Scott Twine - Signed on Four Year Deal - Official

[downendcity]

On 14/07/2024 at 18:53, LondonBristolian said:

Does he have glasses? Is he wearing a hat?

 

On 15/07/2024 at 14:49, Southport Red said:

Has he got a moustache? 

Spotted at the Avon Gorge Hotel

[Nugget]

Loan would be alright tbf as long as not a massive loan fee, interesting what a buy option would be in that case if they stick to the £4m valuation (whatever it is they are want now) or factor in another Year off his deal for a lower £ based on us paying some of his salary during a loan 

[cheddarwedlocker]

53 minutes ago, Bcfc24 said:

Loan with Obligation or straight loan?

Absolutely no idea

 

45 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Is that a new development or just your thought based on the fact we can’t get near to agreeing a fee?

Dialogue continuing daily tbh, ive been told that a loan is looking more likely than a transfer but that can all change depending on Burnley really. We have 3m to spend on a 10, and not really any more. Issue with the loan being Burnley will likely want a recall clause meaning we may not even reach the obligation if he hits form. Might end up a Wells situation with Burnley and QPR where Burnley just ship him off to the highest bidder half way through the year

Edited July 16 by cheddarwedlocker

[Mendip City]

1 minute ago, Nugget said:

Loan would be alright tbf as long as not a massive loan fee, interesting what a buy option would be in that case if they stick to the £4m valuation (whatever it is they are want now) or factor in another Year off his deal for a lower £ based on us paying some of his salary during a loan 

Unless he does well and he gets moved on, by Burnley, in January to someone who stumps up the money. Look at last season where he was moved to us in January. 
iMO it’s permanent or nothing and, for what it’s worth I wouldn’t be disappointed if we miss out. 

[redsquirrel]

they either need to get on and stump up so manning can prove his worth or move on. personally i dont think LM will be here for too long before he sees through them and moves on.  

[Ashton Fete]

7 hours ago, cheddarwedlocker said:

Absolutely no idea

 

Dialogue continuing daily tbh, ive been told that a loan is looking more likely than a transfer but that can all change depending on Burnley really. We have 3m to spend on a 10, and not really any more. Issue with the loan being Burnley will likely want a recall clause meaning we may not even reach the obligation if he hits form. Might end up a Wells situation with Burnley and QPR where Burnley just ship him off to the highest bidder half way through the year

On that basis it’s either a season long loan with option to buy or perm transfer now.

A recall option for me is the worst of both worlds as if he lands and we’re flying then they’ll ramp the price up, recall for themselves or a club that wants to buy like what we did for Hull.

I think this comes down to other bids and timing, we seem to be piecing all other bits of the jigsaw to work out what we have left to spend on him.  Or we’re waiting for the TC money to then buy him.

if we get Armstrong in then it’s make or break time for Twine / TC as it’s beginning to look more and more interlinked 

[Shauntaylor85]

1 hour ago, redsquirrel said:

they either need to get on and stump up so manning can prove his worth or move on. personally i dont think LM will be here for too long before he sees through them and moves on.  

City have the money to spend, just pay the fee if you want the player. 

[RedRoss]

5 minutes ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

City have the money to spend, just pay the fee if you want the player. 

I disagree we shouldn't just pay £4/5 million for Twine because I don't believe he's worth it and we've got to consider all the heavy lifting to save money we've done over the last couple of years. 

However, if we keep getting knocked back by Burnley then we need to move on. It's a shame but not the end of the world. 

[Mr Hankey]

1 hour ago, redsquirrel said:

personally i dont think LM will be here for too long before he sees through them and moves on.  

Thought this for a while, even last season there were a couple of things he was saying (can’t remember exactly what) that made me think “hmmm not sure if that is the line Tinnion would expect him to toe”.

If we come out of the blocks particularly fast this season and there are a couple of big championship jobs going & they take interest then i would fully expect him to go. Can’t see him being here come the end of this season, put it that way.

[Nugget]

Don’t think the club seem to be moving on, gut feeling is he will end up here one way or another. 

[Loosey Boy]

6 minutes ago, Mr Hankey said:

Thought this for a while, even last season there were a couple of things he was saying (can’t remember exactly what) that made me think “hmmm not sure if that is the line Tinnion would expect him to toe”.

If we come out of the blocks particularly fast this season and there are a couple of big championship jobs going & they take interest then i would fully expect him to go. Can’t see him being here come the end of this season, put it that way.

