|
Post by realstokebloke on Jul 9, 2018 21:15:47 GMT
Have you read any of this thread? 55 of the 58 pages have been about political horseshit. Right I’ve read all the previous pages as you suggested, that was hard going I can tell you! I can admire someone who sticks to his principles like Eric Liddell did by not running on the Sabbath at the Olympic Games. But on the other hand how can I respect someone who may believe that acts of violence against innocent people can achieve anything except more violence? My conclusion is that he’s a ... uber twat?
And simply not worth the shitestorm he brings (or leaves behind)?
Or a fraction of the fee rumoured?
And, in which case, you'd be spot on.
|
|
|
Post by creweoatcake1 on Jul 9, 2018 21:48:23 GMT
So anyone who doesn't share your view is a moron? ..... Bright Spark you are! Anyone who says they aren’t going to get behind a Stoke player is a moron...my view is i’d support him if he signed for us. So yes anyone who won’t support him if he signs is a moron Thankfully your opinion doesn't count for much!
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Jul 9, 2018 22:18:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jul 9, 2018 22:22:54 GMT
Been lots and lots of transfers o er the years between the two clubs. Seems a while since we had a successful one coming in. Was going to say Odemwingie but he came via Cardiff.
|
|
|
Post by Edward Tattsyrup on Jul 9, 2018 22:28:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2018 22:32:33 GMT
Anyone who says they aren’t going to get behind a Stoke player is a moron...my view is i’d support him if he signed for us. So yes anyone who won’t support him if he signs is a moron Thankfully your opinion doesn't count for much! It counts for the same as yours which is fuck all. Fact remains i’ll get behind any player who pulls on a Stoke shirt. His politics mean sod all, he’s entitled to them.
|
|
|
Post by Ygor on Jul 9, 2018 23:19:23 GMT
So, Rowett isn't fully in control of who we sign then - he merely signs those that Tony and Mark say he can?Just what I always suspected was the case. I'm not sure I like the process but I admit I'm pleased about Etebo and Afobe. And how did you come to that conclusion? “We are working very hard. Tony (Scholes) and Mark (Cartwright) are working very hard to try to get some of the targets we have all agreed upon and ultimately it’s like anything: I want them tomorrow and they want the best deals! We then work together to try to find the middle ground.” I simply read the quote and interpreted it as meaning that Mr Rowett can't actually get a player in unless Scholes and Cartwright agree to it. That means he has to compromise. That to me means GR does not rule the roost on recruitment. He might have the final say on whether or not a player comes in, but only providing Scholes and Cartwright have already said he can have the said player if he wants them. This process got us Wimmer, Imbula and Berahino. It suggests Scholes and Cartwright were instrumental in those transfers. So why did only Hughes pay the price of such failure? So how would you interpret the quote?
|
|
|
Post by Absolution on Jul 10, 2018 0:00:58 GMT
And how did you come to that conclusion? “We are working very hard. Tony (Scholes) and Mark (Cartwright) are working very hard to try to get some of the targets we have all agreed upon and ultimately it’s like anything: I want them tomorrow and they want the best deals! We then work together to try to find the middle ground.” I simply read the quote and interpreted it as meaning that Mr Rowett can't actually get a player in unless Scholes and Cartwright agree to it. That means he has to compromise. That to me means GR does not rule the roost on recruitment. He might have the final say on whether or not a player comes in, but only providing Scholes and Cartwright have already said he can have the said player if he wants them. This process got us Wimmer, Imbula and Berahino. It suggests Scholes and Cartwright were instrumental in those transfers. So why did only Hughes pay the price of such failure? So how would you interpret the quote? Rowett names the player. The transfer team try to get the player. But they can’t just get the player at any price, they’ve got to make sure the price is reasonable and affordable. For example (and using an extreme to make the point), Rowett wants Ritchie from Newcastle. Newcastle might want £25m. Should the transfer team just pay it? No, they’ll negotiate to get the best deal for Stoke. They might get the player, they might not, but they can’t just pay whatever the selling club ask for. I don’t see it as any more sinister or meaningful than that. Rowett’s job is to identify the players he wants. He only has to look after the football side of things. The transfer team have to look at the football and financial side of things.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2018 0:01:24 GMT
Agentunclesam has got a great record with his midland clubs, WBA, and ourselves have been linked to Ritchie & Hugh, in fact we have offered the big German a improved 2 year contract ?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2018 0:04:38 GMT
I really miss Walters and I think McClean would serve us well as a 'new Walters' for three or so seasons.
