Proof that "the model" is sustainable!

[Badger 2,418]

39 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Totally agree if that is the case Badger, where have you seen this suggestion. Plenty of suggestions on here, and I guess other socal media platform, and these will continue until something official / substantial is issued. 

Also, if someone close to him is suffering from a terminal health issue, which is stopping him training, and hence getting picked for the first team, then surely that should also put a stop to his trips to NFL, London restaurants and the like, as posted on his social media. I know it would me. His post with his dog also seem quite upbeat too. 

There was a thread on here, but I think it got pulled - I have no idea if it is true. The link refers to it.

 

 

[Greavsy 2,475]

1 minute ago, Badger said:

There was a thread on here, but I think it got pulled - I have no idea if it is true. The link refers to it.

 

 

So just further speculation, in the absence of anything substantial being released by the club or player. 

Appreciate the reply Badger. 👍 

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,899]

27 minutes ago, Badger said:

No, not at all as you know I didn't say that, but you are trying to justify yourself by inventing what I said to make your point seem less silly. 

I guess the proof is in the pudding as they say. How are you liking what you've been served up this year? Taste good? Would adding a hint of Emi made it taste a little better? Maybe a Badger's taste buds are different to the rest of us commoners.

Maybe Webber made a mistake? 🎶He is only human after all.🎶 RIDICULOUS! SELL SELL SELL!  🎶There's no other way. There's no other way. All that we can do is cry and watch them play.🎶

What a minute...do Badgers make mistakes? Are all Badgers pompous? Are all Badgers black and white? Are some a bit grey? SH*T THE BED! I've had an epiphany! It might just be wind though.

OTBC

[Badger 2,418]

2 minutes ago, Disco Dales Jockstrap said:

I guess the proof is in the pudding as they say. How are you liking what you've been served up this year? Taste good? Would adding a hint of Emi made it taste a little better? Maybe a Badger's taste buds are different to the rest of us commoners.

Maybe Webber made a mistake? 🎶He is only human after all.🎶 RIDICULOUS! SELL SELL SELL!  🎶There's no other way. There's no other way. All that we can do is cry and watch them play.🎶

What a minute...do Badgers make mistakes? Are all Badgers pompous? Are all Badgers black and white? Are some a bit grey? SH*T THE BED! I've had an epiphany! It might just be wind though.

OTBC

🤔 I take it that you are no longer interested in debating the facts then... I wonder why?

[Kenny Foggo 1,122]

1 hour ago, Badger said:

Is this a "football issue?" Somebody suggested that there was a terminal health issue within his family (in which case not our business).

In which case you must have been appalled as Farke's public criticism and the fact that Cantwell has been to the American Football, a West End restaurant the day before training for Chelsea and played at Kings Lynn. 

Deary me...

Edited October 28, 2021 by Kenny Foggo

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,899]

Just now, Badger said:

🤔 I take it that you are no longer interested in debating the facts then... I wonder why?

That's a very shoddy response Badger; I asked you several questions, you avoid the answers. Now that's a fact. Poor form; I'll make a note of that.

I thought we were dealing in opinions anyway? What facts were you after? I can reel some off if you'd like? I'm now going to clean out the fridge but I'll be sure to take your points on board when I return. Please ensure you respond in full. No half measures. 

OTBC

[Kenny Foggo 1,122]

11 minutes ago, Badger said:

🤔 I take it that you are no longer interested in debating the facts then... I wonder why?

Facts.

This season will only be a success if we perform better than last time in this division. As you point out, we have spent more that ever before.

Webber will only have completed his brief / job, if the team is stronger than at the beginning of the season. It's his players that were scouted, his picks his sanctions.

No talk, no fist pumping, no having a go at the fans... just the performance of the 1st team. I hope Webber is successful and as good as he things he is. Lots to prove yet.

Long way to go... all things croosed.

OTBC

 

[Badger 2,418]

10 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Facts.

This season will only be a success if we perform better than last time in this division. As you point out, we have spent more that ever before.

Webber will only have completed his brief / job, if the team is stronger than at the beginning of the season. It's his players that were scouted, his picks his sanctions.

No talk, no fist pumping, no having a go at the fans... just the performance of the 1st team. I hope Webber is successful and as good as he things he is. Lots to prove yet.

Long way to go... all things croosed.

OTBC

 

Yes - I agree with all of that.

