More Journalists In the know...

[A Load of Squit 5,134]

11 minutes ago, Badger said:

The fact that we tried TransferRoom is actually a good thing, apparently most big clubs do. The issue is that Webber justified his absence in January by saying we weren't in the market, when this suggests that we were.

Obviously the fans are divided at the moment - we have been relegated and there is always a proportion of people who think that there are simple solutions to things(we see it all the time with the ownership debate). However, it is not a good look to me that the Sporting Director deliberately mislead the situation in January to justify his own actions (rather than for tactical transfer reasons).

What he said was that we weren't going to buy anyone in January.

"Some people said, ‘You did Kilimanjaro in January.’ Yes, I did, because we had zero funds to sign a player. What am I going to do? Sit in my office for 30 days? 

I don't think that is deliberately misleading.

 

[hertfordyellow 460]

4 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Not sure, I think 8 in total but there may be a restriction in how many are allowed in a matchday squad. Didn't Roeder have a situation where he couldn't play all the loanees at once?

Either way, they could still have been testing the ground for alternatives to the existing disastrous loan recruits (and indeed should have been given the obvious failings).

It’s different for Premiership sides, it’s a different regulator. I’ll try and find it but I think outside of emergency loans, it’s 4 in total.

[Monty13 2,229]

Just now, hertfordyellow said:

It’s different for Premiership sides, it’s a different regulator. I’ll try and find it but I think outside of emergency loans, it’s 4 in total.

Yea this is what I thought, 4 max of which max 2 can be domestic.

[By Hook or Ian crook 917]

14 minutes ago, Badger said:

The fact that we tried TransferRoom is actually a good thing, apparently most big clubs do. The issue is that Webber justified his absence in January by saying we weren't in the market, when this suggests that we were.

Obviously the fans are divided at the moment - we have been relegated and there is always a proportion of people who think that there are simple solutions to things(we see it all the time with the ownership debate). However, it is not a good look to me that the Sporting Director deliberately mislead the situation in January to justify his own actions (rather than for tactical transfer reasons).

Any responsible person at a club should always be in the market to add good players to the club if available 

[Badger 2,405]

2 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

What he said was that we weren't going to buy anyone in January.

"Some people said, ‘You did Kilimanjaro in January.’ Yes, I did, because we had zero funds to sign a player. What am I going to do? Sit in my office for 30 days? 

I don't think that is deliberately misleading.

 

Yes but it does look as if we were in the market to loan some players - which is sort of misleading?

[hertfordyellow 460]

4 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

What he said was that we weren't going to buy anyone in January.

"Some people said, ‘You did Kilimanjaro in January.’ Yes, I did, because we had zero funds to sign a player. What am I going to do? Sit in my office for 30 days? 

I don't think that is deliberately misleading.

 

That’s not even 90% is it?

[hertfordyellow 460]

2 minutes ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

Any responsible person at a club should always be in the market to add good players to the club if available 

Exactly. What if someone offered stupid money to buy Tzolis? Someone who missed out on him offer 16m. You take it and then you have funds. It’s a fluid situation that you can’t monitor from a mountain top.

[Monty13 2,229]

2 minutes ago, Badger said:

Yes but it does look as if we were in the market to loan some players - which is sort of misleading?

Also love how if we didn’t have a penny to spend in January that was his screw up.

[A Load of Squit 5,134]

4 minutes ago, Badger said:

Yes but it does look as if we were in the market to loan some players - which is sort of misleading?

OK we've gone from 'deliberately' to 'sort of'.

I think we have to appreciate the likely hood of anything happening and Webber is probably the in the best position to determine this, he was away for 10 days of the window not the whole of it.

 

[Badger 2,405]

11 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

OK we've gone from 'deliberately' to 'sort of'.

I think we have to appreciate the likely hood of anything happening and Webber is probably the in the best position to determine this, he was away for 10 days of the window not the whole of it.

The evidence does suggest that he was not telling the truth about whether we had hopes of bringing a player in + we know that they were trying to get one out (Cantwell) which would have raised funds. Sorry, I'm not one who has a default attack mode on the club, but for the Sporting Director to leave the club during a potentially vital window for 10 days does seem strange to me. Presumably this sort of thing has to be booked well in advance so arrangements must have been made quite early?

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,891]

2 minutes ago, Badger said:

The evidence does suggest that he was not telling the truth about whether we had hopes of bringing a player in + we know that they were trying to get one out (Cantwell) which would have raised funds. Sorry, I'm not one who has a default attack mode on the club, but for the Sporting Director to leave the club during a potentially vital window for 10 days does seem strange to me. Presumably this sort of thing has to be booked well in advance so arrangements must have been made quite early?

Agree 100% Badger.

OTBC

[hogesar 9,618]

5 minutes ago, Badger said:

The evidence does suggest that he was not telling the truth about whether we had hopes of bringing a player in + we know that they were trying to get one out (Cantwell) which would have raised funds. Sorry, I'm not one who has a default attack mode on the club, but for the Sporting Director to leave the club during a potentially vital window for 10 days does seem strange to me. Presumably this sort of thing has to be booked well in advance so arrangements must have been made quite early?

Yes, if we were in effect advertising for wanting players, plus the Cantwell situation, it seems pretty much transfer-window-suicide to have your Sporting Director not readily available at a moments notice.

[Mello Yello 2,281]

Poor Stu....he's between a rock an' a hard place.....I didn't think it would be long before folk tor into him....

