Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Fuglestad

laughing stock

Recommended Posts

I find this comment from Bristol City''s manager most troubling:

“They were going down like flies at times so I don''t know whether he''ll get any more loans in to add to the 27 he has got already!"

I know the loan issue has been covered before but surely loan players are going to be more scared of being injured than players who have signed for us. I also think it is highly unlikely any of them would play through the pain like we are led to believe Russell, Doc, and even Chadwick have in the past.

I hate being the joke team in this league. I appreciate that Roeder hasn''t had much money to spend but in my opinion loans should be used to add flair or add something new to a team which already has a solid base. A "loaned" back four to me is asking for trouble. He has destoyed what I believe was at least close to a solid base. All that was needed was to replace Shackell with Stefanovic, not uproot the whole lot.

I know it''s a squad game and all that, and I also know it is easier to say these things with the benefit of hindsight, but looking at Roeder''s in''s and out''s since he''s been here, not much of it makes sense to me. For instance Chris Brown was hardly prolific but was a target man, we sold him to pay for Pattison, when we already had plenty of midfielders. We then spent the entire summer looking for a target man, surely we should have kept Brown until he could be replaced. In my opinion if we got rid of all the loans brought in we would still have just as good a side, and in my opinion a more solid, stable and hungry one at that.

GK - Marshall

RB - Semmy

LB - Drury

CB - Doc

CB - Stefanovic

RM - Bell/Chadwick (Croft cannot cross or shoot)

CM - Russell

CM - Clingan

LM - Huckerby! ok then Hoolahan

ST - Brown

ST - Cureton

Okay I''m not saying this would solve all our goalscoring problems, but would we really have scored any less? Also it could be argued that with the money saved by avoiding loans we could have bought a goalscoring small striker. Also we wouldn''t have ruled out smaller strikers because we would have Brown to play alongside them. I''m not saying Brown was great, but we haven''t replaced him with anything better, and I don''t think he should have been sold before we had.

Finally to add to the incoherence of this rant, Roeder''s favouritism is ridiculous. Hoolahan not playing is madness when we need creative midfielders, same with Chadwick. He is quite clearly in love with Bertrand, and when Bertrand goes back we''ll probably lose Drury to a team who will play him, same goes for Semmy, and even the Doc.

Finally just to annoy people: We would have scored more goals this season with Huckerby in the team...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You cannot build a successful team around loan players, 2 or 3 to top up the numbers maybe but the amount of loans we have is absolutely ridiculous. I don''t blame Roeder, if he wanted to buy the players we have brought in he would have needed several million to spend on transfer fees on top of their wages. We are stuffed if a takeover doesn''t happen soon, loan players returning to their clubs and no money to replace them. I hope the board feel good about themselves for the state they''ve allowed us to get in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This isn''t about the board. I am arguing that Roeder has made many poor managerial decisions, regardless of the financial situation. I am fed up of reading threads about the board, I''d like to talk about football please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He has made many strange tactical decisions but he has also been forced into loaning players because he didn''t have enough money to buy them, surely a valid point as you were saying we had to many loan signings in your post. You''re right there has been to much written about the board but that won''t change until they''re replaced and we can all sing from the same hymnsheet again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In hindsight and given his performances for Preston it was a bad idea to let Chris Brown go but at the time it seems the majority of fans were glad to see the back of him. If it was a bad decision by GR, it was one that was applauded at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Nostradamus"]In hindsight and given his performances for Preston it was a bad idea to let Chris Brown go but at the time it seems the majority of fans were glad to see the back of him. If it was a bad decision by GR, it was one that was applauded at the time.[/quote]

theres a "right club" for every player and it looks like Brown has found his... we were never going to be the right club for him and his perfromances would never of been great for us.

jas :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don''t think we need as many players as we have. I don''t think we should have signed any loan players, then we could have used the money to buy a striker. Instead we now have two players for every position, but none of them are any better than each other. We would have been short of numbers at the back, but we could have loaned players if we needed them, using the emergency loan system for what it is intended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We loan in Troy thingy from Spurs and yet let Spillane go to Luton? Now that makes no sense at all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...