OTBC

[MrBunce 245]

One concern I have is that, whilst in a footballing sense Webber's transfers have been successful, on a financial level they have not been as successful. 

Buendia is the first and only (as far as I can recall) player Webber has bought and sold for a significant profit. Many other transfers: Krul, Pukki, Hanley, Vrancic, Stiepermann, Hernandez etc. have been successful on the pitch but have either left for no financial return or are not going to net us much when they leave. 

Almost all the big money sales we've made have been players already at the club when Webber arrived (Spring 2017) or youth players. 

By (perhaps unfair comparison) since Summer 2017, Brentford have bought AND sold Watkins, Benrahma, Maupay and Konza for a collective c.83m (according to transfermarkt... I appreciate one must take those figures with caution). This excludes a host of other players Brentford brought in before 2017 (Bentley, Sawyers, Egan etc.).

Obviously Brentford have been one of, if not the most, successful operators in the transfer market and they don't invest into an academy unlike us. But I can't help but feel that Webber's recording in the collective process of buying and selling players leaves something to be desired. 

I look at our current squad and the players with the highest sales values are probably Aarons and Cantwell - two further academy players here before Webber. I'm not sure where the next big windfall is coming from. Certainly the players over the two summers windows prior to this one have been underwhelming. Perhaps some (or all) of this window's business will move on for big money (though that is hard to see at the moment).

[Badger 2,418]

18 minutes ago, Disco Dales Jockstrap said:

That's a very shoddy response Badger; I asked you several questions, you avoid the answers. Now that's a fact. Poor form; I'll make a note of that.

I thought we were dealing in opinions anyway? What facts were you after? I can reel some off if you'd like? I'm now going to clean out the fridge but I'll be sure to take your points on board when I return. Please ensure you respond in full. No half measures. 

OTBC

I answered all of your questions until you started to get silly.

e.g. "Maybe a Badger's taste buds are different to the rest of us commoners."

Edited October 28, 2021 by Badger

[chicken 2,698]

15 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Brentford who are playing in the same league as ourselves and have a plus goal difference compared to our cheeky minus 21. 

The point seems to have sailed over you head there.

No one is dismissing that they are doing better than us. In fact, that has nothing to do with my point at all.

[chicken 2,698]

7 minutes ago, MrBunce said:

One concern I have is that, whilst in a footballing sense Webber's transfers have been successful, on a financial level they have not been as successful. 

Buendia is the first and only (as far as I can recall) player Webber has bought and sold for a significant profit. Many other transfers: Krul, Pukki, Hanley, Vrancic, Stiepermann, Hernandez etc. have been successful on the pitch but have either left for no financial return or are not going to net us much when they leave. 

Almost all the big money sales we've made have been players already at the club when Webber arrived (Spring 2017) or youth players. 

By (perhaps unfair comparison) since Summer 2017, Brentford have bought AND sold Watkins, Benrahma, Maupay and Konza for a collective c.83m (according to transfermarkt... I appreciate one must take those figures with caution). This excludes a host of other players Brentford brought in before 2017 (Bentley, Sawyers, Egan etc.).

Obviously Brentford have been one of, if not the most, successful operators in the transfer market and they don't invest into an academy unlike us. But I can't help but feel that Webber's recording in the collective process of buying and selling players leaves something to be desired. 

I look at our current squad and the players with the highest sales values are probably Aarons and Cantwell - two further academy players here before Webber. I'm not sure where the next big windfall is coming from. Certainly the players over the two summers windows prior to this one have been underwhelming. Perhaps some (or all) of this window's business will move on for big money (though that is hard to see at the moment).

I think this is more than a little disingenuous. You mention the academy but quickly move on from it.

Arguably we have invested in our system as much as any one player, and that system includes the academy. The last player to come through to the first team from the academy and do so on a regular basis to make a genuine impact was arguably Chris Martin.

The likes of Josh Murphy had made his debut before Farke arrived but I think it is fair to say that Webber brought in a new club philosophy. Alex Neil was not prepared to give Maddison game time. The same can be said of Godfrey. Aarons and Lewis were nowhere close to the first team set up. Josh Martin was brought in during their time and there are others. It is only fair to credit Webber and Farke for making those players worth money by bringing them through to the first team set up, giving them game time and coaching them to a point where premier league teams believe they are capable at that level.

