Bloom's Open Letter

[ac gull]

Ryan will be mentally exhausted - season in Spain ended a lot later than ours - then off on international duty

he had a two week break when all others would have had best part of two months

next season after a good break he will do a lot better

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

I'm not saying that was the plan - but after Atletico Madrid and Leicester he is clearly slightly overawed.

And slightly too small.

 

[Bry Nylon]

Reading between the lines, I believe what Tony is trying to tell us all is this...

 

[chaileyjem]

But he might have come on loan? Who knows.

Only we couldn't sign him on loan as we'd signed another keeper on loan, meaning our two loans were already used up.

And why had we signed that keeper on loan? Because the one we'd spent £5 million on doesn't inspire confidence ?

We were always going to have 3 goalkeepers in our squad so that Walton could be loaned out. All prem league teams have 3 in their 25.

It was also reported we were looking for a 3rd keeper this summer before we'd even signed Ryan.

There's lots of reasons we didn't land a striker - but Pinning the blame on our goalkeeper recruitment is a long shot.

 

[Bry Nylon]

There's lots of reasons we didn't land a striker - but Pinning the blame on our goalkeeper recruitment is a long shot.

If only he could save long shots, it wouldn't be an issue.

 

[clapham_gull]

I found it bizarre that people are still claiming that the loan of a goalkeeper ruined the chance of a loan striker.



Sent from my LG-K520 using Tapatalk

 

[Thunder Bolt]

And slightly too small.

Another myth being perpetuated on NSC. He's 1cm shorter than Ben Roberts. .
That's 6 feet in old money.

Did you complain about Roberts being too small in the playoffs?

 

[Triggaaar]

We were always going to have 3 goalkeepers in our squad so that Walton could be loaned out. All prem league teams have 3 in their 25.

It was also reported we were looking for a 3rd keeper this summer before we'd even signed Ryan.

Yes we needed 3 keepers, but we didn't need all 3 to be of a similar level, and we didn't need the 3rd to be a PL loan.

There's lots of reasons we didn't land a striker - but Pinning the blame on our goalkeeper recruitment is a long shot.

Not at all. It's not surprising Janssen didn't want to join us on a permanent deal given that he hadn't heard from us or been to see the club etc, however it's easy to imagine him accepting a loan deal for a few months.

 

[chaileyjem]

Yes we needed 3 keepers, but we didn't need all 3 to be of a similar level, and we didn't need the 3rd to be a PL loan.

Not at all. It's not surprising Janssen didn't want to join us on a permanent deal given that he hadn't heard from us or been to see the club etc, however it's easy to imagine him accepting a loan deal for a few months.

it's not easy to imagine that at all. He didn't want to come. Why the certainty ?

Or why the club don't want keepers of a similar level (i.e.: good enough to play in the 18) ?

The club didn't get a striker in. Bad luck, incompetence, planning, agents etc. Fair enough. Pick your choice. But because Tim Krul was signed on a loan. Come on .

 

[Bald Gull]

it's not easy to imagine that at all. He didn't want to come. Why the certainty ?

Or why the club don't want keepers of a similar level (i.e.: good enough to play in the 18) ?

The club didn't get a striker in. Bad luck, incompetence, planning, agents etc. Fair enough. Pick your choice. But because Tim Krul was signed on a loan. Come on .

Who knows what the truth is but I don't think the Krul theory is that far-fetched. I think it was fairly obvious we didn't want our 3rd keeper to take up one of our loans from the PL. We know about the Pau Lopez interest and there were also reports of another keeper turning us down after we'd made an 8m euro bid. I also think the timing of the Krul announcement perhaps suggests we were waiting until we were 'sure' we were getting a striker in permanently before using up our loan. He was only announced just before 11 when you'd assume we had the initial agreement of both Spurs and Janssen to the permanent deal. If we hadn't had that, would we have had a final go at Niasse on loan from Everton (or someone else) - I think we possibly would.

As I say, who knows but I wouldn't dismiss the suggestion that a loan keeper from the PL was not our ideal option and that Janssen may have signed on loan rather than permanent if given the choice - I know if I wasn't 100% sure on leaving one company and joining another, I would love to do so for a shorter time period so I could properly check it out at pretty much zero risk to me.

 

[Stat Brother]

Oh blimey Wrongy McWrong-Face still hasn't learned his lesson and is back telling everyone else just how wrong they are instead.

 

[Lower West Stander]

The goalie situation just all looks a bit odd.

We had three keepers last season. Walton went on loan. So we had two.

We let Stockdale go and bought Ryan. We then signed another one on loan despite having Maenpaa.

Loans used up.

Why? Why not keep Walton and Maenpaa as backups?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[chaileyjem]

Oh blimey Wrongy McWrong-Face still hasn't learned his lesson and is back telling everyone else just how wrong they are instead.

Ha!

Well I was certainly wrong and expected us to sign a striker this window SB. (And did last summer) We didn't . I understand why but
It might cost us. Let's get that out of the way.


