| Mid table mediocrity 19:52 - Jan 14 with 4294 views | dickythorpe |
Of our 10 wins this season how many of them involve sides that sit above us at this present time? |  | | |  |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:25 - Jan 17 with 661 views | 34dfgdf54 |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:23 - Jan 17 by jasper_T |
Also unfortunately he saw Grimes as a left back. |
As did you if I remember correctly. |  | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:28 - Jan 17 with 658 views | jack247 |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:11 - Jan 17 by jasper_T |
The second 'if' is implied by the structure of Potter's careful answer. Without it the journo has asked a leading question designed only to create one of two juicy headlines. |
What you actually mean there, is that Potter has answered a different question to the one he’s been asked.
‘Have you been told you WILL have money to spend in January?’
‘Yes, I have been told IF I will have money to spend in January, but I’d rather keep whether I have or not to myself for the time being’. |  | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:29 - Jan 17 with 656 views | karnataka |
| Mid table mediocrity on 21:46 - Jan 17 by jack247 |
The question isn’t ambiguous.
Potter may have inadvertently answered a question he wasn’t asked, or the journalist may have misrepresented, but taking it at face value, he’s been asked if he’s been told he’ll have money to spend and he’s responded yes, but not wanted to elaborate further.
Edit - I think you’re seeing an ‘if’ that I’m not? [Post edited 17 Jan 2019 21:47]
|
But that's the point, the question he was asked isn't quoted in the article so you can't say whether it was ambiguous or not. |  | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:33 - Jan 17 with 650 views | jack247 |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:29 - Jan 17 by karnataka |
But that's the point, the question he was asked isn't quoted in the article so you can't say whether it was ambiguous or not. |
Only if the journalist has completely misrepresented. That part of the article is completely unambiguous. | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:37 - Jan 17 with 641 views | jasper_T |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:25 - Jan 17 by 34dfgdf54 |
As did you if I remember correctly. |
I liked him there in comparison with Olsson, because he can pass.
I was very annoyed he was chosen to play there in pre-season over players with experience in the role.
Not sure I've ever said "he's a better left back than midfielder". | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:44 - Jan 17 with 638 views | _ |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:22 - Jan 17 by jack247 |
Yeah fair play, I’ve misunderstood your point about Leon. Of course Potter knew we needed a defensive midfield lynchpin. We all knew that, let alone Potter. Unfortunately, he was told he couldn’t have the player he wanted on deadline day. |
So why waste money elsewhere when that position was so almighty? Poor from Potter. |  |
| |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:47 - Jan 17 with 631 views | _ |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:33 - Jan 17 by jack247 |
Only if the journalist has completely misrepresented. That part of the article is completely unambiguous. |
It's not ambiguous and many have pointed it out to you.
I read it quickly and even made a bloody thread about it
Risca pointed out the wording, which is perfectly clear, and he's saying he knows WHETHER he's got money or not, but he's keeping that bit of info to himself.
I don't know if you're being deliberately obtuse here but you're not doing yourself any favours. | |
| |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:51 - Jan 17 with 621 views | jack247 |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:44 - Jan 17 by _ |
So why waste money elsewhere when that position was so almighty? Poor from Potter. |
Well either he’s utterly inept and after a full pre season couldn’t see what was blindingly obvious to you, me and probably most others on here, or he was under the impression he’d be able to sign a holding midfielder as well.
To be fair, the Americans could also have been under that impression if they thought they’d sell Ayew and get market value for Clucas | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:54 - Jan 17 with 610 views | _ |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:51 - Jan 17 by jack247 |
Well either he’s utterly inept and after a full pre season couldn’t see what was blindingly obvious to you, me and probably most others on here, or he was under the impression he’d be able to sign a holding midfielder as well.
To be fair, the Americans could also have been under that impression if they thought they’d sell Ayew and get market value for Clucas |
There was more money to spend at the death, but due to Brentford holding out for the full asking price (or even inflating it, depends on who you believe) we did a risk evaluation (due diligence if you like) and we thought, no, he's too much.
That's a fair call in my opinion.
What if we'd done that with Clucas? Chances are he wouldn't have come. As it turned we didn't get 16m's worth out of him. The Americans got burned badly there and he was a big target of Clement.
There had to come a point when we started to wise up a bit with spending. | |
| |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:58 - Jan 17 with 608 views | jack247 |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:47 - Jan 17 by _ |
It's not ambiguous and many have pointed it out to you.
I read it quickly and even made a bloody thread about it
Risca pointed out the wording, which is perfectly clear, and he's saying he knows WHETHER he's got money or not, but he's keeping that bit of info to himself.