Other players like Stiepermann and Vrancic were not signed to make a profit, but to be good pros for the younger players to learn from. I believe both were 27/28 when we signed them. In other words, in their prime and to be ready to play more or less straight away. Same with Pukki and Krul.

In the same way Brentford didn't sign Pontus Jansson to be sold on for a profit. 

[Midlands Yellow 4,131]

24 minutes ago, chicken said:

The point seems to have sailed over you head there.

No one is dismissing that they are doing better than us. In fact, that has nothing to do with my point at all.

Thanks Chicken. 

[BigFish 1,997]

6 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

As a lower Premier Club - if I had a Sarr, a Zaha. a Saint-Maximin - do I spend £50m on several better-than-my-current-average players or do I keep my weapons?

What do such people do?

Parma 

Well @Parma Ham's gone mouldy I am not sure this makes your point very well. Watford got relegated, Palace sold Zaha to United for £10m when the opportunity arrose (I know, but I am making a point) and the Toon sit one place above City with only two more points. 😉

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,899]

38 minutes ago, Badger said:

I answered all of your questions until you started to get silly.

e.g. "Maybe a Badger's taste buds are different to the rest of us commoners."

I was only tickling your furry balls a little; you're a very serious Badger. 

I love Badgers really. I've got 8 of them in my living room - no joke! A cuddly toy, a plate, as well as several ornaments. They're my favourite wild animal; you'd feel right at home on my mantle piece.

OTBC

[MrBunce 245]

39 minutes ago, chicken said:

I think this is more than a little disingenuous. You mention the academy but quickly move on from it.

Arguably we have invested in our system as much as any one player, and that system includes the academy. The last player to come through to the first team from the academy and do so on a regular basis to make a genuine impact was arguably Chris Martin.

The likes of Josh Murphy had made his debut before Farke arrived but I think it is fair to say that Webber brought in a new club philosophy. Alex Neil was not prepared to give Maddison game time. The same can be said of Godfrey. Aarons and Lewis were nowhere close to the first team set up. Josh Martin was brought in during their time and there are others. It is only fair to credit Webber and Farke for making those players worth money by bringing them through to the first team set up, giving them game time and coaching them to a point where premier league teams believe they are capable at that level.

Other players like Stiepermann and Vrancic were not signed to make a profit, but to be good pros for the younger players to learn from. I believe both were 27/28 when we signed them. In other words, in their prime and to be ready to play more or less straight away. Same with Pukki and Krul.

In the same way Brentford didn't sign Pontus Jansson to be sold on for a profit. 

I don't think I'm being disingenuous at all. I was focusing on Webber's business in the transfer market and specifically in financial terms (in performance terms the record speaks for itself). We've done very well with bringing through academy players over the past 4 or so years and that will be a bedrock for us and our sustainable model. I think we have high hopes for Omobamidele and Idah. Josh Martin and Omotoye have also impressed but have been somewhat unfortunate with their loans. I'm not worried about us bringing through academy players. 

What I'm getting at is this: buying players and selling them for a profit is also a key part of us being sustainable. Webber and the club have said as much. The Buendia business was excellent. But so far, over the last 4 years it's the only bit of business. I don't think it is a fluke and I hope there will be more. But unlike with all the examples you gave, we don't have a track record for intensifying talent, buying it and making a profit on it. I gave an example of a club who has, Brentford. I hope we can emulate that. 

But hopefully you can understand why, at this moment in time, I have some concerns about that. 

Edited October 28, 2021 by MrBunce

[BigFish 1,997]

3 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

@PurpleCanary This was the market strategy I referred to. The number of years in the Premier - which is a statement of fact that I accept of course - is thus a non-sequitur in relation to the binary choice of whether you do or don’t  keep your relative weapons. 

The players of any of the clubs you refer to are on average ‘weaker’ than better clubs. They have ‘unhappy’ players, players in demand from United rather than Everton and so forth. 

The issue is therefore how you achieve your relative objectives (winning the champions league, buying great players who play superbly every week, mostly play well, hurt teams enough to win points)

We needed enough points for around 10 wins or so. Not 40 wins. We therefore can ‘afford’ to focus on players who are sometimes good enough to hurt opposition teams to win some games, sometimes. Not all the time. 