But come on - enough of the silly insults and digs.. There's no need. We are all fans at the end of the day. I'm boringly pedantic on here and a bit annoying. Hands up. but certainly hope I'm fair and if called out - I apologise or admit it. . And it's tiresome to be called Pravda, in the pay of the club or Barber because we disagree.
At least Quote me or mention me next time you want to have a go. .

And yes. Baldock gets injured a lot. I can't deny it any longer.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

it's not easy to imagine that at all. He didn't want to come. Why the certainty ?

Or why the club don't want keepers of a similar level (i.e.: good enough to play in the 18) ?

The club didn't get a striker in. Bad luck, incompetence, planning, agents etc. Fair enough. Pick your choice. But because Tim Krul was signed on a loan. Come on .

To be fair, his chance of a Carabao Cup medal as non-playing sub is higher at Tottenham than if he'd come to us. And for an established international, it's all about silverware.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Ryan will be mentally exhausted - season in Spain ended a lot later than ours - then off on international duty

he had a two week break when all others would have had best part of two months

next season after a good break he will do a lot better

He might be knackered on Saturday given they're playing in Melbourne tonight though. And if they get a big win he'll be in Russia in the summer. If they don't he'll be needed for playoffs. Hardly ideal & another reason I'd play Krul on Saturday.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Icy Gull]

Ha!

Well I was certainly wrong and expected us to sign a striker this window SB. (And did last summer) We didn't . I understand why but
It might cost us. Let's get that out of the way.


But come on - enough of the silly insults and digs.. There's no need. We are all fans at the end of the day. I'm boringly pedantic on here and a bit annoying. Hands up. but certainly hope I'm fair and if called out - I apologise or admit it. . And it's tiresome to be called Pravda, in the pay of the club or Barber because we disagree.
At least Quote me or mention me next time you want to have a go. .

And yes. Baldock gets injured a lot. I can't deny it any longer.

I enjoy your posts Chailey but I have to confess that I did laugh when somebody asked which part of the recruitment team you worked for. It lightened a stressful end to the window

 

[chaileyjem]

I enjoy your posts Chailey but I have to confess that I did laugh when somebody asked which part of the recruitment team you worked for. It lightened a stressful end to the window

Ha! If anyone wants advice on keeping a squad of kids footballers together in the lower reaches of the Sussex Sunday youth leagues for 6 years I'm your man. Anything more advanced than that. ? Fraid not.

 

[Triggaaar]

it's not easy to imagine that at all. He didn't want to come. Why the certainty ?

Certainty? Saying it's easy to imagine him accepting a loan is quite different to saying it's certain he will. And you saying he didn't want to come only applies to signing a permanent deal. If he hated the idea of coming, he wouldn't have let his agent get so far along with the deal.

Or why the club don't want keepers of a similar level

Because keepers aren't injured that often and the number 3 rarely gets a game, so it's worth splitting your budget so that you have one really good keeper instead of 3 average keepers. That's pretty much the case in all clubs.

The club didn't get a striker in. Bad luck, incompetence, planning, agents etc. Fair enough. Pick your choice. But because Tim Krul was signed on a loan. Come on.

I don't understand why you don't see the link. You don't know that we couldn't have got a striker on loan had we not have used up our allocation.

 

[GreersElbow]

The goalie situation just all looks a bit odd.

We had three keepers last season. Walton went on loan. So we had two.

We let Stockdale go and bought Ryan. We then signed another one on loan despite having Maenpaa.

Loans used up.

Why? Why not keep Walton and Maenpaa as backups?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Walton is in development and requires regular game time

Krul on loan is unusual, because Maenpaa is clearly an adequate back up. Unless something has happened in the background? Then I'm just speculating.

 

[chaileyjem]

I don't understand why you don't see the link. You don't know that we couldn't have got a striker on loan had we not have used up our allocation.

I do see it. I just think its pretty far fetched to say out of muiltiple moving parts, most of which we don't know apart. Its this one that caused that one.
Perhaps our strategy that day was signing Niasse on loan, Andone on a permanent and selling Hemed to Reading, and a keeper on permanent (who knows who that might have been)
Everton scuppered that one early on and thus the Hemed move despite Reading bidding higher and higher. They wouldn't budge on the loan, accepted a bid from Palace and that was that. (until more hiccups for CPFC later on)
So perhaps loan freed up, we moved on to Krul , who then got on a train to Brighton in early afternoon for his medical. The 3rd GK we'd planned for all summer.
And so strategy was now keep Hemed + Andone bid which was finally accepted in principle in the PM on basis of 2 incoming. One came in, one collapsed pretty late on. And then we moved onto VJ. Who first accepted and then changed his mind.

No doubt there were a whole bunch of other moving parts nobody has any idea about. So to pinpoint Krul , the poor lad, and the GK strategy seems unlikely. But yep. I get it !