I don't know if you're being deliberately obtuse here but you're not doing yourself any favours. |
That would either be Potter answering a question he hadn’t been asked, or the journalist misrepresenting the original question. | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 23:00 - Jan 17 with 602 views | jack247 |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:54 - Jan 17 by _ |
There was more money to spend at the death, but due to Brentford holding out for the full asking price (or even inflating it, depends on who you believe) we did a risk evaluation (due diligence if you like) and we thought, no, he's too much.
That's a fair call in my opinion.
What if we'd done that with Clucas? Chances are he wouldn't have come. As it turned we didn't get 16m's worth out of him. The Americans got burned badly there and he was a big target of Clement.
There had to come a point when we started to wise up a bit with spending. |
So there should be a few quid knocking about now then? | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 23:09 - Jan 17 with 592 views | _ |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:58 - Jan 17 by jack247 |
That would either be Potter answering a question he hadn’t been asked, or the journalist misrepresenting the original question. |
OK different scenario.
Have you been told you've got good comprehension skills?
Yes, you've been told many times, but you're not going to tell everyone else....
(because we now know) 😉😂😂 | |
| |
| Mid table mediocrity on 06:26 - Jan 18 with 557 views | jack247 |
| Mid table mediocrity on 23:09 - Jan 17 by _ |
OK different scenario.
Have you been told you've got good comprehension skills?
Yes, you've been told many times, but you're not going to tell everyone else....
(because we now know) 😉😂😂 |
English is my first language.
I’m more than capable of reading an article. There are four possible scenarios I can see...Potter misunderstood the question, he deliberately answered a question he wasn’t asked, the journalist got a bit naughty with the wording (missing out a rather important word like ‘if’), or it happened exactly as it reads and he was told he’d have money to spend.
Anyway, based on one of your last posts, it’s a moot point. There was money to spend on deadline day, but not enough to buy Woods. Unless they are blisteringly incompetent, the owners would have had a very good idea of income and expenditure from one window to the next, so there still should be a bit to play with. | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 07:46 - Jan 18 with 536 views | jasper_T |
| Mid table mediocrity on 06:26 - Jan 18 by jack247 |
English is my first language.
I’m more than capable of reading an article. There are four possible scenarios I can see...Potter misunderstood the question, he deliberately answered a question he wasn’t asked, the journalist got a bit naughty with the wording (missing out a rather important word like ‘if’), or it happened exactly as it reads and he was told he’d have money to spend.
Anyway, based on one of your last posts, it’s a moot point. There was money to spend on deadline day, but not enough to buy Woods. Unless they are blisteringly incompetent, the owners would have had a very good idea of income and expenditure from one window to the next, so there still should be a bit to play with. |
Deadline day wasn't the end of business. We brought in one player on loan after that and didn't send anyone out after that. Selling Fulton was also heavily rumoured around the time of the Woods saga to generate funds.
How we were going to structure things to afford Woods isn't clear. We may have even been panicked enough to accept a big(ger) loss given how fans fears of consecutive relegations were echoing around the place (which were unfounded but obviously not an issue now). There isn't necessarily £3-4m sitting in the bank somewhere. | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 07:59 - Jan 18 with 534 views | 34dfgdf54 |
| Mid table mediocrity on 22:37 - Jan 17 by jasper_T |
I liked him there in comparison with Olsson, because he can pass.
I was very annoyed he was chosen to play there in pre-season over players with experience in the role.
Not sure I've ever said "he's a better left back than midfielder". |
Potter thought exactly the same as you.
It worked aswell for a time, then things went backwards, and it was changed. Not something I would personally criticise the management for, especially if I advocated it in the first place.
I doubt anyone has said "he's a better left back than midfielder" | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 08:37 - Jan 18 with 525 views | jack247 |
| Mid table mediocrity on 07:46 - Jan 18 by jasper_T |
Deadline day wasn't the end of business. We brought in one player on loan after that and didn't send anyone out after that. Selling Fulton was also heavily rumoured around the time of the Woods saga to generate funds.
How we were going to structure things to afford Woods isn't clear. We may have even been panicked enough to accept a big(ger) loss given how fans fears of consecutive relegations were echoing around the place (which were unfounded but obviously not an issue now). There isn't necessarily £3-4m sitting in the bank somewhere. |
Fulton to Reading was being touted as somewhere around £200k. I don’t know what the CCV loan deal was, but I doubt it’s a bank buster. Players were given new contracts but the owners would have been well aware of that way before the end of August. To all intents and purposes, deadline day was the end of our business. | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 08:40 - Jan 18 with 520 views | jasper_T |
| Mid table mediocrity on 07:59 - Jan 18 by 34dfgdf54 |
Potter thought exactly the same as you.
