|
|
Post by Rt Hon Reverend Luvpump on Feb 4, 2014 6:03:22 GMT
So the Sunderland chairman refused to sell stoke cattermole right at the death which meant stoke would find it hard to sign someone else ,it also looks like he delayed Danny Grahams move to Middlesboro which meant hull could not sigh Tom Ince on loan crafty sod!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 4, 2014 6:41:18 GMT
I thought the latest info was that Cattermole refused to sign until he was paid a loyalty payment he claimed he was owed by Sunderland? That's what I read a couple of days after deadline day.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedro23 on Feb 4, 2014 6:42:55 GMT
Crafty sod! I would call him more than that, arsehole more like. Didn't he do the same with Gardiner and the Baggies. Well at least everyone should know what he is like next time around. Not in the least bothered about Cattermole, but I would say that time wasting cost us in terms of landing someone else which is actually what his objective was.
|
|
|
|
Post by sufolkstokie on Feb 4, 2014 7:24:00 GMT
More like totally naïve Stoke
|
|
|
|
Post by huuuuuth on Feb 4, 2014 7:34:11 GMT
While we will probably never know the full story, from the outside looking in, it looked like complete time wasting and our crack transfer unit fell for it. No wonder they looked so happy about finally tying up a deal, albeit for a pizza  |
|
|
|
Post by alster on Feb 4, 2014 8:12:15 GMT
So the Sunderland chairman refused to sell stoke cattermole right at the death which meant stoke would find it hard to sign someone else ,it also looks like he delayed Danny Grahams move to Middlesboro which meant hull could not sigh Tom Ince on loan crafty sod!!!! Its just what anybody with a bit of nouse would do. Its got to a stage where you almost need two transfer teams. One working on your own signings and the other trying to frustrate your opponents deals. Its dog eat dog down there, there's just too much money riding on the outcome. Not that the money is totally ruining the game, I must confess I thoroughly enjoyed Man City vs Chelsea last night. Some awesome talent on display, how special is that Hazzard? |
|
|
|
Post by Danstoke82 on Feb 4, 2014 8:37:11 GMT
Regards to Cattermole and the break down of the move.
Sunderland played a blinder there, however we should of really had a back up target in that instance…….doesnt look like we did though.
|
|
mikeyc
Academy Starlet
Posts: 207
|
Post by mikeyc on Feb 4, 2014 8:42:39 GMT
Doesn't it mean they've got a disillusioned player who doesn't want to be there on their books? Not such a blinder!
|
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 4, 2014 8:43:26 GMT
Regards to Cattermole and the break down of the move. Sunderland played a blinder there, however we should of really had a back up target in that instance…….doesnt look like we did though. Maybe it was one going out dependant on him coming in, when he didn't come in the team were happy with ours staying (palacios or whelan?)and didn't want to just bring a back up in? |
|
|
|
Post by MuddyWoody on Feb 4, 2014 8:49:09 GMT
Didn't our crack transfer team have their heads firmly up their own arses for most of the window? Again?
Headline striker needed, one apparently overweight unproven loanee striker secured. Amazing performance.
Scholes out!
|
|
|
|
Post by stokecitytalke on Feb 4, 2014 9:33:09 GMT
It was reported that he couldn't agree wages with us (surprise surprise!), plus Sunderland were going to (or did) loan Craig Gardener, so even though they had signed Bridcutt they would have been short if Cattermole had come to us.
Or they played us like a fish!
|
|
|
|
Post by siggy on Feb 4, 2014 10:04:12 GMT
Did we really want him - maybe Poyet had a point that we unsettled him before our big game.