LM also talked about us being “ambitious” this summer……not sure he’d think we’ve been this so far…….

Still a number of weeks until the window shuts but also think he’d have expected/hoped us to have done our transfer business (in’s) by now….

If we could get Armstrong and Twine, think it will have been a good window for us, the squad will be stronger and LM, happy.

Lets see how it pans out…..

[Silvio Dante]

31 minutes ago, RedRoss said:

I disagree we shouldn't just pay £4/5 million for Twine because I don't believe he's worth it and we've got to consider all the heavy lifting to save money we've done over the last couple of years. 

However, if we keep getting knocked back by Burnley then we need to move on. It's a shame but not the end of the world. 

Absolute nail on head. Remember “We move on quickly from plan A if it’s not happening”? Well plan B appears to just say “please” to Burnley

On 15/07/2024 at 17:21, fly in the air said:

other clubs will be interested that's why city need to make a decision offer a good price and get it done. would be annoying of someone like swansea or  cardiff pull off a deal for him. 

Hmmm. As I said in the Armstrong thread, it doesn’t appear they are - or if they are he’s certainly not a top target. That plays to the fact that he’s not actually as good as the hierarchy here think he is - other than a tenuous Sunderland link it appears to be us or a league one team and that’s where he is objectively as a player based on proven ability to date.

19 minutes ago, Mr Hankey said:

Thought this for a while, even last season there were a couple of things he was saying (can’t remember exactly what) that made me think “hmmm not sure if that is the line Tinnion would expect him to toe”.

If we come out of the blocks particularly fast this season and there are a couple of big championship jobs going & they take interest then i would fully expect him to go. Can’t see him being here come the end of this season, put it that way.

Again, nail on head. For all the concerns I’ve raised over Liam, one has never been that he’s a yes man (and I think I said this post appointment). The only way I think he’s here for a while is if he is just indifferent. First sniff of a better opportunity he’ll be off (Oxford proves that) and he hasn’t got huge credit to ride out another poor patch

[Monkeh]

57 minutes ago, Loosey Boy said:

LM also talked about us being “ambitious” this summer……not sure he’d think we’ve been this so far…….

Still a number of weeks until the window shuts but also think he’d have expected/hoped us to have done our transfer business (in’s) by now….

If we could get Armstrong and Twine, think it will have been a good window for us, the squad will be stronger and LM, happy.

Lets see how it pans out…..

That happens every season bar a few with Pearson, he's not going to come out and say we will struggle and fail in the transfer market

[Silvio Dante]

6 minutes ago, 0606 said:

4/5 mil for Twine isn’t reality nor what Burnley are asking for. 

But even if it’s not, it’s evident that they value him at more than what we are willing to pay. And our desperation to do this deal is likely to make them hold that price.

Everything about how we’ve shown our hand here is amateurish and a case in point of how you don’t negotiate. 

[Silvio Dante]

Exclusive footage of Tinnion trying to persuade Burnley to do the deal:

 

[numbeast]

It could be we've not offered a suitable amount, or it could be that Parker wants to see if Twine brings something to the table that will save time and money so they can concentrate on other areas that need strengthening. I wouldn't be surprised if this saga with Twine doesn't get dragged out until Burnley have played a few friendlies.

Because of their parachute payments, they don't have to rush people out of the door in the same way we did under Pearson. We could grow impatient and move on or we can wait and see what develops, I'm sure there are others who are equally as good as Twine we could move on if needed.

We can all speculate but only those involved will know what's happening. If there was no sign of this transfer happening I believe we would have already moved on, but had there not been a change of management I think this would have been wrapped up by now. 

[Glen hump]

4 minutes ago, numbeast said:

It could be we've not offered a suitable amount, or it could be that Parker wants to see if Twine brings something to the table that will save time and money so they can concentrate on other areas that need strengthening. I wouldn't be surprised if this saga with Twine doesn't get dragged out until Burnley have played a few friendlies.

Because of their parachute payments, they don't have to rush people out of the door in the same way we did under Pearson. We could grow impatient and move on or we can wait and see what develops, I'm sure there are others who are equally as good as Twine we could move on if needed.

We can all speculate but only those involved will know what's happening. If there was no sign of this transfer happening I believe we would have already moved on, but had there not been a change of management I think this would have been wrapped up by now. 

