Howaythelads

If I think a player is shiite or even good but not needed, and the club signs him whilst players who I think are good who play in positions that I think need to be filled, yet are overlooked and cast aside, then of course I think its a poor signing. Its stating the obvious, its my opinion. And likewise, anyone who thinks its a good signing, or one that was needed, is just expressing their opinion, same as me. The only difference is that the opinion of the manager and chairman counts, unlike mine. But if they get it wrong, then I have the right to say that their opinion was/is shiite and that it was a mistake, as was overlooking the players we could have done with who have gone on to play well elsewhere. If they get these decisions/opinions wrong consistently, then I have the right to question their judgement and ability to do their job. If I think we should have signed Campbell, and Roeder doesnt, and we then struggle in defence for an entire season with utter shiite playing at the back for us, whilst Campbell becomes a rock for Pompey, then of course I'll think that the club made the wrong decision. So, what is the point you are trying to make? That I cant criticise the transfer dealings of Roeder because you say so? Who are you again? Thats right, a nobody on an internet forum, just like the rest of us. What you say or think means f*** all mate, so yes, I can criticise the manager or chairman for his decisions in the transfer market. Deal with it. Have to agree, should have signed a def. Should have signed another striker, tbh. Although after saying that, an experienced player who was available at a good price is never going to be a bad buy for a position occupied by a young player having his first season. They almost ALWAYS have a big dip the following season. Course, we could use Bramble there since anyone can "do a job" on the left. The point is, in the games Zog has played this season he's looked no more effective in his role than the likes of Bramble, Ramage and Babayaro etc have in their role. In other words, he's suffered the expected big dip and has looked rubbish, hopefully he'll come back strong next season. The defenders will be better when there is better team play ahead of them, I find it odd that people don't seem to realise or understand this. We have weaknesses all over the place but the main one has been playing the entire season with just one decent striker, and that striker is hardly the best team player, is he? Funny I find it odd some people don't seem to realise that having a quality left back will give us more options to keep the ball when in attack. Would also help N'Zogbia out when he has struggled. Mate, the stuff you post is very, very easy to understand. Sorry, like. Well I would think so but often some people just don't seem to get it. Stuck in another era of football I imagine. It's pretty easy to get such simplistic points of view. :fallsoverlaughing: You've never shown any understanding of the concept of team play. Ever.

O'Neill's record is no better than Souness, tbh.

This being the same Titus who looked ok in the CL when we had a decent overall team, especially in CM with a player of the calibre of Speed in there rather than shite like Parker. Not that I'm saying Bramble is great, like.

If I think a player is shiite or even good but not needed, and the club signs him whilst players who I think are good who play in positions that I think need to be filled, yet are overlooked and cast aside, then of course I think its a poor signing. Its stating the obvious, its my opinion. And likewise, anyone who thinks its a good signing, or one that was needed, is just expressing their opinion, same as me. The only difference is that the opinion of the manager and chairman counts, unlike mine. But if they get it wrong, then I have the right to say that their opinion was/is shiite and that it was a mistake, as was overlooking the players we could have done with who have gone on to play well elsewhere. If they get these decisions/opinions wrong consistently, then I have the right to question their judgement and ability to do their job. If I think we should have signed Campbell, and Roeder doesnt, and we then struggle in defence for an entire season with utter shiite playing at the back for us, whilst Campbell becomes a rock for Pompey, then of course I'll think that the club made the wrong decision. So, what is the point you are trying to make? That I cant criticise the transfer dealings of Roeder because you say so? Who are you again? Thats right, a nobody on an internet forum, just like the rest of us. What you say or think means f*** all mate, so yes, I can criticise the manager or chairman for his decisions in the transfer market. Deal with it. Have to agree, should have signed a def. Should have signed another striker, tbh. Although after saying that, an experienced player who was available at a good price is never going to be a bad buy for a position occupied by a young player having his first season. They almost ALWAYS have a big dip the following season. Course, we could use Bramble there since anyone can "do a job" on the left. The point is, in the games Zog has played this season he's looked no more effective in his role than the likes of Bramble, Ramage and Babayaro etc have in their role. In other words, he's suffered the expected big dip and has looked rubbish, hopefully he'll come back strong next season. The defenders will be better when there is better team play ahead of them, I find it odd that people don't seem to realise or understand this. We have weaknesses all over the place but the main one has been playing the entire season with just one decent striker, and that striker is hardly the best team player, is he? Funny I find it odd some people don't seem to realise that having a quality left back will give us more options to keep the ball when in attack. Would also help N'Zogbia out when he has struggled. Mate, the stuff you post is very, very easy to understand. Sorry, like.