A few clubs seem to be interested in players and then never signing for whatever reason - Arsenal with Cabaye just before they play them, I sure a lot of this is just mischief making to wind teams and managers up.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeycov on Feb 4, 2014 10:15:22 GMT
So the Sunderland chairman refused to sell stoke cattermole right at the death which meant stoke would find it hard to sign someone else ,it also looks like he delayed Danny Grahams move to Middlesboro which meant hull could not sigh Tom Ince on loan crafty sod!!!! Its just what anybody with a bit of nouse would do. Its got to a stage where you almost need two transfer teams. One working on your own signings and the other trying to frustrate your opponents deals. Its dog eat dog down there, there's just too much money riding on the outcome. Not that the money is totally ruining the game, I must confess I thoroughly enjoyed Man City vs Chelsea last night. Some awesome talent on display, how special is that Hazzard? I think the episode has backfired on Sunderland. Cattermole may have been considering his position re leaving after they (unexpectedly) made the Capital One Cup Final Although I see the need to strengthen midfield , I had some reservations re Cattermole. I also thought that we may be able to get better value, with the reported £5million. It may have soured relations with the Black Cats, but I agree we were a bit a naive and need more of a cutting edge to our transfer dealings - that may mean it's time to review our wages structure however. |
|
|
|
Post by lastoftheldk on Feb 4, 2014 10:20:46 GMT
So the Sunderland chairman refused to sell stoke cattermole right at the death which meant stoke would find it hard to sign someone else ,it also looks like he delayed Danny Grahams move to Middlesboro which meant hull could not sigh Tom Ince on loan crafty sod!!!! Its just what anybody with a bit of nouse would do. Its got to a stage where you almost need two transfer teams. One working on your own signings and the other trying to frustrate your opponents deals. Its dog eat dog down there, there's just too much money riding on the outcome. Not that the money is totally ruining the game, I must confess I thoroughly enjoyed Man City vs Chelsea last night. Some awesome talent on display, how special is that Hazzard? Last nights game proved that money is running/ruining the game |
|
|
|
Post by alster on Feb 4, 2014 10:22:16 GMT
Its just what anybody with a bit of nouse would do. Its got to a stage where you almost need two transfer teams. One working on your own signings and the other trying to frustrate your opponents deals. Its dog eat dog down there, there's just too much money riding on the outcome. Not that the money is totally ruining the game, I must confess I thoroughly enjoyed Man City vs Chelsea last night. Some awesome talent on display, how special is that Hazzard? I think the episode has backfired on Sunderland. Cattermole may have been considering his position re leaving after they (unexpectedly) made the Capital One Cup Final Although I see the need to strengthen midfield , I had some reservations re Cattermole. I also thought that we may be able to get better value, with the reported £5million. It may have soured relations with the Black Cats, but I agree we were a bit a naive and need more of a cutting edge to our transfer dealings - that may mean it's time to review our wages structure however. I've been posting on the wage structure thing for some time. I have my suspicions (totally unfounded) that could be what the current austerity against record increase in income is all about. Making room to rejig the wage structure. |
|
|
|
Post by realstokebloke on Feb 4, 2014 11:17:57 GMT
If, for no other reason than leverage, I don't know why we didn't bid seriously for Bridcutt.
If we got him, we'd have had the position covered and done so by a younger, cheaper guy (so Gustavo thinks anyway) with less red mist issues and arguably more potential. We knew him & had an 'in' (Carto had the links as he was bus agent until recently - unless of course he was as bad as his agent as he appears to be as our DoF).
And even if we didn't, our position would have been a fail safe: we'll back out of a deal for LB but only if you sell us Clattermole.
But to be able to do that of course would have meant something akin to a proper strategy - not fannying around hi-fiving on the last afternoon.
(& take on board the story you saw Lakeland Potter about him refusing the deal - but even if that was the case, we'd still have them by the s&c's if we had our claws properly into Bridcutt & they'd have had to pay it if it was true - and I can believe that it was actually.)
Anyway, if nothing else it confirms what we already knew: Sunderland are a right bunch of twots and it should stop us trying to sign all their reserves & cast offs.
But rightly or wrongly, I think Clattermole will go in at no2 on our Sumer target list behind Diouf.
|
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Feb 4, 2014 11:55:56 GMT
Nobody seems to have mentioned the fact that Rafa Benitez enquired about Cattermole on transfer night. I reckon Sunderland turned us down thinking Rafa would offer more, but left it too late!
|
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on Feb 4, 2014 11:57:33 GMT
Should we be blaming others for our own shortcomings in the transfer window?
|
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Feb 4, 2014 12:05:01 GMT
The deal was pulled not because Stoke we're naive or because Sunderland didn't want to sell to a rival but because Cattermole asked for a pay off & his club refused as reported in the media.