It worked aswell for a time, then things went backwards, and it was changed. Not something I would personally criticise the management for, especially if I advocated it in the first place.
I doubt anyone has said "he's a better left back than midfielder" |
Fulton and Routledge were getting games in central midfield ahead of Grimes, though, so I'm not sure that's true. He was prepared and treated like a left back through the start of the season, ahead of Naughton & Roberts. | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 09:12 - Jan 18 with 510 views | jack247 |
| Mid table mediocrity on 08:40 - Jan 18 by jasper_T |
Fulton and Routledge were getting games in central midfield ahead of Grimes, though, so I'm not sure that's true. He was prepared and treated like a left back through the start of the season, ahead of Naughton & Roberts. |
Yes he absolutely was. I can see the logic in having a ball player at left back. A Grimes-Celina-James combination could have been excellent.
It didn’t work though. He made too many defensive errors and we don’t have anyone else with his skillet in midfield. | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 09:44 - Jan 18 with 491 views | jasper_T |
| Mid table mediocrity on 09:12 - Jan 18 by jack247 |
Yes he absolutely was. I can see the logic in having a ball player at left back. A Grimes-Celina-James combination could have been excellent.
It didn’t work though. He made too many defensive errors and we don’t have anyone else with his skillet in midfield. |
That was Potter's stated logic for Harries at left back as well. He can't play 90% of what the position demands due to his lack of mobility, but he's left footed and can pass a ball. | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 10:09 - Jan 18 with 474 views | 34dfgdf54 |
| Mid table mediocrity on 09:44 - Jan 18 by jasper_T |
That was Potter's stated logic for Harries at left back as well. He can't play 90% of what the position demands due to his lack of mobility, but he's left footed and can pass a ball. |
Watching him for the U23s the other day, lack of mobility is a nice way of putting it aswell.
I thought Grimes went to left back when Ollson got injured, because as you said, he could pass the ball out was a lot better on the ball than what Naughton and Roberts could be there, due to them being right footed mainly, it does definitely make a difference when you play left back, and your weak foot is your left. It worked aswell, but after a while he was found out, at no fault of his own, and it was changed.
I wouldn't of necessarily said Potter classed him as an out and out left back. | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 10:10 - Jan 18 with 474 views | _ |
| Mid table mediocrity on 23:00 - Jan 17 by jack247 |
So there should be a few quid knocking about now then? |
I wouldn't be surprised but time moves on and situations need constant re-assessment.
It wouldnt be beyond the realms of possibility that Routs gets another deal. | |
| |
| Mid table mediocrity on 10:17 - Jan 18 with 460 views | jack247 |
| Mid table mediocrity on 10:10 - Jan 18 by _ |
I wouldn't be surprised but time moves on and situations need constant re-assessment.
It wouldnt be beyond the realms of possibility that Routs gets another deal. |
Which would be great as far as I’m concerned. He’s not going to command the kind of wages he’s been on wherever he goes. I wouldn’t expect a one year deal for a 34 year old to cripple us and he can be a big player for us.
If there was a couple of million left over in August, give or take I’d expect most of it to be there now. | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 11:03 - Jan 18 with 446 views | jasper_T |
| Mid table mediocrity on 10:09 - Jan 18 by 34dfgdf54 |
Watching him for the U23s the other day, lack of mobility is a nice way of putting it aswell.
I thought Grimes went to left back when Ollson got injured, because as you said, he could pass the ball out was a lot better on the ball than what Naughton and Roberts could be there, due to them being right footed mainly, it does definitely make a difference when you play left back, and your weak foot is your left. It worked aswell, but after a while he was found out, at no fault of his own, and it was changed.
I wouldn't of necessarily said Potter classed him as an out and out left back. |
The passing I liked from Grimes at left back was the short one and two touch triangles to get us out of trouble, which Connor and Naughton do just fine. Olsson is poor at it, his variety of pass is very limited and it's very easy to make him turn around and go backwards. Extremely one-footed fullbacks are a bugbear of mine. It's pretty simple to defend against a player who can only go one way when you've got a touchline to help you. They need to be exceptional skilled in other areas to make up for it and Olsson isn't that.
The 30-40 yard balls up the line I can take or leave. | | | |
| Mid table mediocrity on 02:00 - Jan 20 with 334 views | Glyn1 |
Out of mild interest, is the answer now 1 ? |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
