|
Post by lordb on Jan 18, 2018 22:55:45 GMT
He aged 10 years in the space of a couple of seasons after being Lerner's fall guy at Villa, Paul. He left Blackburn to voluntarily enter unemployment rather than spend another minute working for Venky's and Blackburn after they told him there was no money. He and Wolves seemed to mutually part once it became clear Lambert wouldn't have a big say in transfers. I appreciate that this is an unexpected chance back in the Prem for him, but the man has had his fill of being a yes man, I really think he might surprise a few people here and everywhere else.
I'm not sure what it is you're suggesting Rob ... that he would have turned the offer down, if he thought he wasn't going to have total control over transfers?
No one has total control,even Alex Ferguson didn't. Coates publicly stated today on the radio no point signing players the manager doesn't want. Transfer by committee is the norm everywhere now. As long as the manager has the final say then that will have to do. At Wolves players were signed irrespective of what Lambert said. That's the key difference. Obviously we have an issue in closing deals which probably requires a replacement for Scholes but that's for another day
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Jan 18, 2018 22:56:15 GMT
Have you got a link to that Radio Stoke interview Paul? Cheers
No sorry mate, it was on in the kitchen whilst I was cooking and it struck me how different his answers were to the ones in the press conference.
Funny thing is, he didn't say that he was actually his signing, he just kind of implied it, he was certainly aware of what he was doing, they were clever answers.
To tell you the truth I'm not particularly bothered about it either way, it was it is, I'm not going to lose sleep over it.
I thought exactly the same thing myself, seems strange we are bringing in an unknown quantity to fill one of the areas we are struggling with in a huge way, the lad has not played for two months can he hit the ground running ? we have to invest heavily on the right players this window no more pissing money up the wall on gambles we can not afford to on so many levels.
|
|
|
Post by realstokebloke on Jan 18, 2018 22:57:03 GMT
and so it starts. There has been so much blind optimism on here over the last few days but I can't help but feel that this has disaster written all over it. The transfer team have got their yes man, a man lucky to be in such a job and who will be complicit in the internal dealings of running the football team. Haha I'm glad I'm not the only one. I want to run with it but no one has even contemplated we could lose on Saturday. And this signing could be ace. But the impression it gives is of a cheap board hoping to God they can keep us up on the cheap. The very issue we've had for 2/3 years. Haha.
The LHW's are out already.
I guess actions will ultimately speak louder than words, no matter how much of a muddle Lamberto and TS manage to get them in regarding who scouted / bought our new FB.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 18, 2018 22:58:38 GMT
Haha I'm glad I'm not the only one. I want to run with it but no one has even contemplated we could lose on Saturday. And this signing could be ace. But the impression it gives is of a cheap board hoping to God they can keep us up on the cheap. The very issue we've had for 2/3 years. Haha.
The LHW's are out already.
I guess actions will ultimately speak louder than words, no matter how much of a muddle Lamberto and TS manage to get them in regarding who scouted / bought our new FB.I feel sorry for Lambert more than anything to be honest rsb. Maybe the board will surprise me?
|
|
|
Post by realstokebloke on Jan 18, 2018 23:03:12 GMT
Haha.
The LHW's are out already.
I guess actions will ultimately speak louder than words, no matter how much of a muddle Lamberto and TS manage to get them in regarding who scouted / bought our new FB. I feel sorry for Lambert more than anything to be honest rsb. Maybe the board will surprise me? Maybe.
He deserves his chance to be fair. And the backing of the top brass to even give him that chance.
btw, "LAW's" (Lambert Apologist Wankstains) does have a certain ring to it though?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 18, 2018 23:05:44 GMT
I feel sorry for Lambert more than anything to be honest rsb. Maybe the board will surprise me? Maybe.
He deserves his chance to be fair. And the backing of the top brass to even give him that chance.
btw, "LAW's" (Lambert Apologist Wankstains) does have a certain ring to it though? There's no point in appointing if you don't trust him to spend the money needed to get us out of this mess. HAha it does. I just hope he keeps us up then fooks off in the summer tbh.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 18, 2018 23:06:19 GMT
I'm not sure what you're suggesting Rob ... that he would have turned the offer down, if he thought he wasn't going to have total control over transfers?