As he didnt ask for a transfer he was entitled to one.
This by the way is the number 1 reason why players rarely submit a transfer request.
Where I do criticise Stoke is leaving it so late that we couln't go to other targets.
|
|
|
|
Post by hollybush on Feb 4, 2014 12:14:54 GMT
So the Sunderland chairman refused to sell stoke cattermole right at the death which meant stoke would find it hard to sign someone else ,it also looks like he delayed Danny Grahams move to Middlesboro which meant hull could not sigh Tom Ince on loan crafty sod!!!! Its just what anybody with a bit of nouse would do. Its got to a stage where you almost need two transfer teams. One working on your own signings and the other trying to frustrate your opponents deals. Its dog eat dog down there, there's just too much money riding on the outcome. Not that the money is totally ruining the game, I must confess I thoroughly enjoyed Man City vs Chelsea last night. Some awesome talent on display, how special is that Hazzard? Aye, so special you couldn't even be bothered to spell his name properly.  |
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on Feb 4, 2014 12:29:37 GMT
The deal was pulled not because Stoke we're naive or because Sunderland didn't want to sell to a rival but because Cattermole asked for a pay off & his club refused as reported in the media. As he didnt ask for a transfer he was entitled to one. This by the way is the number 1 reason why players rarely submit a transfer request. Where I do criticise Stoke is leaving it so late that we couln't go to other targets. Spot on. He never arrived at Stoke and pretty much all reports had the deal pulled by Sunderland. It sounds like first rate BS that it was down to wages. Our mistake was not to move sooner (how long had it been reported that we were after LC - weeks?). But that may have been down to waiting on other deals. It seems both of our failures on deadline day were down to other parties (Sunderland change of mind, Rennes cocking up). Much that many want to blame Scholes and Cartwright (and they may deserve some of the blame), it would seem that these failures weren't largely down to them. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2014 12:57:21 GMT
Did we really want him - maybe Poyet had a point that we unsettled him before our big game. A few clubs seem to be interested in players and then never signing for whatever reason - Arsenal with Cabaye just before they play them, I sure a lot of this is just mischief making to wind teams and managers up. That we were still chasing the deal on Friday (a few days after that game) including sending a few bids until one was agreed and getting his agent over to the Brit says that we did really want him, yes |
|
|
|
Post by Danstoke82 on Feb 4, 2014 13:06:40 GMT
While we will probably never know the full story, from the outside looking in, it looked like complete time wasting and our crack transfer unit fell for it. No wonder they looked so happy about finally tying up a deal, albeit for a pizza Crack or cack mate?;-) |
|
|
|
Post by huuuuuth on Feb 4, 2014 19:41:54 GMT
While we will probably never know the full story, from the outside looking in, it looked like complete time wasting and our crack transfer unit fell for it. No wonder they looked so happy about finally tying up a deal, albeit for a pizza Crack or cack mate?;-) Take your pick ode :-D |
|
|
|
Post by bobdebilde on Feb 4, 2014 19:49:37 GMT
glad it didnt happen weve signed enough shite from them since weve been in the prem
|
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Feb 4, 2014 19:55:49 GMT
Didn't our crack transfer team have their heads firmly up their own arses for most of the window? Again? Headline striker needed, one apparently overweight unproven loanee striker secured. Amazing performance. Scholes out! Leaving out PO then, as it goes against your point I'm guessing. |
|
|
|
Post by Fred Ferret on Feb 4, 2014 20:05:31 GMT
We were mugs to trust dealing with the likes of Ellis Short and his "oppo" Poyet.
However, if they played us on the end of a line, I'm sure that the questionable level of "integrity" that they have demonstrated will be only too well known by other clubs. Therefore, let's hope they reap what they sow.
Short has shown a remarkable consistency in demonstrating his competence [lack of] - judging by the queue of incompetents that he has recruited. Blunderland FC has comfortably lived up to the perception, held by everyone else in the football community.
As for the questionable Poyet - he will go the way of his predecessor - it's simply just a matter of time.
|
|
