Alot of players coming in so who's going out?

[CanaryJames 0]

I''d rather we kept Korey Smith (and to a lesser extent Francomb and Adeyemi) in the squad personally.

None will need to be registered, so will boost squad numbers, and the reserve league (as well as being fringe players every now and then, as well as playing in cup matches) should develop them.

I do however (perhaps a slight contradiction) think Rudd needs regular first-team games, so would look to loan him out - once we have another experienced goalkeeper.

I don''t see why people think we''d sell Surman if Lansbury signed. Much like Smith, etc., Lansbury would not need to be registered, so it''s not like he''d be taking up ''Surman''s space''. We may as well (if we bring him in) just have another option in the squad. That said, I can''t see Lansbury returning, as we''re well equipped in that area.

Steven Smith, Tudor-Jones and Hughes (shame, as I think he has ability )to leave permanently; Oli Johnson, Cody McDonald and Rudd out on loan would be my decision. Undecided on Chris Martin, keep McNamee for now.

[Joanna Grey 0]

[quote user="paul moy"]

I''ve no doubt that a fit Cody will knock in a dozen before Xmas in the Champs, and if we have a side struggling for goals through bad form, injuries or suspensions Lambert will look a chump. Thus a loan move with a sensible recall  clause would make sense.[/quote]

There is no point in a "sensible recall clause" if Cody is loaned out, he can not play for us if he is not named in the 25 man squad however many problems we are having in the striker department.

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="Joanna Grey"][quote user="paul moy"]

I''ve no doubt that a fit Cody will knock in a dozen before Xmas in the Champs, and if we have a side struggling for goals through bad form, injuries or suspensions Lambert will look a chump. Thus a loan move with a sensible recall  clause would make sense.[/quote]

There is no point in a "sensible recall clause" if Cody is loaned out, he can not play for us if he is not named in the 25 man squad however many problems we are having in the striker department.

[/quote]

Your assertion is simply not true.  Players can be added or subtracted in the January transfer window within the rules, and of course if a player has a long-term injury or has been sold this would be highly desirable.  

[chicken 0]

@broadstares: Wasn''t so much lil macca that i was talking about but the fact people are posting stuff like we dont need five strikers etc.

And not bothering to look into what is the 25 man squad rule.

If it is only one more signing then unless we couldnt afford it that leaves three spots. As i have said i think lambert will keep hold of some players jus to provide extra cover incase of injueies and bans etc.

There is no point risking it when u dont have to. And out of the fringe players that are nost likely to go i those that have featured more recently have been macca wilbraham and probably hughes. it will be interesting to see for sure.

[BroadstairsR 0]

[quote user="chicken"]@broadstares: Wasn''t so much lil macca that i was talking about but the fact people are posting stuff like we dont need five strikers etc. And not bothering to look into what is the 25 man squad rule. If it is only one more signing then unless we couldnt afford it that leaves three spots. As i have said i think lambert will keep hold of some players jus to provide extra cover incase of injueies and bans etc. There is no point risking it when u dont have to. And out of the fringe players that are nost likely to go i those that have featured more recently have been macca wilbraham and probably hughes. it will be interesting to see for sure.[/quote]

 

Chicken, I have my doubts about Chris Martin and Jackson in the Premiership as well as McNameee. You could add  Cody, Wilbraham and Johnson also. 

 

I would prefer to see Jackson kept simply because of his achievements towards the end of last season. Prior to that he had been a lost soul and many wanted hin shipped out, some suggested using him as a makeweight in the aborted M-Smith deal.

 

Martin has something, but he lacks more. He is the sort of enigma that I feel no-fuss Lambert can''t be bothered with. McNamee has already been replaced. Wilbraham was a temporary buy, give Oli away (to Ipswich!) and sell Cody whilst he is at the height of his fame and value.

 

Martin, McNamee, Cody and Wilbraham would  fetch a decent sum between them (£1.5m?) and should be marketable in the Championship.** This money could go towards another striker with Premiership experience. Perhaps an older player, as a temporary measure, ala Paul Jewell. I can think of none yet, but time is on PL''s side and a loanee would do, for once. The early part of next season is crucial, we do not want to embark upon it only to find out that half our strike force is ineffective. We seem to be going into the new season with a strike-force made up of an abundance of  unproven nearly-men.  You could even include Holt in this, but Grant is Grant a one-off.

 

My personal preference would be to have Ched Evans in there, but this would be the opposite approach to my suggestion above. 

 

** It is a bit unfortunate that our Club''s relationship with Peterborough is cool at the moment. Newly promoted and flush with the M-Smith money and as local as we get at Norwich, they would seem the ideal destination for the likes of Martin and McNamee. The former might benefit from a year''s loan there.

 

[zak123 0]

No way. Selling Chris Martin would just be Stupid. It would leave us with only 4 Strikers (I don''t really count Cody), with no emergency loans or anything like that you really need to be looking at about 6. Chris Martin is like no other Striker on our team, plus he is more versatile. He has the ability to shoot from anywhere and score, which is something I don''t feel any of the other strikers have. IMO 10 games into the season Chris will replace Hoolahan at the tip of the diamond because he is a lot stronger than Hoolahan, and having seen him play in that roll in the Championship, he loves it!

[Joanna Grey 0]

[quote user="paul moy"][quote user="Joanna Grey"][quote user="paul moy"]

I''ve no doubt that a fit Cody will knock in a dozen before Xmas in the Champs, and if we have a side struggling for goals through bad form, injuries or suspensions Lambert will look a chump. Thus a loan move with a sensible recall  clause would make sense.[/quote]

There is no point in a "sensible recall clause" if Cody is loaned out, he can not play for us if he is not named in the 25 man squad however many problems we are having in the striker department.

[/quote]

Your assertion is simply not true.  Players can be added or subtracted in the January transfer window within the rules, and of course if a player has a long-term injury or has been sold this would be highly desirable.  

[/quote]

Jeeeeeez,  you think I did not know that? That''s why I said it would make sense if he was loaned out to go for half a season only. Any less than that and there is no need for a recall clause.

[chicken 0]

@broad: Its all very good saying what you would do but it ignores the details we have available to us.

Lambert has said one more suggesting it to be a defender. So if that is the case that is what you have to pick you 25 from.

Also there is a lot of supposition by people on here in regards to Chris'' temperement when there is nothing to go on other than something that happened four years ago.

Lambert has praised him on many occaisions why would he do that if he didnt rate him let alone award him a new contract.

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="Joanna Grey"][quote user="paul moy"][quote user="Joanna Grey"][quote user="paul moy"]

I''ve no doubt that a fit Cody will knock in a dozen before Xmas in the Champs, and if we have a side struggling for goals through bad form, injuries or suspensions Lambert will look a chump. Thus a loan move with a sensible recall  clause would make sense.[/quote]

There is no point in a "sensible recall clause" if Cody is loaned out, he can not play for us if he is not named in the 25 man squad however many problems we are having in the striker department.

[/quote]

Your assertion is simply not true.  Players can be added or subtracted in the January transfer window within the rules, and of course if a player has a long-term injury or has been sold this would be highly desirable.  

[/quote]

Jeeeeeez,  you think I did not know that? That''s why I said it would make sense if he was loaned out to go for half a season only. Any less than that and there is no need for a recall clause.

[/quote]

You obviously did not know that and thus you''re trying to backtrack. I never mentioned a half-season loan and thus for a full-season loan a recall clause would be necessary or we have a similar debacle to last season..... LOL