I'm suggesting that having walked away from jobs in the past rather than have his hands tied, and said in the process that he never wants to go through anything like what he experienced at Villa again, he wouldn't automatically jump at the first job that came his way, even if it was in the Premier League. He doesn't strike me, having read up on him a fair bit this week in researching a piece for the fanzine, as that sort of character. I don't mean to be flippant Rob but I'll take that as yes then? There's not a shadow of doubt in my mind (based on what he said in his press conference this morning) that Stafylidis isn't his signing but by the time he'd done his interview with Radio Stoke later in the day, he was starting to imply that maybe he was. I doubt very much that he was in any position at all to dictate hard terms with regard to transfers in his interview on Sunday, that's not to say that ultimately, he might indeed have full hands on the transfer reigns. We'll just have to wait and see how it all pans out, I don't really see how any of us can really know at this point.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 18, 2018 23:11:32 GMT
I'm suggesting that having walked away from jobs in the past rather than have his hands tied, and said in the process that he never wants to go through anything like what he experienced at Villa again, he wouldn't automatically jump at the first job that came his way, even if it was in the Premier League. He doesn't strike me, having read up on him a fair bit this week in researching a piece for the fanzine, as that sort of character. I don't mean to be flippant Rob but I'll take that as yes then? There's not a shadow of doubt in my mind (based on what he said in his press conference this morning) that Stafylidis isn't his signing but by the time he'd done his interview with Radio Stoke later in the day, he was starting to imply that maybe he was. I doubt very much that he was in any position at all to dictate hard terms with regard to transfers in his interview on Sunday, that's not to say that ultimately, he might indeed have full hands on the transfer reigns. We'll just have to wait and see how it all pans out, I don't really see how any of us can really know at this point. I don’t think I could have been much clearer to be honest Paul. I don’t see him as this desperate figure just happy to have a Prem job and say yes sir, no sir, three bags full sir, certainly not after his experience at Villa.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 18, 2018 23:14:00 GMT
I'm not sure what it is you're suggesting Rob ... that he would have turned the offer down, if he thought he wasn't going to have total control over transfers?
No one has total control,even Alex Ferguson didn't. Coates publicly stated today on the radio no point signing players the manager doesn't want. Transfer by committee is the norm everywhere now. As long as the manager has the final say then that will have to do. At Wolves players were signed irrespective of what Lambert said. That's the key difference. Obviously we have an issue in closing deals which probably requires a replacement for Scholes but that's for another day Yeah and I was the one who actually quoted Coates on here as soon as he said it Will. I feel like I'm getting dragged into am argument I haven't made. MY point was to do with whether Lambert would have turned the offer down under pretty much any circumstances and I dont think he would have done.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jan 18, 2018 23:16:10 GMT
No one has total control,even Alex Ferguson didn't. Coates publicly stated today on the radio no point signing players the manager doesn't want. Transfer by committee is the norm everywhere now. As long as the manager has the final say then that will have to do. At Wolves players were signed irrespective of what Lambert said. That's the key difference. Obviously we have an issue in closing deals which probably requires a replacement for Scholes but that's for another day Yeah and I was the one who actually quoted Coates on here as soon as he said it Will. I feel like I'm getting dragged into am argument I haven't made. MY point was to do with whether Lambert would have turned the offer down under pretty much any circumstances and I dont think he would have done. We will never know. I'd imagine he might have done if it was a Wolves type set up a bonkers funny farm like Blackburn.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 18, 2018 23:22:56 GMT
I don't mean to be flippant Rob but I'll take that as yes then? There's not a shadow of doubt in my mind (based on what he said in his press conference this morning) that Stafylidis isn't his signing but by the time he'd done his interview with Radio Stoke later in the day, he was starting to imply that maybe he was. I doubt very much that he was in any position at all to dictate hard terms with regard to transfers in his interview on Sunday, that's not to say that ultimately, he might indeed have full hands on the transfer reigns. We'll just have to wait and see how it all pans out, I don't really see how any of us can really know at this point. I don’t think I could have been much clearer to be honest Paul. I don’t see him as this desperate figure just happy to have a Prem job and say yes sir, no sir, three bags full sir, certainly not after his experience at Villa. I haven't said that have I Rob? I've said two things 1. WE don't know what remit he's been given with regard to transfers and 2. That I dont believe he was in much of a position to dictate terms with regard to that transfer policy. Of course I'm only guessing but I would suspect that he would have agreed to pretty much any terms in this regard but that doesnt necessarily mean that he's had to.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 18, 2018 23:25:19 GMT
I don’t think I could have been much clearer to be honest Paul. I don’t see him as this desperate figure just happy to have a Prem job and say yes sir, no sir, three bags full sir, certainly not after his experience at Villa. I haven't said that have I Rob? I've said two things 1. WE don't know what remit he's been given with regard to transfers and 2. That I dont believe he was in much of a position to dictate terms with regard to that transfer policy. Of course I'm only guessing but I would suspect that he would have agreed to pretty much any terms in this regard but that doesnt necessarily mean that he's had to. You queried my suggestion he wouldn’t be a yes man I thought Paul?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 18, 2018 23:27:27 GMT