Twine wants to come, we don’t want to pay what Burnley want, unfortunately for us Burnley hold all the cards.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Burnley are a bit of a curious case due to their big leveraged debt, I did something a bit sell to buy to an extent a few months back but I suppose they can hold what they have..but that debt, terms etc will be key.

Also worth noting fwiw they are srill in the 2023-24 financial year as their Accounts run until end of July..Possibly that can be a factor. Maybe change of financial year rather than season triggers some debt position change.

[Lakeside Red]

How long do we wait before we move on from Twine deal can’t wait forever 

Edited July 17 by Lakeside Red

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Glen hump said:

Twine wants to come, we don’t want to pay what Burnley want, unfortunately for us Burnley hold all the cards.

Twine says to City he wants to come, he loves it here.

We've no idea what he’s saying to Burnley.  If it were me, I’d be hedging my bets and say nice things about both clubs!

25 minutes ago, 0606 said:

You are over estimating how much we want him - you are also not grasping how much of a difficult deal it is to do - Burnley don’t feel the need to sell. 

The deal is only difficult because the clubs can’t agree a fee.  Burnley’s fee is driven my their circumstances - as you say they don’t need to sell.  Basic supply and demand really!

If you’re saying we don’t want him as heavily as suggested on OTIB, we should move on / have moved on already.  Yet the likes of @cheddarwedlocker is now saying a loan is likely.  We aren’t moving on it seems.

From the outside looking in, we appear to be showing classic signs of inexperience in the market.

[Super]

38 minutes ago, Lakeside Red said:

How long do we wait before we move on from Twine deal can’t wait forever 

Another 50 pages.

[cheddarwedlocker]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Twine says to City he wants to come, he loves it here.

We've no idea what he’s saying to Burnley.  If it were me, I’d be hedging my bets and say nice things about both clubs!

The deal is only difficult because the clubs can’t agree a fee.  Burnley’s fee is driven my their circumstances - as you say they don’t need to sell.  Basic supply and demand really!

If you’re saying we don’t want him as heavily as suggested on OTIB, we should move on / have moved on already.  Yet the likes of @cheddarwedlocker is now saying a loan is likely.  We aren’t moving on it seems.

From the outside looking in, we appear to be showing classic signs of inexperience in the market.

Deal is still 50/50 in terms of happening or not I would say.

Loan just more likely than a permanent move ATM

[GrahamC]

I read an article from a Burnley journalist that said following 2 new signings this week (a Brazilian full back, a striker who was prolific in Ligue 2 last season) plus Gudmundsson who did a “Nathan Baker” & was initially released then has signed a new deal, they currently have a 38 man squad!

Admittedly that includes the likes of Wout Wieghorst who featured in the Euro semi final against England, has been off on loan for the past two years & clearly isn’t going to want to play in the Championship, but even so, that’s far too many to start the season with, 25 is the maximum I think.

We must know this & reckon if we hold our nerve he’ll be available for a loan.

[lenred]

2 minutes ago, cheddarwedlocker said:

Deal is still 50/50 in terms of happening or not I would say.

Loan just more likely than a permanent move ATM

Just do not see any benefit in a loan.  We just need to move on if we can’t secure a deal. 

[Silvio Dante]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Twine says to City he wants to come, he loves it here.

We've no idea what he’s saying to Burnley.  If it were me, I’d be hedging my bets and say nice things about both clubs!

The deal is only difficult because the clubs can’t agree a fee.  Burnley’s fee is driven my their circumstances - as you say they don’t need to sell.  Basic supply and demand really!

If you’re saying we don’t want him as heavily as suggested on OTIB, we should move on / have moved on already.  Yet the likes of @cheddarwedlocker is now saying a loan is likely.  We aren’t moving on it seems.

From the outside looking in, we appear to be showing classic signs of inexperience in the market.

And if I may be so bold Dave, that classic inexperience has been in place since we did the initial deal in January. 
 

At the time of that deal, many of us raised concerns over the lack of buy option. There was always a possibility that if Twine had a good loan spell we’d have the price pushed up on us, and the basic fact is we had no need to do the deal in January - we were neither going up or down, and the player was the defintion of a “known quantity” to the head coach. He didn’t make a compelling case for signing while on loan which leads me to believe we were going to try and get him come what may.

