True, dat. I half-expected to find we had conceded more this season than last. We haven't, but the difference isn't huge. After 39 games we'd conceded 46 goals last season. This season it's 37.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
NO Zamora and NO Baldock for tomorrow night!!!
- Thread starter JonnyComeEarly
- Start date
True, dat. I half-expected to find we had conceded more this season than last. We haven't, but the difference isn't huge. After 39 games we'd conceded 46 goals last season. This season it's 37.
Man Utd sent him here to get games under his belt, if he was fully fit I think they be a little vexed at his lack of minutes on the pitch.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,446
I agree that Wilson doesn't look right. I'd start Skalak - Manu wasn't even making the Huddersfield starting XI during his emergency loan, so if Manu starts it's tantamount to the Albion admitting they cocked up by not bringing in an emergency loan striker of their own.
I'll give you one thing, you certainly remain stubborn in the face of evidence that is right in front of your nose. I'll say it again. We are the joint third highest scorers in the division. Scoring has not been our problem. Burnley got 63 admittedly but most of those have been against teams in the bottom 10. No one else is close to that.
But go on, humour us, who would you have signed, how much would you have paid and how would you have ensured they came here?
- Jun 27, 2012
- 15,034
And how do you know they weren't. No secret that club tried to land Murray but couldn't
Perhaps they learnt the lesson that from the meagre options available in loan window that we could a) guarantee game time to b) would have strengthened our options that no deal was worthwile. Are you convinced otherwise ? Do you admit the options aside from Murray were probably limited ?
Last edited:
Second striker involves running around a lot. With our bunch we can rotate the role even in a single match. (Sevilla showed how to do it in the pre-seson friendly.)
I think we have five second stikers. Six if March is fit. If we could combine the various merits all into one player, he woud be very good. As it they are much of a likeness in ability, all having strengths and weaknesses.
IF Lualua could run into space he woud be the best. If Baldock could shoot he would be the best. If Knockaert had a fraction more pace he would be the best. Skalak is a bit unknown.
Agreed, his hold up play, lay offs and linkage were superb.
He struggles to win much against mountainous centre halves, but we should be playing more to his feet to bring out his best qualities.
It's just as well that he's back in the building
BensGrandad
New member
If you are conceeding goals you have 2 choices either tighten up and stop conceeding so many or get the strikers to score more had we done either we would be nearer automatic than we are. The obvious man to have brought in was GM with an agreement to purchase in the summer if we got promoted. Money talks and had we offered enough Howe would have allowed a loan. Whatever the cost 1 or even 2 million is insignificant compared to a minimum of £100m for promotion, even if relegated after 1 season. I am sure there were others available at Premier clubs like Chelsea, Tottenham and Arsenal who need games, and that is the job of the recruitment team to identify them if needed, but it appears they were deemed not needed. Once again fail to prepare is to prepare to fail. Just a couple of names Peter Crouch., Gabby Agbonlahor neither were playing for their clubs on loan deadline day.
Last edited:
Lifelong Supporter
Well-known member
This is sense.
Can you name the ones who went to other Championship clubs?
Shropshire Seagull
Well-known member
You'll recall this very situation a few years back and the answer was ....
Adam Virgo !!
I think we're a long way from that situation now, don't you agree?
BensGrandad
New member
Why does that matter? Are we not capable of making our own approaches, howver unlikely they may be.
BensGrandad
New member
The entire situation is different then we had a chairman with no money whose ambition was survival we now have a chairman who could afford the money to get us to the premier and has fingers in enough companies to circumvent FFP. Also we dont have an Adam Virgo in the background to try it.
How do you we didn't?
Approaches were made, you only have to look at the comments made by CH to realise that.
Those approaches were rejected. Reading paid a £2.5 million loan fee for a striker this season, and look where it's got them.
The Albion are (I suspect) going to announce record losses for this season, given the signings of Hunemeier, Manu, Murphy, Knockaert and Skilak all for million pound plus amounts, along with re-signing Sir Bob of Z and rejecting Fulham's £5.5 million bid for Dunk by making him an extremely wealthy young man via a new contract. So they have invested heavily this season already.
- Jun 27, 2012
- 15,034
Clearly it didn't and he wouldn't.
Because you said you were SURE there were strikers available from those clubs. If you were SURE you'd know the players' names.
You're behaving like a spoilt child who only got an iPhone 6 S for Christmas but who wanted a 6 S plus.
BensGrandad
New member
Not at all I have never advocated spending TB money but we are in the best position that we have been and likely to be for another couple of seasons to get to the Premier and it would be foolish to miss out for the lack of 2 loan signings. 1 to cover Bong when we were on such a super run and to not cover a striker for the run in knowing 2 of our main strikers are injury prone and likely to miss games.