Ins and outs

[Rich T The Biscuit 676]

Now we have published the squad for this season, what are people''s views on those that have gone and their replacements.

For the ones gone out of contract the only one I was bothered by was Ruddy but I get why he was let go.

In terms of those sold, Howson seems to have been replaced by Vrancic and he looks good plus its given Maddison a chance to shine and I think he''ll turn out to be a better player than Howson if he''s given the games, yes a slightly different player but with our new playing system I''m not sure where Howson would have played?!

As for Dorrans, I know he''s only a loan but Harrison Reed looks to be a different class to Dorrans so no loss there.

And finally Murphy, I don''t know other people''s view but I think we kept the better one of the 2, people will argue they play different wings but I doubt we''ll see "wingers" much this season and even if so Wildschut has stepped up and shown the player he actually is.

All in all for me, good window that got some money in and reduced the wage bill effectively and necessarily.

[daly 551]

£40000 plus a week for Naismith and Jarvis

[Drazen Muzinic 1,502]

A shame this board doesn''t have ins and outs.

Mainly outs though.

[Davo 0]

Rich T - I think you are right in what you are saying. I''m hoping Naismith has a new lease of life playing for DF. I think If we can get Javis out on loan, the German lad in Midfield and maybe a proven CB then I would be really happy with the summer transfer business.

When we get our injured players back I think we are stronger than last season. The mood seems better in the camp and I for one am optimistic this season.

I am confident DF will be better than AN. At least he seems to have a plan B and even C if needed!!

On the ball city

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="daly"]£40000 plus a week for Naismith and Jarvis[/quote]You''ve seen their contracts - do share.However my understanding is that players will have various clauses in their contracts that cover for the like of Jarvis''s injuries.That''s why the wages are skewed towards appearances, win bonuses etc

[king canary 8,754]

I''m confident we''ve got a better person in charge now and that is key. I''d still like to see another defender (probably right back) and there is still a lot of unknowns but the overall moves seem positive. If we can shift Jarvis and maybe Naismith we could use that money to add a couple more.

I''m excited by Reed, Vranic and Watkins and am keen to see Josh and Maddison get more first team chances. My concerns lie with the unknowns in defence but we won''t know until the season starts how they work put.

[king canary 8,754]

"You''ve seen their contracts - do share.

However my understanding is that players will have various clauses in their contracts that cover for the like of Jarvis''s injuries.

That''s why the wages are skewed towards appearances, win bonuses etc"

Seriously, I think you have a problem.

[Wishbone 8]

Not sure how reliable a source this is, but

Chris Davison‏

@c11davison

More

#AFC | I understand Norwich City are still pursuing Krystian Bielik & want him on a season long loan. Canaries may opt for other targets.

[Davo 0]

I''m personally not that interested in Krystian Bielik. He played a handful of games for Birmingham and although he was ok for them, as soon as Harry took over he only played once under him as a sub by all accounts. Surely there are better players than him we could get!

As I stated earlier, I would like to see a proven CB.

On Naismith, yes he''s probably on a lot of money but if he can perform under DF then he might be worth every penny. I am not a fan of Naismith but he''s done well over pre season and seems happier playing for DF!! Time will tell. He''s got an old head too, which I believe, we need this season to help the team along!

I do think we will see a CB/RB and maybe a forward in the next few days.

Tony Andreu Will be out the door soon too!! More money saved!

[Wishbone 8]

Although only pre season, the Arsenal fans want Bielik to be given a chance as he''s been good in the games he''s played. Apparently, they''re frustrated that Mertesacker is getting game time and is very off the pace. I don''t know much about Bielik or Clarke-Salter but it seems we''re after a young and raw player that can develop with us and isn''t a risk in wages or long-term deal.

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="king canary"]"You''ve seen their contracts - do share.

However my understanding is that players will have various clauses in their contracts that cover for the like of Jarvis''s injuries.

That''s why the wages are skewed towards appearances, win bonuses etc"

Seriously, I think you have a problem.[/quote]No thinking about it KC as he has. Strange he questions what people post with regard to contracts but then talks about how wages are made up as though he knows chapter and verse.

[Daz Sparks 1,558]

Good post Rich T, agree with the sentiments shared.

As for the piffle about injuries, the PFA supply answers I would trust over that supplied by City 1st,. ie, footballers contracts stipulate that they will be paid their full contracted wages for 18 months for a football related injury and 12 months for a non football related injury. I believe that Jarvis has not had any one injury period that has exceeded 18 months, so it can be concluded has been paid his full contract.

[Rich T The Biscuit 676]

It''s clear that Andreu is gone with no number but I suspect now it will be a loan although it''s still early so maybe a sale/free transfer isn''t out of the question.

Also expect one of the keepers to go, possibly Jones if they want McGovern to support the younger ones

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="TIL 1010"][quote user="king canary"]"You''ve seen their contracts - do share.

However my understanding is that players will have various clauses in their contracts that cover for the like of Jarvis''s injuries.

