks and the potential of Diop

Cuz1

I’m sure I stated at the time I didn’t want evra at all and if there was nobody available that was better than what we had I’d have gone without, hindsight is a wonderful thing but again imo if we hadn’t signed him would it have made to much of a difference to us

grey_til_I_dye

Champo

When did I call them a disgrace

The comment wasn't aimed directly at you.

just because I don't blindy back every decision the owners don't make doesn't assume I think they are a disgrace

Why would you?

I don't think anyone does.

secrethammersfan

If I was asked to manage a team for six months in mid-season, with the sole aim of not going down, and I had to make sure the team selection was as robust as possible, and my left back got sidelined for 6 weeks, I might look for a player I knew rather than going and spending time getting to know the players in the development squad.

billybondsbeard

grey_til_I_dye said:

Champo

When did I call them a disgrace

The comment wasn't aimed directly at you.

just because I don't blindy back every decision the owners don't make doesn't assume I think they are a disgrace

Why would you?

I don't think anyone does.

Grey
Just in case of any misunderstanding - I still think that the owners are a disgrace ;biggrin

MIAHammer

If Evra turned out to be another Zabaleta, would we still be having this conversation? It was a gamble which the board and Moyes felt we needed to make and as it turns out, it worked out - we survived.
If we hadn’t made a signing and we had gone down we’d all be saying the board and Moyes made a huge mistake.

We’re like commentators on TV. If the striker shoots and misses they say the better option is he should have passed it. When he passes and the move breaks down they say he should have had a go himself.
When he shoots and scores the commentator never says, he should have passed it.

Pearces_Left_Foot

Standard reporting Wilshere deal close 100K a week

Yeoldhammer

100k for another injury prone player. ;doh blowing the wages on a guy that will be sitting with Andy Carroll on 6 figures.

grey_til_I_dye

Last season. Wilshere made 29 starts, and played in 38 games in total, playing 2217 minutes of football.

That's not so shabby.

Cuz1

Imo Wilshere is the best English passer of a ball player we have when fit

Pearces_Left_Foot

Good news if we sign him is Shawcross is in the championship so he might get through a season unscathed

Pearces_Left_Foot

http://www.claretandhugh.info/west-ham-itk-transfer-update/

Some new names linked

baracks_a_hammer

So if everyone is fit who would Wilshere come in for (assuming his reason for not staying put is that he wants more starts)? He is not a DM?

billybondsbeard

I think that Wilshire could be a very good signing as long as a major factor of his package would be based on appearances. You dont become a bad player overnight, and he had a reasonable season just gone relatively free from injury.

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years

Pellegrini often plays with a couple AM instead of wingers,so probably LM/LAM

Without Lanzini we miss someone who is quality on the ball and can link play up from defence to attack

MrsGrey

I saw Wiltshire play quite a number of times last season (TV, not live) and was quietly impressed. I'd be quite pleased if he signed for us.


Players are always going to get injured. It's the nature of the job.

As long as he passes a thorough medical (ie no underlying issues) I don't see his past injury record as a factor.

I also like his tenacity.

steve

Would be more then happy to get him ,still in his prime .injures aside the guy is class .trouble is he would come to a club with a long history of breaking players injure wise ;biggrin

billybondsbeard

Jinxed on KUMB saying deals agreed today with/for Mawson and Fernandes ;wahoo

Adam

Wilshere’s a good replacement for Lanzini, while he’s out injured. He’s exactly what this team needs. He keeps the ball well and makes incisive passes.

Adam

billybondsbeard said:

Jinxed on KUMB saying deals agreed today with/for Mawson and Fernandes ;wahoo

That would mean we’ve spent £60m-£70m approximately. Surely we would still need a pacey attacker (haven’t seen anything of Bruno Fernandes - is he more like Lanzini than Antonio?) and maybe a DM?

I don’t see us paying big money for Mawson. I think we’ll get a cheaper CB than Mawson, having already bought Diop.

billybondsbeard

With Mawson I suppose you could factor in the Ayew transfer payments - perhaps a bit of that left over after Fabianski ??