If I think a player is shiite or even good but not needed, and the club signs him whilst players who I think are good who play in positions that I think need to be filled, yet are overlooked and cast aside, then of course I think its a poor signing. Its stating the obvious, its my opinion. And likewise, anyone who thinks its a good signing, or one that was needed, is just expressing their opinion, same as me. The only difference is that the opinion of the manager and chairman counts, unlike mine. But if they get it wrong, then I have the right to say that their opinion was/is shiite and that it was a mistake, as was overlooking the players we could have done with who have gone on to play well elsewhere. If they get these decisions/opinions wrong consistently, then I have the right to question their judgement and ability to do their job. If I think we should have signed Campbell, and Roeder doesnt, and we then struggle in defence for an entire season with utter shiite playing at the back for us, whilst Campbell becomes a rock for Pompey, then of course I'll think that the club made the wrong decision. So, what is the point you are trying to make? That I cant criticise the transfer dealings of Roeder because you say so? Who are you again? Thats right, a nobody on an internet forum, just like the rest of us. What you say or think means f*** all mate, so yes, I can criticise the manager or chairman for his decisions in the transfer market. Deal with it. Have to agree, should have signed a def. Should have signed another striker, tbh. Although after saying that, an experienced player who was available at a good price is never going to be a bad buy for a position occupied by a young player having his first season. They almost ALWAYS have a big dip the following season. Course, we could use Bramble there since anyone can "do a job" on the left. The point is, in the games Zog has played this season he's looked no more effective in his role than the likes of Bramble, Ramage and Babayaro etc have in their role. In other words, he's suffered the expected big dip and has looked rubbish, hopefully he'll come back strong next season. The defenders will be better when there is better team play ahead of them, I find it odd that people don't seem to realise or understand this. We have weaknesses all over the place but the main one has been playing the entire season with just one decent striker, and that striker is hardly the best team player, is he?

Eh, what has MON got to do with Roeder or our game against Arsenal? just making a comparison.... An obvious and well justified comparison too.

The bottom line is that we need players in all departments of the team. Watching yesterdays match should have brought it home exactly what NE5 is on about though. If it didn't, watch it again.

I was just thinking about some shite I read in another thread and then I unfortunately went to this one......

If I think a player is shiite or even good but not needed, and the club signs him whilst players who I think are good who play in positions that I think need to be filled, yet are overlooked and cast aside, then of course I think its a poor signing. Its stating the obvious, its my opinion. And likewise, anyone who thinks its a good signing, or one that was needed, is just expressing their opinion, same as me. The only difference is that the opinion of the manager and chairman counts, unlike mine. But if they get it wrong, then I have the right to say that their opinion was/is shiite and that it was a mistake, as was overlooking the players we could have done with who have gone on to play well elsewhere. If they get these decisions/opinions wrong consistently, then I have the right to question their judgement and ability to do their job. If I think we should have signed Campbell, and Roeder doesnt, and we then struggle in defence for an entire season with utter shiite playing at the back for us, whilst Campbell becomes a rock for Pompey, then of course I'll think that the club made the wrong decision. So, what is the point you are trying to make? That I cant criticise the transfer dealings of Roeder because you say so? Who are you again? Thats right, a nobody on an internet forum, just like the rest of us. What you say or think means f*** all mate, so yes, I can criticise the manager or chairman for his decisions in the transfer market. Deal with it. That you should pack in the use of words like "idiot" and "retard" when you don't agree with somebody. Thought it was obvious, tbh. Criticism is ok and can stimulate debate, total s**** like the majority of your posts just makes me laugh. So your point of "It's a shame you're so arrogant that you believe the club signing anyone other than players YOU think they should sign makes it a poor signing" is actually "please dont call anyone a retard or an idiot". Hard to call you anything else when you display that sort of logic behind your posts. Although I still wont. And please point out where I called anyone a retard or an idiot. If you mean the previous post, then clearly you missed the sarcasm, because the point of it was that I was mimicing you. Except I don't go around on here calling people retards. Unlike some. As I said, just look in the mirror sonny. You really do post some shite and your efforts in this thread are no exception.

