ramesses Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 "We'll get James a training session or two under his belt and if he comes through, he will certainly play for some part of the Villa game on Wednesday," said manager Nigel Clough. "Would that be enough to put him in on Saturday? I think we have got to take the risk, as we are so short of "proper" midfield players, because we haven't managed to secure an experienced midfielder that we made a priority back in April." Seems to me this is Nigel speak for I'm hacked off Tom! Why didn't you get Eustace?? Trouble at t’mill? Surely not. Then again… One theory is that the money’s available and there’s plenty of time before the end of this transfer window to finally bring in an adequate replacement for Hulse (and Porter I guess), an adequate replacement for Savage, and adequate cover for our full backs. The moral of this theory is that some fans and Clough just need to learn some patience. A second theory is that our billionaire owners haven’t provided any significant extra financial support for Clough this transfer window (again). Therefore Clough (as usual) is struggling to bring in all the players he needs to make us competitive in this league. That he’ll need to sell Leacock and Bywater quite quickly – and even then he’ll have to rely on loans for at least one, or maybe even two, of the three important positions. Injuries are always going to be a serious extra headache for Clough under such conditions. The moral of this theory is that some fans and Clough need to live with the frustration of having wealthy but uninterested owners who don’t appear to give a rat’s arse about getting us out of this division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex W Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Wow!!! That has to be the 1st negative post you have ever wrote Alex!!! It has only taken 4326 odd here and about 2000000 on DET!! :eek:) Not negativity, just an observation For all I know we have several targets anyway. Although it would be nice to know who they were, all the silence on other DM speculation leaves people to make their minds up and often they decide that we're not trying to get one in. Which would be b*ll*cks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Some people might also say that the budget Nigel was given might of been spent better and now it hasn't there will be no more. We have Bywater, Legzdins, Fielding, Deeney where only two of them are essential. Maybe there was no need to spend on Legzdins as cover. Ward, Maguire, Cykwa, Croft, Pearson, Bailey, Bryson, Tyson, S Davies, B Davies, Doyle,. Perhaps we could of bought one less attacker and spent it on a DM instead? Perhaps the budget was tight, but the investors felt it was just about sufficient to cover the squad. We signed 9 players and that they never specified who or how that money should be spent. They just provided enough to get 9 players. btw, this isn't my theory. Just adding another possible viewpoint. I actually thing the board has been clever and covered their own back for a few months again. 9 players. ST money back. How can we complain? The devil is in the details though. But expect to hear these two comments when anyone complains "we purchased Ward,Robinson...... Shackell alone cost up to a million pounds. We brought in almost an entire new team of players and fans were clearly in approval of our work in the summer because we recieved only minimal returns of season tickets." We're over a barrell again. The only way we can come out laughing is if Nigel pulls off a half decent season. Then we'll all be pleased. But then do we invest next summer? Or has the team matured and is ready to kick on? Don't see an end to this friction for a long time. Because the investors are business first men, and we're football first men. And they wont comprimise. They ain't Derby fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_ram Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Don't see an end to this friction for a long time. Because the investors are business first men, and we're football first men. And they wont comprimise. They ain't Derby fans. Someone buy this man a pint, he speaks sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 I think the major issue is that Tom Glick created a certain amount of hype in regards to the summer signings we would be making, whilst the reality doesn't seem to measure up to the expectations that Glick helped to generate. All this was seemingly to sell season tickets. The money back offer was just spin. The board maybe relying on the fact that people wouldn't ask for a refund at this late stage anyway, irrespective of signings made? No it wasn't, you can still take it back now if you are unhappy, it says so in the season ticket renewal letters sent out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Someone buy this man a pint, he speaks sense. I'll only drown my sorrows in it. Would be nice to have a Lionel Pickering come along. [sIZE=1]please don't anyone mention Gadsby. That debate shut down the DET! starting from.....now[/sIZE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Some people might also say that the budget Nigel was given might of been spent better and now it hasn't there will be no more. We have Bywater, Legzdins, Fielding, Deeney where only two of them are essential. Maybe there was no need to spend on Legzdins as cover. Ward, Maguire, Cykwa, Croft, Pearson, Bailey, Bryson, Tyson, S Davies, B Davies, Doyle,. Perhaps we could of bought one less attacker and spent it on a DM instead? Perhaps the budget was tight, but the investors felt it was just about sufficient to cover the squad. We signed 9 players and that they never specified who or how that money should be spent. They just provided enough to get 9 players. btw, this isn't my theory. Just adding another possible viewpoint. I actually thing the board has been clever and covered their own back for a few months again. 9 players. ST money back. How can we complain? The devil is in the details though. But expect to hear these two comments when anyone complains "we purchased Ward,Robinson...... Shackell alone cost up to a million pounds. We brought in almost an entire new team of players and fans were clearly in approval of our work in the summer because we recieved only minimal returns of season tickets." We're over a barrell again. The only way we can come out laughing is if Nigel pulls off a half decent season. Then we'll all be pleased. But then do we invest next summer? Or has the team matured and is ready to kick on? Don't see an end to this friction for a long time. Because the investors are business first men, and we're football first men. And they wont comprimise. They ain't Derby fans. And if they were to use this it would be very true. These 9 signings were all made within weeks of the end of the last season, so are not players that we have had to buy in desperation at the end of the transfer window. If Clough can't make us a competitive team depsite getting 9 of his targets then maybe, just maybe, we will start having to question his ability to spot a decent player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex W Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 I'll only drown my sorrows in it. Would be nice to have a Lionel Pickering come along. [sIZE=1]please don't anyone mention Gadsby. That debate shut down the DET! starting from.....now[/sIZE] What was that about [sIZE=7]Gadsby?[/sIZE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 What was that about [sIZE=7]Gadsby?