(Avoidance of doubt - loans with no options are fine for things like season long, get you over the line, one like this made no sense and it was a vanity loan)

Basically we’re now reaping what a lot of us said we were sowing in January over doing a naive deal we had no need for considering our position. It was a daft deal then and unless we can argue Burnley down, it looks a dafter deal now because of that.

NB - thanks as ever @cheddarwedlocker - the intel is appreciated

[One Team]

11 minutes ago, lenred said:

Just do not see any benefit in a loan.  We just need to move on if we can’t secure a deal. 

Agreed mate, wish we’d move on TBH and focus our efforts elsewhere. 

[cheddarwedlocker]

11 minutes ago, lenred said:

Just do not see any benefit in a loan.  We just need to move on if we can’t secure a deal. 

Depends if we can agree a buy option for next summer, which is something we missed out on this year...

Aslo have to consider that expenditure would go towards the next financial year rather than this one, which is perhaps favourable for the Crayon boys?

[Mr Popodopolous]

Muric to Ipswich reportedly, will further alleviate any need to sell or be bounced into anything.

[petehinton]

Is my understanding that a season long loan with a more ‘favourable’ (I.e. what we actually want to pay) fee option to turn perm at the end of the season is where this one is gonna end up at. 

[Silvio Dante]

18 minutes ago, 0606 said:

My understanding is that the add ons that Burnley want are pretty ridiculous and that’s where the issue is not so much the initial fee (which is what I alluded to in a previous post)

Fleshing this point out….

- If it’s a promotion based add on we aren’t going to have to pay it - and in the unlikely event we do, then the monies gained from going to the PL makes it worthwhile

- If it’s an international based add on, it’s not happening

- If it’s percentage of next sale it might be hard to swallow but we still gain more financially if Twine performs than we would from a mooted season long loan

The only add ons that look like they could scupper a deal are number of performances (and if we have to pay that and baulk at it then it means Scott’s performances haven’t led to success and it’s a fundamental question of doing the deal full stop) or individual performance but team failing

So, on balance, I think that’s nonsense.

[lenred]

6 minutes ago, cheddarwedlocker said:

Depends if we can agree a buy option for next summer, which is something we missed out on this year...

Aslo have to consider that expenditure would go towards the next financial year rather than this one, which is perhaps favourable for the Crayon boys?

Yep, agree there.  Just feels like we are going to get our pants pulled down whichever way we go.  If we cannot agree a way forwards then let’s move on and quickly.   I just fear if we don’t get him over the line we will see our 2nd/3rd/4th choices disappear into the distance like what appears to be happening on the second striker front possibly.   All ifs and buts atm though - as always have to see where we end up end of August!

[lenred]

8 minutes ago, petehinton said:

Is my understanding that a season long loan with a more ‘favourable’ (I.e. what we actually want to pay) fee option to turn perm at the end of the season is where this one is gonna end up at. 

Do you know if the loan fee be deducted or will that now be in addition to what we want to pay? 

[Davefevs]

24 minutes ago, cheddarwedlocker said:

Deal is still 50/50 in terms of happening or not I would say.

Loan just more likely than a permanent move ATM

My view is there are 4 scenarios:

1. sign him permanently
2. sign him on loan with option to buy
3. sign him on loan with conditional obligation - eg playoffs / promotion
4. sign him on loan with unconditional obligation

we should not be entertaining a 5th option - just loan him

Scenarios 1-4 are all predicated on reaching a financial agreement with Burnley.  We failed to do that pre-January, end of January and also this summer.

When are we gonna wake up and smell the coffee?

Thats not a dig at you, thanks for the intel.

Its crazy.

FWIW I believe Twine started for Burnley in their behind closed door friendly the other day!

20 minutes ago, 0606 said:

Well it’s not quite as simple as that - we don’t want him as heavily where a fee goes beyond what we are willing to pay. Other people say we’ve played a poor hand but actually back in December the club had no option but to lay their cards out in order to sign him then. People are suggesting that we will cave and end up paying over the odds which from what I know is completely untrue.

The issue with Burnley is that they don’t feel the need to sell and they don’t feel the need to loan him again, they want to protect their investment, they also know that Parker’s approach will be different and that Twine may have a bigger part to play after all. That might change in time.

the club are rightly slated on some things, but this isn’t one of them - the moment they made a bid in December their intentions were sealed. My understanding is that the add ons that Burnley want are pretty ridiculous and that’s where the issue is not so much the initial fee (which is what I alluded to in a previous post)

It is as simple as that, there is nothing complex in this.  If they don’t need to sell and don’t want to loan, what the hell are we doing still entertaining Twine this window?