We calculated and chose to raise the average level across the squad. In my view, from ‘a long way not good enough on average’ to simply ‘not good enough in average’

To achieve this we sold out occasional winning points weapon (Emi) and sold out our corollary half-weapon (Pukki). These were our prove. occasional points winner chances. 

As a coach, I look at our new, better-average-than-we-were team / squad, and there is nothing much that jacked me change my own blueprint. Thus I am free to ‘go at’ Norwich more than I normally would against other sides. So we have to defend more. So we make more mistakes. So we lose more.

This was a choice. A deliberate one. It was quite an aggressive strategy. Perhaps the resale value of the assets we bought will rise over time and provide the necessary sustenance to maintain the ‘no overdraft’ financial model. 

Any model is typically sold on dreams of the top tier though, isn’t it? So it can’t completely write out competing from it’s strategy document. It did for one year already don’t forget. All admitted that was a painful necessity to allow competition next time. 

This season is a watershed. It is the top level test. Nobody denied it. It is on trial. How hard will Dimi and Ben Gibson work for you next year in the Chsmpionship? What dream will sell to the next Tzolis. 

This is competitive top level football. This is the life we have chosen.

Parma 

If we had kept Buendia, with his hip injury and international call ups would we be any better off right now. He has one goal and no assists in a mid-table side. It would be a stretch if he could have improved that in a team struggling at the bottom. One season's weapon can quickly become another season's overhead. Such is football.

[PurpleCanary 5,620]

4 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

@PurpleCanary This was the market strategy I referred to. The number of years in the Premier - which is a statement of fact that I accept of course - is thus a non-sequitur in relation to the binary choice of whether you do or don’t  keep your relative weapons. 

The players of any of the clubs you refer to are on average ‘weaker’ than better clubs. They have ‘unhappy’ players, players in demand from United rather than Everton and so forth. 

The issue is therefore how you achieve your relative objectives (winning the champions league, buying great players who play superbly every week, mostly play well, hurt teams enough to win points)

We needed enough points for around 10 wins or so. Not 40 wins. We therefore can ‘afford’ to focus on players who are sometimes good enough to hurt opposition teams to win some games, sometimes. Not all the time. 

We calculated and chose to raise the average level across the squad. In my view, from ‘a long way not good enough on average’ to simply ‘not good enough in average’

To achieve this we sold out occasional winning points weapon (Emi) and sold out our corollary half-weapon (Pukki). These were our prove. occasional points winner chances. 

As a coach, I look at our new, better-average-than-we-were team / squad, and there is nothing much that jacked me change my own blueprint. Thus I am free to ‘go at’ Norwich more than I normally would against other sides. So we have to defend more. So we make more mistakes. So we lose more.

This was a choice. A deliberate one. It was quite an aggressive strategy. Perhaps the resale value of the assets we bought will rise over time and provide the necessary sustenance to maintain the ‘no overdraft’ financial model. 

Any model is typically sold on dreams of the top tier though, isn’t it? So it can’t completely write out competing from it’s strategy document. It did for one year already don’t forget. All admitted that was a painful necessity to allow competition next time. 

This season is a watershed. It is the top level test. Nobody denied it. It is on trial. How hard will Dimi and Ben Gibson work for you next year in the Chsmpionship? What dream will sell to the next Tzolis. 

This is competitive top level football. This is the life we have chosen.

Parma 

Parma, I understand the argument. My point is that while the other teams you mentioned could hold onto their weapon players, because they had reasonable squads that didn't need that much improving, at least in the crucial sense of your argument that they were able to make the calculation that keeping the weapon was worth more than the potential additions, we could not do likewise because of the gaping holes in the squad.

According to the EDP we had £15m to spend without selling anyone, with anyone in effect being Buendia. Bailey apparently talked about £20m-£30m. Say it was as much as £25m. Buy a mid-20s player with EPL experience able to play nearly as well in the EPL as Skipp did in the Championship, and that is the transfer budget used up.

A few loan deals are possible even though they cost, and you have a spine of the team something like this:

A perhaps showing his age Krul, McGovern, Badern.

Gibson (and that is only if he and Giannoulis were not included in this season's supposed budget), Hanley and Omabamidele.

A Pukki who does look like he is ageing, Hugill and Idah.

Hernandez as the one winger, who is clearly not near EPL class.

Get the normal run of injuries and suspensions and we would be scr*wed.