probably the same reason he's been sat with him loads of times since he left

Yet we have NO good left backs and (at a stretch) ONE quality centre back. Yeah left wing is certainly what we needed. In regards to players fitting in, Dyer and Milner play a hell of a lot better on the left wing than any of our defenders play at left back. We DID need someone for the left and a player became available. Nowhere near as much as we DID need a centre back or a left back and players became available. Sadly Jon, it appears you still think a defender would prevent us from being dominted by teams such as Wigan, Smoggies, Charlton, Fulham, and Man City as has happened lately. If you can't dictate the game against teams like this, then you are in trouble and only better quality footballers who can pass and move in forward areas change this. Left backs don't pass and move the ball forward? I suppose you think left back wasn't one of the main reasons we lost to AZ aswell? We tend to have f*** all going down the left wing because there isn't anyone good enough to support Duff, do you not see why this could be part of our issue when it comes to retaining possesion in the oppositions half? Aye, it was great seeing Duff destroy AZ, whilst Huntington pocketed the AZ right winger and Antoine Sibierski came off the bench to show his class and grab a brace. Only an idiot would think that signing Duff was a mistake, and youd have to be retarded to think that we needed a left back or another forward more than we did Duff. We're on the verge of UEFA Cup glory and qualifying for an automatic UEFA spot because the squad we built has been more thang good enough, clearly some people need to get some perspective. Tough guy stuff. How unusual from you. You can only sign players who are available and who want to join your club. I didn't want the club to sign Duff, I wanted the club to sign another striker because that's where we're really lacking imo. However, as I've said to your and your mate before, the fact the club didn't sign another player for an area of the team I wanted to see strengthened doesn't make Duff a poor signing. It's a shame you're so arrogant that you believe the club signing anyone other than players YOU think they should sign makes it a poor signing. You're right that some people need to get some perspective, look no further than the mirror. Other players were available though but you will continue to make excuses so there is no point in trying to debate this any further.. Care to show me these excuses you refer to? Telling me you havent used the "Campbell wanted to go to Portsmouth, really wanted to work with Redknapp bla bla bla" excuse? Err, aye. That's exactly an example of something I've never said nor had I even thought about it. Despite the doubts about him I'd probably have tried to sign Campbell, tbh. Anyway, rather than debating properly just keep making stuff up mate.

Yet we have NO good left backs and (at a stretch) ONE quality centre back. Yeah left wing is certainly what we needed. In regards to players fitting in, Dyer and Milner play a hell of a lot better on the left wing than any of our defenders play at left back. We DID need someone for the left and a player became available. Nowhere near as much as we DID need a centre back or a left back and players became available. Sadly Jon, it appears you still think a defender would prevent us from being dominted by teams such as Wigan, Smoggies, Charlton, Fulham, and Man City as has happened lately. If you can't dictate the game against teams like this, then you are in trouble and only better quality footballers who can pass and move in forward areas change this. Left backs don't pass and move the ball forward? I suppose you think left back wasn't one of the main reasons we lost to AZ aswell? We tend to have f*** all going down the left wing because there isn't anyone good enough to support Duff, do you not see why this could be part of our issue when it comes to retaining possesion in the oppositions half? Aye, it was great seeing Duff destroy AZ, whilst Huntington pocketed the AZ right winger and Antoine Sibierski came off the bench to show his class and grab a brace. Only an idiot would think that signing Duff was a mistake, and youd have to be retarded to think that we needed a left back or another forward more than we did Duff. We're on the verge of UEFA Cup glory and qualifying for an automatic UEFA spot because the squad we built has been more thang good enough, clearly some people need to get some perspective. Tough guy stuff. How unusual from you. You can only sign players who are available and who want to join your club. I didn't want the club to sign Duff, I wanted the club to sign another striker because that's where we're really lacking imo. However, as I've said to your and your mate before, the fact the club didn't sign another player for an area of the team I wanted to see strengthened doesn't make Duff a poor signing. It's a shame you're so arrogant that you believe the club signing anyone other than players YOU think they should sign makes it a poor signing. You're right that some people need to get some perspective, look no further than the mirror. Other players were available though but you will continue to make excuses so there is no point in trying to debate this any further.. Care to show me these excuses you refer to?