City can “bleat” about the terms, but see my reply to Cheddar above.

As per @Silvio Dante its like they think Burnley will just cave in!

So if what you say is true, we should absolutely be slating the club, it’s like me chasing Miss World.

[numbeast]

37 minutes ago, Lakeside Red said:

How long do we wait before we move on from Twine deal can’t wait forever 

I think we should be making enquiries about other options. Should these enquiries be leaked would be beneficial to letting the fans know we're not just sitting on our hands playing a waiting game, it would also let Twine know that yes he is first choice not the only choice, but it won't force Burnley into speeding things up, they're not in a hurry and aren't in a position where they have to sell.

I think it's important to show the fans Scott Twine is plan A but the club also have other plans to fall back on. Just look how many pages a player linked generates. Outlining plans B & C will ease the concerns that many of us on here & fans who aren't on here.

This time of year is important for the supporters moral, if the club are seen to be proactive that'll boost moral but, if like here, we are seen to be waiting on another club without at least making tentative moves for another number 10 then the positivity of our signings so far is wiped out.

I'm happy with the clubs business so far but the sooner we wrap it all up the better, I don't want this no 10 issue going on until deadline day.

[Ian M]

9 minutes ago, numbeast said:

I think we should be making enquiries about other options. Should these enquiries be leaked would be beneficial to letting the fans know we're not just sitting on our hands playing a waiting game, it would also let Twine know that yes he is first choice not the only choice, but it won't force Burnley into speeding things up, they're not in a hurry and aren't in a position where they have to sell.

I think it's important to show the fans Scott Twine is plan A but the club also have other plans to fall back on. Just look how many pages a player linked generates. Outlining plans B & C will ease the concerns that many of us on here & fans who aren't on here.

This time of year is important for the supporters moral, if the club are seen to be proactive that'll boost moral but, if like here, we are seen to be waiting on another club without at least making tentative moves for another number 10 then the positivity of our signings so far is wiped out.

I'm happy with the clubs business so far but the sooner we wrap it all up the better, I don't want this no 10 issue going on until deadline day.

We kinda did that with the Brazilian right? Only we then quickly distanced ourselves from being interested... "Don't worry Burnley, we're loyal, Scott Twine is still the one that we want"

[Banjo Island]

Suggestion how about peterboro’s kwame poku if the twine deal fall’s through

[slartibartfast]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

 

 

 

 

As per @Silvio Dante its like they think Burnley will just cave in!

So if what you say is true, we should absolutely be slating the club, it’s like me chasing Miss World.

Depends which year,1967 might be a goer !

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, slartibartfast said:

Depends which year,1967 might be a goer !

[Port Said Red]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Mum!!

[bcfc01]

She hasn't aged very well.

You might be in witha chance @Davefevs

 

[Major Isewater]

38 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

She hasn't aged very well.

You might be in witha chance @Davefevs

 

Rudolph ? 
 

[Rudolf Hucker]

19 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

Rudolph ? 
 

[bristol red]

Forget Twine/ Give Stokes a go as no. 10. Isn’t that his preferred position? He’s 20 and played 45 games last season. I’m sure he hasn’t come here to sit on the bench.

[Ronnie Sinclair]

If he ends up not signing..... 

[stortfordred]

11 minutes ago, Ronnie Sinclair said:

If he ends up not signing..... 

He’s been frozen out. 

[bcfcnick]

3 minutes ago, bristol red said:

Forget Twine/ Give Stokes a go as no. 10. Isn’t that his preferred position? He’s 20 and played 45 games last season. I’m sure he hasn’t come here to sit on the bench.

That's a good call and I was thinking along similar lines although I like Twine.  Stokes has apparently impressed in training and has an eye for goal. I can't see Wells, Cornick or any new striker such as Armstrong being prolific, so we do need goals from our no. 10.   Twine would probably only contribute about 5.  The bonus would be we could spend a bit more on a striker and hopefully secure a 15 goals a season striker to compliment Fally Mayulu.  I really hope Benarous stays fit and he would be a contender for that position as would Mehmeti and perhaps Sam Bell as well.  