Edited October 28, 2021 by PurpleCanary

[Badger 2,418]

1 hour ago, Disco Dales Jockstrap said:

I was only tickling your furry balls a little; you're a very serious Badger. 

I love Badgers really. I've got 8 of them in my living room - no joke! A cuddly toy, a plate, as well as several ornaments. They're my favourite wild animal; you'd feel right at home on my mantle piece.

OTBC

It's Badger Ale actually - I couldn't think of a name when I first joined - it was the first thing that came to mind, as indeed it was in your case, although I can't remember the full story that you told me a couple of months ago. I recall your sister was part of it?

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,260]

2 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

Parma, I understand the argument. My point is that while the other teams you mentioned could hold onto their weapon players, because they had reasonable squads that didn't need that much improving, at least in the crucial sense of your argument that they were able to make the calculation that keeping the weapon was worth more than the potential additions, we could not do likewise because of the gaping holes in the squad.

According to the EDP we had £15m to spend without selling anyone, with anyone in effect being Buendia. Bailey apparently talked about £20m-£30m. Say it was as much as £25m. Buy a mid-20s player with EPL experience able to play nearly as well in the EPL as Skipp did in the Championship, and that is the transfer budget used up.

A few loan deals are possible even though they cost, and you have a spine of the team something like this:

A perhaps showing his age Krul, McGovern, Badern.

Gibson, Hanley and Omabamidele.

A Pukki who does look like he is ageing, Hugill and Idah.

Hernandez as the one winger, who is clearly not near EPL class.

As you say we’ll have to agree to disagree. 

Weapons are always key at the top level. There is any amount of evidence that this is true in the relative strategies of our competition. 

I did not believe that upgrading Gibson and Giannoulis after 6 months was ‘crucial’.

I believed keeping the few weapons we had was key and the rest would have to step up. Which is why they fought so hard to get promoted and prove themselves after all. 

To make the point even more clearly Webber himself said that we were intending ‘to improve the first eleven’ rather than spreading our resources thinly across 20 players, which is a strategy only the really rich can employ - not least because keeping that many top level players happy is very difficult. 

At some point we decided we would not , or could not do this. We sold Buendia upon promotion. I don’t think many fans could definitely pick our best eleven this season. Nor would they hate our second eleven. 

As my father wisely says about business ‘you can make any decision you like, you just have to accept the cost’ 

Webber himself did not originally endorse the strategy we subsequently embarked on. 

Two of our major, record signings were wingers. Few clubs - even at the top level - play with wingers. For a team destined to mostly defend, it is an odd approach. 4411 with a Pukki at 9 and a Buendia at 10 would already be enough for a weaker Italian side. The rest compact and functional. 

None of this is hindsight. As @Petriix pointed out, I commended our ‘build for tomorrow’ defensive resilience strategy during our ascent to the premier. We deliberately DIDN’T beat teams 5-0, we trained for tomorrow. Good management. Good planning. 

It has nothing to do with how long we are, were or were not in the Premier. We chose the route we have taken. It hasn’t worked. I don’t think any studious coach thought it would or could at this level. Any analyst of our form, points, pattern of play over the last 18 months without Buendia (and Buendia plus Pukki) would  have trembled at any attempt to broaden the skill base by trading the peaks.

It was the peaks that brought the success. Such weapons are not easily replaceable. We made a choice. We wanted to be different. We got a bit heady on ‘change’ and self-blindness made us justify a rather suicidal move.

Parma 

Edited October 28, 2021 by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

[Ken Hairy 3,813]

On 27/10/2021 at 12:08, yellow_belly said:

 

Perhaps you think it is ok to max your credit card, declare yourself bankrupt and expect others to pick up your bill?! That would explain your faulty  moral compass.

My missus sister did that years ago, I couldn't believe how easy it was for her relatively soon after declaring bankruptcy it was for her to get credit again. Off topic I realise 😁

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

What these accounts prove is that we have to sell players to break even. 

The model works until we run out of players that bigger teams want. 

[chicken 2,698]

6 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Thanks Chicken. 

No probs.

The fact they are doing better than us bears no correlation to allegedly some Brentford fans saying that Ajer is the best defender they have seen play for them in modern times.

It was more to do with that until pretty recently their level wasn't even in the Championship and they haven't ever played in the premier league. So shock horror, they fork out £15m rising to £20m for a defender and he's a hit. I mean, until then who was their best? Pontus Jansson?