I haven't said that have I Rob? I've said two things 1. WE don't know what remit he's been given with regard to transfers and 2. That I dont believe he was in much of a position to dictate terms with regard to that transfer policy. Of course I'm only guessing but I would suspect that he would have agreed to pretty much any terms in this regard but that doesnt necessarily mean that he's had to. You queried my suggestion he wouldn’t be a yes man I thought Paul? That doesn't mean he's actually having/had to do so though does it Rob?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 18, 2018 23:31:11 GMT
You queried my suggestion he wouldn’t be a yes man I thought Paul? That doesn't mean he's actually having/had to do so though does it Rob? It doesn’t mate but that was literally our first interaction on the thread and literally all I’d said was that I didn’t see him as a yes man!
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 18, 2018 23:40:23 GMT
That doesn't mean he's actually having/had to do so though does it Rob? It doesn’t mate but that was literally our first interaction on the thread and literally all I’d said was that I didn’t see him as a yes man! You said it on a thread where people were discussing whether a specific signing was his or not and I responded in that context. That being, that I believe that he would have agreed to pretty much any terms with regard to transfers, if it meant he was going to get the job. That doesn't at all mean that I'm suggesting that he's actually had to.
|
|
|
Post by djduncanjames on Jan 19, 2018 0:23:05 GMT
Think my Dad said he got Stafylidis shagging birds at the placemate in the early 70s
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Jan 19, 2018 3:11:09 GMT
No sorry mate, it was on in the kitchen whilst I was cooking and it struck me how different his answers were to the ones in the press conference.
Funny thing is, he didn't say that he was actually his signing, he just kind of implied it, he was certainly aware of what he was doing, they were clever answers.
To tell you the truth I'm not particularly bothered about it either way, it was it is, I'm not going to lose sleep over it.
I thought exactly the same thing myself, seems strange we are bringing in an unknown quantity to fill one of the areas we are struggling with in a huge way, the lad has not played for two months can he hit the ground running ? we have to invest heavily on the right players this window no more pissing money up the wall on gambles we can not afford to on so many levels. This smells fishy. How do we know this is not another Imbula?
|
|
|
Post by marrer on Jan 19, 2018 7:08:57 GMT
It doesn’t mate but that was literally our first interaction on the thread and literally all I’d said was that I didn’t see him as a yes man! You said it on a thread where people were discussing whether a specific signing was his or not and I responded in that context. That being, that I believe that he would have agreed to pretty much any terms with regard to transfers, if it meant he was going to get the job. That doesn't at all mean that I'm suggesting that he's actually had to. Lads lads shhh.... that's enough. Jump on the phone, have a natter and get on the same page. Tomorrow's going to be a great day. UTP
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 19, 2018 7:41:56 GMT
It doesn’t mate but that was literally our first interaction on the thread and literally all I’d said was that I didn’t see him as a yes man! You said it on a thread where people were discussing whether a specific signing was his or not and I responded in that context. That being, that I believe that he would have agreed to pretty much any terms with regard to transfers, if it meant he was going to get the job. That doesn't at all mean that I'm suggesting that he's actually had to. With respect Paul, the discussion had widened into Lambert's role 'the board have got their yes man' was something someone posted on that page, for instance. The lone point I was making was that that was not the impression I'd got. No more, no less. I never mentioned anything about dictating terms or anything like that. To distill my point: 1) I don't think Lambert would have taken the job if he was just here to be a patsy 2) I don't think he'll be asked to be one.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2018 7:44:17 GMT
You can just feel the chemistry going on here. It's absolute poetry really.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 19, 2018 10:20:33 GMT
You said it on a thread where people were discussing whether a specific signing was his or not and I responded in that context. That being, that I believe that he would have agreed to pretty much any terms with regard to transfers, if it meant he was going to get the job. That doesn't at all mean that I'm suggesting that he's actually had to. With respect Paul, the discussion had widened into Lambert's role 'the board have got their yes man' was something someone posted on that page, for instance. The lone point I was making was that that was not the impression I'd got. No more, no less. I never mentioned anything about dictating terms or anything like that. To distill my point: 1) I don't think Lambert would have taken the job if he was just here to be a patsy 2) I don't think he'll be asked to be one. Rob the quote actually was 'the TRANSFER TEAM have got their yes man', so I'm quite comfortable in my belief that the conversation hadn't actually widened and it was that comment you were specifically responding too. If it wasn't and you meant something else, then forgive me but I'm sure you can see why I might have thought that was the case.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jan 19, 2018 10:22:48 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Jan 19, 2018 10:28:12 GMT
I think stoke city signed him. I hope this helps.