If I think a player is shiite or even good but not needed, and the club signs him whilst players who I think are good who play in positions that I think need to be filled, yet are overlooked and cast aside, then of course I think its a poor signing. Its stating the obvious, its my opinion. And likewise, anyone who thinks its a good signing, or one that was needed, is just expressing their opinion, same as me. The only difference is that the opinion of the manager and chairman counts, unlike mine. But if they get it wrong, then I have the right to say that their opinion was/is shiite and that it was a mistake, as was overlooking the players we could have done with who have gone on to play well elsewhere. If they get these decisions/opinions wrong consistently, then I have the right to question their judgement and ability to do their job. If I think we should have signed Campbell, and Roeder doesnt, and we then struggle in defence for an entire season with utter shiite playing at the back for us, whilst Campbell becomes a rock for Pompey, then of course I'll think that the club made the wrong decision. So, what is the point you are trying to make? That I cant criticise the transfer dealings of Roeder because you say so? Who are you again? Thats right, a nobody on an internet forum, just like the rest of us. What you say or think means f*** all mate, so yes, I can criticise the manager or chairman for his decisions in the transfer market. Deal with it. That you should pack in the use of words like "idiot" and "retard" when you don't agree with somebody. Thought it was obvious, tbh. Criticism is ok and can stimulate debate, total shite like the majority of your posts just makes me laugh.

Yet we have NO good left backs and (at a stretch) ONE quality centre back. Yeah left wing is certainly what we needed. In regards to players fitting in, Dyer and Milner play a hell of a lot better on the left wing than any of our defenders play at left back. We DID need someone for the left and a player became available. Nowhere near as much as we DID need a centre back or a left back and players became available. Sadly Jon, it appears you still think a defender would prevent us from being dominted by teams such as Wigan, Smoggies, Charlton, Fulham, and Man City as has happened lately. If you can't dictate the game against teams like this, then you are in trouble and only better quality footballers who can pass and move in forward areas change this. Left backs don't pass and move the ball forward? I suppose you think left back wasn't one of the main reasons we lost to AZ aswell? We tend to have f*** all going down the left wing because there isn't anyone good enough to support Duff, do you not see why this could be part of our issue when it comes to retaining possesion in the oppositions half? Aye, it was great seeing Duff destroy AZ, whilst Huntington pocketed the AZ right winger and Antoine Sibierski came off the bench to show his class and grab a brace. Only an idiot would think that signing Duff was a mistake, and youd have to be retarded to think that we needed a left back or another forward more than we did Duff. We're on the verge of UEFA Cup glory and qualifying for an automatic UEFA spot because the squad we built has been more thang good enough, clearly some people need to get some perspective. Tough guy stuff. How unusual from you. You can only sign players who are available and who want to join your club. I didn't want the club to sign Duff, I wanted the club to sign another striker because that's where we're really lacking imo. However, as I've said to your and your mate before, the fact the club didn't sign another player for an area of the team I wanted to see strengthened doesn't make Duff a poor signing. It's a shame you're so arrogant that you believe the club signing anyone other than players YOU think they should sign makes it a poor signing. You're right that some people need to get some perspective, look no further than the mirror.

Yet we have NO good left backs and (at a stretch) ONE quality centre back. Yeah left wing is certainly what we needed. In regards to players fitting in, Dyer and Milner play a hell of a lot better on the left wing than any of our defenders play at left back. We DID need someone for the left and a player became available.

Zog has had one good season where he showed potential, he's then struggled as predicted before the season started and this is normal for a young player. Despite it being easy enough to predict a possible slump by Zog it was clearly a stupid decision to buy an experienced player for a problem area like the left side of midfield even though such a player became available at a bargain fee. Let's face it, we have any number of players who can play that position effectively, such as Milner, Dyer, Ameobi, Emre, Parker, Sibierski and probably Bramble and Carr, given that any player can just slot in there and be good enough.

The fact he's unable to antiticpate danger hence the number of times he has to throw himself into a challenge is poor, hence his tackling, while appearing to be "all action", is quite poor. His range of passing is too slow and is also poor. He's just a shit to average footballer who had one good season at Charlton.

You sound very confident. Good job Martins has remained fit.

The form right now is s****, so until we're mathematically safe it remains a possibility no matter how unlikely. There are a lot of teams that would have to win matches to drag us down that number of places. For my money we've been showing relegation form performance wise for ages now, however, we had that run around November and December time when we won some matches that we didn't really deserve to win, results that had we been supporting the opposition we'd have felt hard done by so for me it's a genuine belief that we fluked a lot of the points we currently have on the board, the performances have never really been convincing for ages now. What's changed recently is that as well as s**** performances we're now getting the results we deserve and it can't be ignored. It's all well and good thinking we won't lose the rest of our games, but losing the next 2 puts us well in the mix and then the nerves will kick in, the confidence will drop even more and the performances will become even worse. It's not impossible. In my opinion I don't think we'll finish any higher than we are right now and it's more likely we'll drop a few places than go up a few. Frankly, I'll settle for 2 draws in the next 2 games and that will be enough to see us safe I reckon.