[A Load of Squit 5,134]

31 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Yes, if we were in effect advertising for wanting players, plus the Cantwell situation, it seems pretty much transfer-window-suicide to have your Sporting Director not readily available at a moments notice.

He would be available to speak to someone either by 'phone or satellite 'phone.

Kilimanjaro has people climbing it all the time, even Ed Balls did it with some members of Little Mix for Comic Relief.

 

[priceyrice 123]

14 hours ago, glory.win or die. said:

They all seem to be coming out of the woodwork with stories now relegation is confirmed.

This is interesting, and concerning in equal measures...and somewhat Unsurprising!

Supports what I posted on here recently about pissing money up the wall this summer. Don't know how much evidence some on here need. Definitely looks to have been a fall out between Webber and Ma****er

[hogesar 9,618]

21 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

He would be available to speak to someone either by 'phone or satellite 'phone.

Kilimanjaro has people climbing it all the time, even Ed Balls did it with some members of Little Mix for Comic Relief.

 

Possibly but if there's two periods where you'd say itd be the worst possible time for your sporting director to be away from his desk, it'd be during transfer windows.

[A Load of Squit 5,134]

2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Possibly but if there's two periods where you'd say itd be the worst possible time for your sporting director to be away from his desk, it'd be during transfer windows.

Does his desk have some magic properties? Can he not function without it?

 

[hogesar 9,618]

1 minute ago, A Load of Squit said:

Does his desk have some magic properties? Can he not function without it?

 

I dont know, but if he could do everything he needed to from his mountain climb then I'd suggest the club / Webber shouldn't have felt it necessary to tell us that we never had any intention of doing business in January, as that seems to be a mistruth.

[A Load of Squit 5,134]

1 minute ago, hogesar said:

I dont know, but if he could do everything he needed to from his mountain climb then I'd suggest the club / Webber shouldn't have felt it necessary to tell us that we never had any intention of doing business in January, as that seems to be a mistruth.

They said that we weren't going to buy anyone.

 

[hogesar 9,618]

3 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

They said that we weren't going to buy anyone.

 

No, Webber said we had "Zero funds to sign a player" when actually we were advertising a total available budget of 60k per week to sign player(s), seemingly.

[A Load of Squit 5,134]

3 minutes ago, hogesar said:

No, Webber said we had "Zero funds to sign a player" when actually we were advertising a total available budget of 60k per week to sign player(s), seemingly.

I think you've done a 2+2=5 there.

Did anyone at the time think that meant loans, if you can find someone who thought that was about loaning players and not buying them you will have done very well.

 

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,891]

16 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Did anyone at the time think that meant loans, 

Yes - I did. And it appears a few others on here did as well (Badger/Hoggy). When you say you aren't going to 'sign' anyone, that includes loans for me. Why wouldn't it? I hoped we would send a couple of loanies back (if possible) and get some fresh blood in.

OTBC

[hogesar 9,618]

30 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

I think you've done a 2+2=5 there.

Did anyone at the time think that meant loans, if you can find someone who thought that was about loaning players and not buying them you will have done very well.

 

I thought it meant either / or - generally signing a player you see as either a loan or permanent. Considering our financial status, loans in January felt more likely.

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

13 hours ago, Duncan Edwards said:

I can believe that there is both truth in what he’s said and that it has been framed in a way to show Webber in as negative light as possible. 

Indeed. It is perfectly possible that all things are true and that this ‘fact’ is neither positive nor negative. 
 

It could easily be explained as simply following up all possible avenues. It might have been a free hit of filter platform backstop. Perfectly good ‘due diligence’ just in case it turned up something miraculous (and recognised as unlikely).

in this Ma****er tells the ‘truth’ and Webber would/could tell the truth that it was poor, out-of-context and largely irrelevant. Both things can easily co-exist and be ‘true’

Parma 

[A Load of Squit 5,134]

8 minutes ago, Disco Dales Jockstrap said:

Yes - I did. And it appears a few others on here did as well (Badger/Hoggy). When you say you aren't going to 'sign' anyone, that includes loans for me. Why wouldn't it? I hoped we would send a couple of loanies back (if possible) and get some fresh blood in.

OTBC

Of course you did, you just failed to say anything about it until it was discussed on twitter. 😀

[Dr Greenthumb 746]

57 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Does his desk have some magic properties? Can he not function without it?

 

The professionalism of it all could look bad to enquiring parties

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

What justification has he got for calling Kabak and Normann 'mercenaries', but an unfair slur on a couple of chaps he'll know nothing about. Kabak in particular doesn't get football at his parent club, he'd have been hoping to get football which he needs at his age.

Edited May 1, 2022 by TeemuVanBasten

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,891]

3 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

Of course you did, you just failed to say anything about it until it was discussed on twitter. 😀

Blimey - that was a hospital pass of a response Squit. Twitter, this forum etc aren't the world you know. Opinions and ideas do exist outside of them; even ones that disagree with you. Rather poor form to infer I'm lying. Badger and Hoggy both seem to agree with me that when Webber said there were, 'zero funds to sign a player' that included loans. Are they lying too? 

And how exactly am I supposed to discuss the fact that Webber appears to have been 'economical' with the truth about our January efforts before I was even aware he had been? Am I Nostradamus now? 

Personally, I wanted Kabak and Gilmour to go back in January. I hoped the club would look into replacing them and was disappointed nothing happened as they were offering little to improve our team. Maybe their contracts didn't allow it. January came and went, and that was the end of it.

OTBC