That''s why the wages are skewed towards appearances, win bonuses etc"

Seriously, I think you have a problem.[/quote]No thinking about it KC as he has. Strange he questions what people post with regard to contracts but then talks about how wages are made up as though he knows chapter and verse.[/quote]I have seen a number of contracts, albeit not at City''s level so don''t presume anything plod. And I can quote from law

''In the case of an injury sustained under club duty, the club pays for the player his basic salary for 18 months'' ie ''no appearances, win bonuses etc'' as stated

[TIL 1010 5,246]

The same old tiresome Plod routine from Diabolical Bill in his attempt yet again to be right over everything.

[Greavsy 2,645]

Maybe the wrong one did get banned!

[TIL 1010 5,246]

You really do need to get over yourself. As someone said to me only today that when they see you have posted they skip that thread which really does not leave a lot to read on here.Leave you to the last word as per usual.

[Diane 500]

[quote user="Rich T The Biscuit"]Now we have published the squad for this season, what are people''s views on those that have gone and their replacements.

For the ones gone out of contract the only one I was bothered by was Ruddy but I get why he was let go.

In terms of those sold, Howson seems to have been replaced by Vrancic and he looks good plus its given Maddison a chance to shine and I think he''ll turn out to be a better player than Howson if he''s given the games, yes a slightly different player but with our new playing system I''m not sure where Howson would have played?!

As for Dorrans, I know he''s only a loan but Harrison Reed looks to be a different class to Dorrans so no loss there.

And finally Murphy, I don''t know other people''s view but I think we kept the better one of the 2, people will argue they play different wings but I doubt we''ll see "wingers" much this season and even if so Wildschut has stepped up and shown the player he actually is.

All in all for me, good window that got some money in and reduced the wage bill effectively and necessarily.[/quote]

I agree with all that Rich, a good window so far, money in, reduced the wage bill, I still think we need another striker then I ll be happy

[Essjayess 307]

I am pretty content with the ins and outs, of much more interest to me is this season  we have a coach with a clear vision, a defined philosophy on how he wants his players to play, and come hell or high water, he will not change his approach from week to week, unlike last season when AN seemingly went from one game to the next befuddled, muddled and mixed up on knowing what to do.For sure we dont know how results will go, but for now i like DF, i like what he brings, and am prepared to be patient and see it through.

[Dorset Canary 0]

I''d rather see three new players in CB, DM & Striker with the later being the last option... We have goals in us.

Am more worried about defensive injuries/bans than up front. If we set our stool out with a hard defensive stance it could attract cards... Thoughts & opinions?

[Hairy Canary 754]

Well said Til, you have more stamina than me. The guy is utterly painful with these constant comments about contracts and then posts details himself that nobody can possibly know! I''m sure it''s just a way of derailing threads.

As far as the ins and outs are concerned and considering the money constraints we are under following the parachute payment reductions this year and next, I think we have made a really good fist of rebalancing the squad. Personally would still like to see another CB so we can play wingbacks more often than not. Will be tough to get top six I feel but nice to have some new blood and youngsters to see. Nice sense of excitement this season.

[Woodman 92]

I agree Dorset, with Klose out for a month or so, we don''t really have any back up aside from Godfrey, so an injury or suspension could prove costly.

I''d like to see 3 more: a CB, a DM (though I think we could get away without one) and an alternative type of striker. At a push, Naismith, Watkins or Josh could play there.

[Rogue Baboon 0]

I think we should still go back in for Dijks, except on a season long loan.

Think he could work brilliant in either a back 4 or back 3

[Diane 500]

I think the wages that Dijks is asking for is well beyond us

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

Don''t personally think Dijks was ''that'' good. He tended to drift out of position and was liable for a red card or three across a season.

Seems that with the manager change and a few players being sold from Ajax he is back in first team contention there. Doubt he''ll be leaving this summer, unless a Prem club comes calling.

[ZLF 335]

will add my name to the list that am not fussed about Dijks.

for LB I think we are covered with Husband, Toffolo and Lewis

So I would prefer either a dedicated left footed CB or a CB/RB option ahead of Dijks.

[Norfolk Mustard 106]

Looking at the video highlights of Norwich vs Brighton, the way the Brighton winger breezed past our new left back was concerning...

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

In fairness to Husband, for the goal he was left isloated against two Brighton players as whoever was suppose to be supporting him hadn''t come over to cover.

This is a big issue with 3 at the back and wingbacks, can be very easy for opposition teams to overload on the wings, although having 3 centre backs means that crosses into the box should generally land to a defender rather than an attacker.

[jamie 10 0]

I agree with the 3 areas that need strengthening cb, cm & st in all fairness if we get an injury in any of these positions it''s going to stretch the squad, I''m sure with all the wages that have been freed up from ruddy, bennet, bassong, malumbu, howson, dorrans all would guess that they were the higher earners at the club there should be some funds left to strengthen the squad

[Dorset Canary 0]

Out of interest does anybody know where abouts in midfield Tom Trybull plays?

That''s the one on trial with us now.

Still searching online not too much on his Wiki page