|
|
|
Post by jimmygscfc on Jan 19, 2018 10:35:03 GMT
Doesn't mean to say we won't buy him though Grapey, if it all worked out for both parties. Look at the Bruno fiasco to see that options are a moveable feast!
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 19, 2018 11:02:43 GMT
With respect Paul, the discussion had widened into Lambert's role 'the board have got their yes man' was something someone posted on that page, for instance. The lone point I was making was that that was not the impression I'd got. No more, no less. I never mentioned anything about dictating terms or anything like that. To distill my point: 1) I don't think Lambert would have taken the job if he was just here to be a patsy 2) I don't think he'll be asked to be one. Rob the quote actually was 'the TRANSFER TEAM have got their yes man', so I'm quite comfortable in my belief that the conversation hadn't actually widened and it was that comment you were specifically responding too. If it wasn't and you meant something else, then forgive me but I'm sure you can see why I might have thought that was the case. I don’t believe that the transfer team or anyone at the club want a yes man or that Lambert would be happy to be one Paul. Indeed, Lambert and Wolves parted ways specifically because he wouldn’t be a yes man on transfers.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Jan 19, 2018 11:16:14 GMT
I'm sure the conversation went something like...
"we've been told for months to chase 2 fullbacks by the previous management. We agreed. We've got an academy kid on one side backed up by an injured aging pro. We've got a championship prospect on the left and an injured pro.
We've been set up all year to okay this way. We suggest you let us close these deals while you get to know the squad and tell us if you agree with the other two on the list. A midfielder and a striker. Just get a win on Saturday and we'll catch up after that.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 19, 2018 11:17:58 GMT
Rob the quote actually was 'the TRANSFER TEAM have got their yes man', so I'm quite comfortable in my belief that the conversation hadn't actually widened and it was that comment you were specifically responding too. If it wasn't and you meant something else, then forgive me but I'm sure you can see why I might have thought that was the case. I don’t believe that the transfer team or anyone at the club want a yes man or that Lambert would be happy to be one Paul. Indeed, Lambert and Wolves parted ways specifically because he wouldn’t be a yes man on transfers. Fair do's Rob. We're both speculating of course but I suspect that (due to the position that Lambert found himself in on Sunday) that the issue of transfer policy quite probably wasn't that high on the agenda. More a case of ... "hey Paul we've got a terrific transfer team here, we're sure you'll have a great relationship with them." "Yes, I'm sure I will". Whereas somebody in a stronger bargaining position, would have been able to have dictated specific terms to some degree. But hey, as I said, we're both speculating at the end of the day.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jan 19, 2018 11:22:03 GMT
Whatever the true story, it's pretty obvious that Mark Cartwright is a tremendously influential figure at the club and that fact is absolutely fucking frightening.
|
|
|
Post by redwhite on Jan 19, 2018 11:52:40 GMT
He's been given Imbula's shirt number. Does this mean the Great Gianelli won't be making a January return?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 19, 2018 11:54:38 GMT
He's been given Imbula's shirt number. Does this mean the Great Gianelli won't be making a January return? We can but hope!
|
|