It's all relative. 

And so you see, where they are in the league has no impact on that statement. It doesn't. 

[Midlands Yellow 4,131]

2 hours ago, chicken said:

No probs.

The fact they are doing better than us bears no correlation to allegedly some Brentford fans saying that Ajer is the best defender they have seen play for them in modern times.

It was more to do with that until pretty recently their level wasn't even in the Championship and they haven't ever played in the premier league. So shock horror, they fork out £15m rising to £20m for a defender and he's a hit. I mean, until then who was their best? Pontus Jansson?

It's all relative. 

And so you see, where they are in the league has no impact on that statement. It doesn't. 

I wish some of our big money signings were a hit already. 

[chicken 2,698]

17 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

I wish some of our big money signings were a hit already. 

We've still not yet paid more than £10m for a player. Without sounding overly harsh, £10m is a gamble at premier league level. It's big money for us. But a number of Championship sides have splashed out £10m on players now - and not all of those paid off either.

Some players just don't come good off the bat. Ajer was a safer bet because he had played in Scotland and we know the transition hasn't been that difficult for players coming from that direction before. We have had a number of players from there. Hoolahan started off in Scotland after leaving Ireland.

We went for Kabak who had some experience but very little game time (and little pre season) since April. A lot of folks put a heavy expectation on Omobamidele who himself had only played a handful of first team games before the summer.

As others have said, perhaps the biggest risk is that these players needed time, and that is something you don't get in the premier league.

[Badger 2,418]

On 28/10/2021 at 14:51, MrBunce said:

One concern I have is that, whilst in a footballing sense Webber's transfers have been successful, on a financial level they have not been as successful. 

Buendia is the first and only (as far as I can recall) player Webber has bought and sold for a significant profit. Many other transfers: Krul, Pukki, Hanley, Vrancic, Stiepermann, Hernandez etc. have been successful on the pitch but have either left for no financial return or are not going to net us much when they leave. 

Almost all the big money sales we've made have been players already at the club when Webber arrived (Spring 2017) or youth players. 

By (perhaps unfair comparison) since Summer 2017, Brentford have bought AND sold Watkins, Benrahma, Maupay and Konza for a collective c.83m (according to transfermarkt... I appreciate one must take those figures with caution). This excludes a host of other players Brentford brought in before 2017 (Bentley, Sawyers, Egan etc.).

Obviously Brentford have been one of, if not the most, successful operators in the transfer market and they don't invest into an academy unlike us. But I can't help but feel that Webber's recording in the collective process of buying and selling players leaves something to be desired. 

I look at our current squad and the players with the highest sales values are probably Aarons and Cantwell - two further academy players here before Webber. I'm not sure where the next big windfall is coming from. Certainly the players over the two summers windows prior to this one have been underwhelming. Perhaps some (or all) of this window's business will move on for big money (though that is hard to see at the moment).

Very interesting point. Thanks 👍

[Badger 2,418]

On 28/10/2021 at 15:31, BigFish said:

Well @Parma Ham's gone mouldy I am not sure this makes your point very well. Watford got relegated, Palace sold Zaha to United for £10m when the opportunity arrose (I know, but I am making a point) and the Toon sit one place above City with only two more points. 😉

You not supposed to mention this, Big Fish. Everybody knows but no clubs ever sell their best player when they are promoted!

The club critics try to pretend that Palace's sale of Zaha never happened: it would spoil their argument.

[Badger 2,418]

19 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

I wish some of our big money signings were a hit already. 

I suspect villa fans feel the same about Buendia.

[Midlands Yellow 4,131]

10 minutes ago, Badger said:

I suspect villa fans feel the same about Buendia.

Maybe Badger but they aren’t sitting bottom on 2 points with a minus 21 GD. 

[Canaries north 151]

17 minutes ago, Badger said:

You not supposed to mention this, Big Fish. Everybody knows but no clubs ever sell their best player when they are promoted!

The club critics try to pretend that Palace's sale of Zaha never happened: it would spoil their argument.

Wasn't he sold to man u while palace was in the championship in the January window but loaned back for the rest of the season and got them promoted. I really am not sure as my memory is not as good as it was. Beer to blame I'm sure. If this is the case then it's very different to getting the promotion and then selling? They would never have gone up without him. As said I could be wrong and am happy to be proved wrong. Also it was man u and Ferguson not villa.