[Merrick's Marvels]

26 minutes ago, bristol red said:

Forget Twine/ Give Stokes a go as no. 10. Isn’t that his preferred position? He’s 20 and played 45 games last season. I’m sure he hasn’t come here to sit on the bench.

A tubby non league player who's never played in Div 4 let alone Div 2?

I'd suggest we give him time to find his feet and his fitness.

[Rudolf Hucker]

9 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

A tubby non league player who's never played in Div 4 let alone Div 2?

I'd suggest we give him time to find his feet and his fitness.

“Tubby”? Ffs

[Merrick's Marvels]

24 minutes ago, Rudolf Hucker said:

“Tubby”? Ffs

"Shagger"? Ffs.

 

[Terry Boyle's Perm]

So much talk about how much or little Twine offers. Who are the potential alternatives? I’ve seen Swift mentioned on here, but discounted as he will come at a cost, although Twine isn’t going to be given away….

Would Hagi fit the bill. Not sure if he’s the right type, so welcome some opinion on that? I’ve read that Rangers will let him go for a fraction of the Twine fee. Grateful for thoughts and other alternatives..

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Terry Boyle's Perm said:

So much talk about how much or little Twine offers. Who are the potential alternatives? I’ve seen Swift mentioned on here, but discounted as he will come at a cost, although Twine isn’t going to be given away….

Would Hagi fit the bill. Not sure if he’s the right type, so welcome some opinion on that? I’ve read that Rangers will let him go for a fraction of the Twine fee. Grateful for thoughts and other alternatives..

I think the problem (for me) is not knowing how we intend to accommodate Twine, I assume it’s as a double-10 in a 3421, therefore I’d expect an alternative to be similar to Twine.  Azaz was a clever, passing “10”…so I think we are looking for one of those.

Then it’s a case of is in here in England or abroad?

[Terry Boyle's Perm]

Thanks Dave. Is Hagi one of those types too? Knowing and understanding our reticence to spend real money I think of player exchanges and if Rangers really do want Conway maybe a swap for one of theirs could be an option - Hagi for example?

[Bcfc24]

Ian G saying Twine deal could go to deadline day, imo that would be absolutely ridiculous if we wait till deadline day for him, move on for goodness sake

[Davefevs]

12 minutes ago, Terry Boyle's Perm said:

Thanks Dave. Is Hagi one of those types too? Knowing and understanding our reticence to spend real money I think of player exchanges and if Rangers really do want Conway maybe a swap for one of theirs could be an option - Hagi for example?

In all honesty, I’ve not seen him play….or not been paying attention when I’ve watched SPL games.  Usually been focussing on McCrorie, Miovski, Idah, etc.

[Redrascal2]

13 minutes ago, Bcfc24 said:

Ian G saying Twine deal could go to deadline day, imo that would be absolutely ridiculous if we wait till deadline day for him, move on for goodness sake

Surely even Tinnion wouldn't let that happen.

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, Redrascal2 said:

Surely even Tinnion wouldn't let that happen.

Well he said he might have to let Conway run his contract down, so anything is possible!

[Robbored]

39 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I think the problem (for me) is not knowing how we intend to accommodate Twine, I assume it’s as a double-10 in a 3421, therefore I’d expect an alternative to be similar to Twine.  Azaz was a clever, passing “10”…so I think we are looking for one of those.

You said exactly the same thing when I was on about signing Barry Bannon who at the time had about two or maybe three seasons left in him.

The overall point of ‘accommodating’ a gifted midfielder is surely down to the manager and his coaches to manipulate the starting 11 to get the best out said player? ………….

We know that LM has worked with Twine before and knows what skills he’d bring and no doubt at all LM would like to see sign for City assuming that the price is agreeable.

[Davefevs]

5 minutes ago, Robbored said:

You said exactly the same thing when I was on about signing Barry Bannon who at the time had about two or maybe three seasons left in him.

The overall point of ‘accommodating’ a gifted midfielder is surely down to the manager and his coaches to manipulate the starting 11 to get the best out said player? ………….

We know that LM has worked with Twine before and knows what skills he’d bring and no doubt at all LM would like to see sign for City assuming that the price is agreeable.

I did and I stand by my rationale.  Not a problem to accommodate Barry Bannan (at least I can get his name right) as a free spirit over the past few seasons, if you’re in league one (two seasons) and one of the better teams or accepting just above relegation in the champ last season, but not if your ambitions are Champ playoffs with a squad like Bristol City.  There’s not enough upside for me in letting one player play free versus the rest of the team.

