Injured?I'd actually be astonished if they were NOT looking at Dunk.
He's not available, fortunately.
Injured?I'd actually be astonished if they were NOT looking at Dunk.
He's not available, fortunately.
I'd actually be astonished if they were NOT looking at Dunk.
He's not available, fortunately.
Injured?
HITC reporting Dunk wanted by Southampton as Fonte replacement.
Then again HITC hardly known as being a reliable source, think they just make shit up on the spot.
We could sell Dunk to Liverpool for £50 million and cut out the middle man.
That made me chuckle
http://www.oufc.co.uk/news/article/2016-17/oxford-united-west-ham-martinez-3534302.aspx
One that we might have taken a chance on, perhaps?
Unthinkable! We are Brighton & Hove Albion and we don't do things like that! You'd have us putting TEENAGERS in our glorious team, like lesser clubs like Liverpool do? Oh the shame of it!If we were going to "take a chance", I'd rather we took a chance with one of our own youngsters than somebody else's.
If we were going to "take a chance", I'd rather we took a chance with one of our own youngsters than somebody else's.
Highly unlikely...Burnley have only 3 strikers in squad after Bamford's recall and sale.
palace's chances of survival just got a little bit easier:-
[tweet]823855995780759552[/tweet]
I know Sunderland are short of money at the moment but if I were one of their fans, I'd rather try a development squad player than sign Lescott.
And Brighton have signed a Junior Right Back, to provide cover, so that our Junior Right Back can go out on loan, Yes i know he will get more game time but i still cannot see the sense in this. Surely the Chelsea player will be on considerably higher salary than our player, even though we only pay a percentage?
And Brighton have signed a Junior Right Back, to provide cover, so that our Junior Right Back can go out on loan, Yes i know he will get more game time but i still cannot see the sense in this. Surely the Chelsea player will be on considerably higher salary than our player, even though we only pay a percentage?
I was thinking exactly the same - why give another clubs 19 year old some experience when we can give our own 20 (??) year old right back that very same experience?
Because maybe just maybe the Chelsea lad is better than our lad, and in the event of them needing to play at some point this season, wouldn't it be good to have the best player available on the pitch?