There's every resemblance to the principle you're on about. Rather than buying players and hoping to sell them for profit, we should be buying players hoping to get the best out of them to lift us as a club. It seems there's more failures than successes if you're judging transfers by this criteria. We bought Lee, Beardsley, Shearer etc for decent fees, got the best out of them, and let them leave for pretty much nothing. That's a successful transfer. Robert fits the bill too, helped transform us into a Champion's League side, and he's left the club and plummeted off the scene, ending up an overweight charicature barely making Levante's bench. While those are successful transfers, there's been even more failed transfers over the past 8-10 years. The issue is how management utilises the talents of players after we buy them. The above players left for little or nowt after succeeding. The likes of Cort, Bramble, Viana, Luque, Marcelino etc, have been failures because for whatever reason we've not realised their potential. In the case of Bellamy, the reason we haven't got the best out of him but rather let him leave for less than he was worth was down to gross mismanagement. He was looking one of our best purchases of recent times up until Souness came, and instead he's doing the business elsewhere, which is exactly what shouldn't have happened. Still think you're on a different tack. I believe the club now tries to do the bit I put in bold, they haven't always. Are you suggesting that when signing players this isn't the motivation of the club? Whether individual players make it or not and why they fail when they don't make it is another subject in my opinion.

Some people said from day one that Souness and Bellamy was a disaster waiting to happen, end of the day its the board who appointed Souness so they have to take some of the blame. Chomp! Chomp! (If this thread now turns into one about the Board I know you will accept the blame for it.) Anyway, all I have to say in response to this is that the people who thought this were not you or your chums from toonspastic, in fact many of you toonspastic types would hear none of it because Souness had to be backed and given time to build his own team before being judged, etc etc etc.........

Yes, agree with that.

I see. You're over my head then, 'cos what you're saying doesn't seem to me to bear any resemblance to the principle I'm on about. There is no similarity between the points you're making in relation to the way players such as Bellamy, Viana and Cort were bought and sold compared with players like Rob Lee and Warren Barton, to mention just two examples. Laurent Robert is a poor example because he wasn't past his best when he was sold, he was alienated by a shit manager and switched off. What I'd be interested in is whether people see selling a player for profit as some kind of measure of the ability of the Board.

How often have we done that, spent a good amount on a player then let them leave for a small fee or nothing after they have peaked? Robert, Shearer are two that spring to mind. however i can think of more examples where we've bought players who have not yet reached their peak and failed to develop them/mishandled them - Bellamy, Viana, Bramble, Dyer, Cort and so on. Robert and Bellamy were booted out by Souness and can't be considered in this scenario for that reason. Cort was never fit, Viana never established himself in this league, Dyer is still at the club and so is Bramble. I would consider Robert a success in so far as we got his best years out of him, improving the team significantly while he was here. Bellamy though is exactly what we should be considering, as a prime example of how the club is mismanaging its players - a player finally realising his potential, only to be horrendously mismanaged. we sold him for less than his worth because of this, and he's went on to flourish even more at other clubs. Cort and Viana also fit the bill, both players we've spent a lot of money on and for whatever reason haven't reached their potential at this club. In this case the mismanagement may well have started before we even bought them, failing to properly scout and assess the suitability of these players. Dyer and Bramble likewise. agree but i was more thinking about the past 10 years. I think you're on a different subject altogether. The thread is about making a profit when selling players on and I'm contesting that this isn't what we should be doing by pointing out what an ambitious club should be aiming to do, which is selling players for less having got the best years from them.

How often have we done that, spent a good amount on a player then let them leave for a small fee or nothing after they have peaked? Robert, Shearer are two that spring to mind. however i can think of more examples where we've bought players who have not yet reached their peak and failed to develop them/mishandled them - Bellamy, Viana, Bramble, Dyer, Cort and so on. Robert and Bellamy were booted out by Souness and can't be considered in this scenario for that reason. Cort was never fit, Viana never established himself in this league, Dyer is still at the club and so is Bramble. There are a few from Keegan's team that might qualify, such as Beardsley, Lee, Barton, Beresford, Peacock and Albert who all spring to mind. All bar Beresford were sold for relatively small fees having done well for us and were all past their best. It's certain that had the club decided to perhaps part with Rob Lee at his peak they would have made a profit, as NE5 points out this is something the club regularly did in the past but nobody should want to see that kind of thing now.