I’m not arguing that LM wants him, that is obvious…too obvious in terms of driving a good negotiating position!

I posted yesterday what I saw as the pros and cons of Scott Twine from what we’ve seen so far in a City shirt.  LM talked initially about how him and Tommy were great for each other, and now he’s asking one of them to train with the u21s, whilst the other is playing for Burnley in preseason.  All whilst talking about wanting a different profile of striker.

I can’t wait for preseason to see how we are actually gonna play.

+++++

[Ian M]

So we get to deadline day and Burnley are still insisting the fee is £4m or no deal, how late do we leave it before moving to our second choice 10? 4pm? 5pm? 6pm? 2025?

[Shauntaylor85]

1 minute ago, Ian M said:

So we get to deadline day and Burnley are still insisting the fee is £4m or no deal, how late do we leave it before moving to our second choice 10? 4pm? 5pm? 6pm? 2025?

This obsession with Twine is ridiculous. I thought we wanted everyone in place for pre season. 

[Ska Junkie]

Time to look elsewhere methinks.

[Mr Popodopolous]

11 minutes ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

This obsession with Twine is ridiculous. I thought we wanted everyone in place for pre season. 

It has been quite a disjointed transfer market across the board thusfar and we aren't really market movers as such. Euros and Copa America play a role- both have just ended by mid July but at the same time we don't feel notably dynamic or smooth operators, not helped by the budget restrictions.

[redsquirrel]

twine could help,crooning round the burnley gaff 

 

[JAWS]

Are we still gonna do stonehenge?

 

Edited July 17 by JAWS
Quote

[BritAbroad]

Wasn't there supposed to be some Brazilian bloke as a backup option for Twine?

[Tom]

6 hours ago, bristol red said:

Forget Twine/ Give Stokes a go as no. 10. Isn’t that his preferred position? He’s 20 and played 45 games last season. I’m sure he hasn’t come here to sit on the bench.

Ayman Benarous should be able to play there a bit this season. Yes, lots of injuries, but he should be fit now, and I was impressed with him before.

[Mr Popodopolous]

19 minutes ago, Tom said:

Ayman Benarous should be able to play there a bit this season. Yes, lots of injuries, but he should be fit now, and I was impressed with him before.

There was sadly a suggestion on the Injury thread sourced from Twitter that he (along with Dickie) got injured in pre-season.

Let us hope that was Twitter nonsense as if not the guy just can't catch a break.

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

4 hours ago, Terry Boyle's Perm said:

Thanks Dave. Is Hagi one of those types too? Knowing and understanding our reticence to spend real money I think of player exchanges and if Rangers really do want Conway maybe a swap for one of theirs could be an option - Hagi for example?

I'd love for Hagi to be the answer, not just because his dad was an incredible talent.

Georghe was a little before my time (I was born 1995) but immensely talented, not just his set pieces but all round play.

 

But in the admittedly few games I've seen of Ianis I'm far from convinced 

[W-S-M Seagull]

14 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Twine says to City he wants to come, he loves it here.

We've no idea what he’s saying to Burnley.  If it were me, I’d be hedging my bets and say nice things about both clubs!

The deal is only difficult because the clubs can’t agree a fee.  Burnley’s fee is driven my their circumstances - as you say they don’t need to sell.  Basic supply and demand really!

If you’re saying we don’t want him as heavily as suggested on OTIB, we should move on / have moved on already.  Yet the likes of @cheddarwedlocker is now saying a loan is likely.  We aren’t moving on it seems.

From the outside looking in, we appear to be showing classic signs of inexperience in the market.

I've read a lot about how Twine is 'really desperate' to join us etc and I don't really think that's the case. I think that yes he is interested but his main desire would be to make himself a key part of the Burnley team. 

For Burnley if we are offering around 1.5-2.5 million which is what I'd say is his value then at that price then they may well think it's not worth doing and will just keep him around the place. 

People often say he's not worth the 4 million that Burnley want and I agree. But that's the price Burnley value him at. So we either pay that price or we don't and we move on. Simple as that really. 

[Nugget]

Stokes, Anis, Benarous could all play the role but this looks like LM’s no.1 target.

If it weren’t for injuries I think even Naismith could do a job there.