BS3_RED Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 The money he has wasted on two forwards who he does not want to play. He now wants rid of LT23 and never starts Maynard. So why buy either in the first place. If i was Steve Lansdown i would think long and hard before opening my cheque book in January as we have already wasted £3.2 million and another £12,500 a week having John sat on the bench. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vincent_bcfc Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 The money he has wasted on two forwards who he does not want to play. He now wants rid of LT23 and never starts Maynard. So why buy either in the first place. If i was Steve Lansdown i would think long and hard before opening my cheque book in January as we have already wasted £3.2 million and another £12,500 a week having John sat on the bench. Please tell me we are not paying Stern John £12,500 a week - that is absurd! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 The money he has wasted on two forwards who he does not want to play. He now wants rid of LT23 and never starts Maynard. So why buy either in the first place. If i was Steve Lansdown i would think long and hard before opening my cheque book in January as we have already wasted £3.2 million and another £12,500 a week having John sat on the bench. Lee Trundle has has ample opportunity and only showed quality on a few occasions. Maynard has only scored 3 goals, and although I don't think its his fault that he hasnt scored many - people forget his young age and that he's one for the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tunley Legend Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 Lee Trundle has has ample opportunity and only showed quality on a few occasions. Maynard has only scored 3 goals, and although I don't think its his fault that he hasnt scored many - people forget his young age and that he's one for the future. The problem is that Championship clubs like ours with a limited budget do not normally go round splashing £2¼ million on "players for the future". Many people were expecting a player who could do the business this season. I agree that Maynard has the potential to do well and we need to get behind the lad but the simple fact is that, as yet, GJ has not solved the goalscoring problems we had last season and has reverted to a single player up front in the hope of keeping a clean sheet and nicking a goal. Clubs are a bit wiser to it now that we are no longer an unknown quantity and, whilst I don't see this season being a disaster, if changes aren't made then we will have stagnated a bit from last season. It has nothing to do with league position and a lot more to do with style of play. As for Trundle - GJ paid out the dosh and if he isn't good enough then GJ takes the responsibility for that. If the lad is good enough then GJ has to take responsibility for not picking him. Some might say GJ cannot win but that is the flip side of signing the 5 year contract at somewhere probably between £10,000 and £20,000 sheets per week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJC Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 'Will Gary pay us back?' interesting question, I imagine he is pondering a similar one only with 'the supporters' replacing the word 'Gary.' Whilst I agree that his striker transfer dealings have not gone to plan - I imagine both he and the supporters expected a more immediate impact from Maynard whilst Trundle has never truly delivered his valuation, would you not assume that we, as supporters, should repay a manager who has done so much for us in so little time with trust in his methods? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS3_RED Posted November 23, 2008 Author Share Posted November 23, 2008 'Will Gary pay us back?' interesting question, I imagine he is pondering a similar one only with 'the supporters' replacing the word 'Gary.' Whilst I agree that his striker transfer dealings have not gone to plan - I imagine both he and the supporters expected a more immediate impact from Maynard whilst Trundle has never truly delivered his valuation, would you not assume that we, as supporters, should repay a manager who has done so much for us in so little time with trust in his methods? This thread is about paying so much for two strikers that as of yet have been a waste of money. I for one would have to think long and hard before allowing him to spend big money again if i was S L. As the manager he has to make the most of any available money and if he is spending over 2m on a player then he had better make sure that a- he is good enough b- we play a style that suits a player we have spent so much money on. Now i am a firm believer that Nicky Maynard will come good, however that can not happen if we are only playing a target man up front and Nicky is on the bench. If we are to play that system this season then Johnson screwed up signing him and he should be accountable for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJC Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 Fair enough. But to not trust him with the cheque book is as good as sacking him. Like you, I am in no doubt Maynard will come good, ultimately making his £2 million price tag appear a bargain. Of course it would have been nice to see a more immediate impact but he is a sound long term investment in my view. Trundle has never consistently delivered his valuation, I have nothing against him at all and think he has a role to play. However, as ive said in the thread I started, it must surely be time for him to move on and Johnson admit he got that one wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bh_red Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 Please tell me we are not paying Stern John £12,500 a week - that is absurd! John is on 10k a week at Southampton, we're not paying the full amount of his wages, but we are paying a percentage of that, what percentage, I don't know. either way, it's still alot of money for a player that was brought in and not being used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bh_red Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 Lee Trundle has has ample opportunity and only showed quality on a few occasions. Maynard has only scored 3 goals, and although I don't think its his fault that he hasnt scored many - people forget his young age and that he's one for the future. whilst I agree Trundle has had more than enough chances and from the start he possibly isn't the answer, you have to admit that he is ALWAYS worth a place on the bench, when your playing 5 in midfield and your only other option from the bench is Sproule, where is the creativity. Against Plymouth, Brum and Reading this season, he's come on either in the 2nd half or for the final 30mins moved to the wing and we have actually had some creativity and he's been bloomin impressive. either way, I'd say he was a much better option to bring on than the likes of Williams or Sproule, because his ability to influence a game in spells is fantastic. In someways, he's almost the perfect replacement to bring on for Noble when he tires. as for Maynard, agree he is one for the future and it's not his fault he cost £2.25m and there is NO DOUBT he will get better with time, but he is suffering from the same problems as many other forwards in the last few seasons......lack of service. Jevon, Byfield, Trundle, etc........all suffered from the same problems despite being good goal scorers prior to joining City. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tunley Legend Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 'Will Gary pay us back?' interesting question, I imagine he is pondering a similar one only with 'the supporters' replacing the word 'Gary.' Whilst I agree that his striker transfer dealings have not gone to plan - I imagine both he and the supporters expected a more immediate impact from Maynard whilst Trundle has never truly delivered his valuation, would you not assume that we, as supporters, should repay a manager who has done so much for us in so little time with trust in his methods? From what my old man has said there was nothing wrong with the support at Selhurst yesterday and there was nothing wrong with the support when we failed to beat a poor Forest side who, unless they sack Calderwood ASAP, are more nailed on to get relegated than Jesus was to the cross. GJ needs to ignore "issues" with the fans and start the next phase of moving the club forward. In 18 months time or however long it takes he will then get the rewards and fan adulation he appears to crave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickle Rick Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 John is on 10k a week at Southampton, we're not paying the full amount of his wages, but we are paying a percentage of that, what percentage, I don't know. either way, it's still alot of money for a player that was brought in and not being used. So what, Johnson doesn't 'owe' us any money. Its pathetic to think so. Lansdown backs him as do many others such as myself. He is trying to do whats best for the club in HIS opinion, funnally enough he's payed to! As for Stern John, yea he might be on the bench, but we ain't 'wasting' wages in comparison to at least 60% of the other clubs in this league. Its called competition and we still look like we need improving of our strength in depth so guess what - we'd need to 'waste' more wages. But oh well, everything can't alwas be sweet for all and that'll be my opinion on the matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.