[/sIZE] Nice one. Who's coming to derbycounty mad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex W Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Nice one. Who's coming to derbycounty mad? Hahaha And not me, BFB is down there, we'll get that shut down just between our squabbling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcfcdavecov Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 No it wasn't, you can still take it back now if you are unhappy, it says so in the season ticket renewal letters sent out. But why offer it if it isn't a clever marketing ploy....otherwise known as spin? If this was just a standard offer, then why are we the first club to offer it. There must be a reason. Glick said we would be challenging the top 6. The only time we will challenge the top 6 on this budget is when we will be playing them on the pitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CumbrianRam Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 I'd rather Hendrick played than some old, useless, expensive, short term, gap filling trollop like Eustace. I say useless....he didn't sign for us, it's what Florist fans do. I actually agree with you there.:eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramesses Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Some people might also say that the budget Nigel was given might of been spent better and now it hasn't there will be no more. We have Bywater, Legzdins, Fielding, Deeney where only two of them are essential. Maybe there was no need to spend on Legzdins as cover. Ward, Maguire, Cykwa, Croft, Pearson, Bailey, Bryson, Tyson, S Davies, B Davies, Doyle,. Perhaps we could of bought one less attacker and spent it on a DM instead? Perhaps the budget was tight, but the investors felt it was just about sufficient to cover the squad. We signed 9 players and that they never specified who or how that money should be spent. They just provided enough to get 9 players. btw, this isn't my theory. Just adding another possible viewpoint. I actually thing the board has been clever and covered their own back for a few months again. 9 players. ST money back. How can we complain? The devil is in the details though. But expect to hear these two comments when anyone complains "we purchased Ward,Robinson...... Shackell alone cost up to a million pounds. We brought in almost an entire new team of players and fans were clearly in approval of our work in the summer because we recieved only minimal returns of season tickets." We're over a barrell again. The only way we can come out laughing is if Nigel pulls off a half decent season. Then we'll all be pleased. But then do we invest next summer? Or has the team matured and is ready to kick on? Don't see an end to this friction for a long time. Because the investors are business first men, and we're football first men. And they wont comprimise. They ain't Derby fans. Yes, a very good point. I should have added at least one more theory… A third theory is that Clough has had enough cash and he is mainly to blame for most things (if you look closely enough you’ll always find a reason to blame the manager somehow). That we need to get shot of Clough and get a replacement. The moral of this theory is that some fans, Tom Glick and our billionaire owners need a readily identifiable scapegoat. Let’s have fun persecuting the next scapegoat (sorry, manager). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 But why offer it if it isn't a clever marketing ploy....otherwise known as spin? If this was just a standard offer, then why are we the first club to offer it. There must be a reason. Glick said we would be challenging the top 6. The only time we will challenge the top 6 on this budget is when we will be playing them on the pitch. It isn't spin...its a fact. If you are not happy with the signings you can take your season ticket back. As I said in an earlier post Clough made 9 signings very shortly after the end of the season, so these are his targets not leftovers. If we can't challenge for top 6 after signing 9/11ths of a new team then maybe its time to start asking questions of the manager. As of yet we have no clue how we will perform this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcfcdavecov Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 I actually agree with you there.:eek: I call bullshit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcfcdavecov Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 It isn't spin...its a fact. If you are not happy with the signings you can take your season ticket back. As I said in an earlier post Clough made 9 signings very shortly after the end of the season, so these are his targets not leftovers. If we can't challenge for top 6 after signing 9/11ths of a new team then maybe its time to start asking questions of the manager. As of yet we have no clue how we will perform this season. Yes, it's fact. It's fact we are the only club offering this deal. It's fact we are the first to offer such a deal. Why? that's my only question.....answer it. Don't you think the paltry budget would determine the targets? Do you think that Tyson would have been his first choice striker if the budget was bigger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duracell Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 "We'll get James a training session or two under his belt and if he comes through, he will certainly play for some part of the Villa game on Wednesday," said manager Nigel Clough. "Would that be enough to put him in on Saturday? I think we have got to take the risk, as we are so short of "proper" midfield players, because we haven't managed to secure an experienced midfielder that we made a priority back in April." Seems to me this is Nigel speak for I'm hacked off Tom! Why didn't you get Eustace?? That's a dig at the board alright. Nigel is the last person to admit his own mistakes, and he clearly says "since April", not "since early June" - trying to make the situation sounds as bleak and hopeless as he can. It's like he's saying that he did his part of the job by indentifying the targets ages ago, and Glick - the guy who actually does the negotiations and bidding, has failed on his side of the deal. Clough's criticised his players plenty of times in the media, with little restraint - I don't see why you could put it beyong him to criticise his CEO in the public eye too, if in a more subtle manner. You need to remember, he's a fustrated person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CumbrianRam Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 I'm more worried about rushing Bailey back than any possible digs really Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curb Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 How can blaming the manager be making him a scapegoat? There is no doubt whatsoever that his performance so far - over 2 1/2 years not a few months - has been crap by whatever you want to judge him on, results, man management, developing players. The only argument is whether you think he could or couldn't have done much better with the resources at his disposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex W Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 How can blaming the manager be making him a scapegoat? There is no doubt whatsoever that his performance so far - over 2 1/2 years not a few months - has been crap by whatever you want to judge him on, results, man management, developing players. The only argument is whether you think he could or couldn't have done much better with the resources at his disposal. In your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.