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Jul 10, 2018 1:09:54 GMT
Putting aside all the political backage this player brings, when was the last time we signed a player from WBA that was any good?
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Jul 10, 2018 5:54:34 GMT
I really miss Walters and I think McClean would serve us well as a 'new Walters' for three or so seasons. He couldn't lace Walters boots.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jul 10, 2018 6:46:58 GMT
“We are working very hard. Tony (Scholes) and Mark (Cartwright) are working very hard to try to get some of the targets we have all agreed upon and ultimately it’s like anything: I want them tomorrow and they want the best deals! We then work together to try to find the middle ground.” I simply read the quote and interpreted it as meaning that Mr Rowett can't actually get a player in unless Scholes and Cartwright agree to it. That means he has to compromise. That to me means GR does not rule the roost on recruitment. He might have the final say on whether or not a player comes in, but only providing Scholes and Cartwright have already said he can have the said player if he wants them. This process got us Wimmer, Imbula and Berahino. It suggests Scholes and Cartwright were instrumental in those transfers. So why did only Hughes pay the price of such failure? So how would you interpret the quote? Rowett names the player. The transfer team try to get the player. But they can’t just get the player at any price, they’ve got to make sure the price is reasonable and affordable. For example (and using an extreme to make the point), Rowett wants Ritchie from Newcastle. Newcastle might want £25m. Should the transfer team just pay it? No, they’ll negotiate to get the best deal for Stoke. They might get the player, they might not, but they can’t just pay whatever the selling club ask for. I don’t see it as any more sinister or meaningful than that. Rowett’s job is to identify the players he wants. He only has to look after the football side of things. The transfer team have to look at the football and financial side of things. This statement clarifies a few things. 1. Teflon and Slopey do have an input into player identification. The players 'they have all agreed on'. 2. They hold the a tremendous amount of power about which players actually join having the sole say on value. They act like the treasury in implementing Government policy. Often the delivery bares very little resemblance to the original policy because the treasury have all the power, 3. Following on from the above revelation, it is these pair of clowns who decided that Wimmer, Imbula, Berahino actually represented good value! 4. They are every single bit as guilty as Hughes for relegation and should have met the exact same fate. The fact they haven't takes is a complete piss take.
|
|
|
Post by Fred Ferret on Jul 10, 2018 6:49:56 GMT
Rowett names the player. The transfer team try to get the player. But they can’t just get the player at any price, they’ve got to make sure the price is reasonable and affordable. For example (and using an extreme to make the point), Rowett wants Ritchie from Newcastle. Newcastle might want £25m. Should the transfer team just pay it? No, they’ll negotiate to get the best deal for Stoke. They might get the player, they might not, but they can’t just pay whatever the selling club ask for. I don’t see it as any more sinister or meaningful than that. Rowett’s job is to identify the players he wants. He only has to look after the football side of things. The transfer team have to look at the football and financial side of things. This statement clarifies a few things. 1. Teflon and Slopey do have an input into player identification. The players 'they have all agreed on'. 2. They hold the a tremendous amount of power about which players actually join having the sole say on value. They act like the treasury in implementing Government policy. Often the delivery bares very little resemblance to the original policy because the treasury have all the power, 3. Following on from the above revelation, it is these pair of clowns who decided that Wimmer, Imbula, Berahino actually represented good value! 4. They are every single bit as guilty as Hughes for relegation and should have met the exact same fate. The fact they haven't takes is a complete piss take. The reason why our transfer signings have seemingly ground to a shuddering halt?
|
|
|
Post by nutterpotter on Jul 10, 2018 6:50:20 GMT
And how did you come to that conclusion? “We are working very hard. Tony (Scholes) and Mark (Cartwright) are working very hard to try to get some of the targets we have all agreed upon and ultimately it’s like anything: I want them tomorrow and they want the best deals! We then work together to try to find the middle ground.” I simply read the quote and interpreted it as meaning that Mr Rowett can't actually get a player in unless Scholes and Cartwright agree to it. That means he has to compromise. That to me means GR does not rule the roost on recruitment. He might have the final say on whether or not a player comes in, but only providing Scholes and Cartwright have already said he can have the said player if he wants them. This process got us Wimmer, Imbula and Berahino. It suggests Scholes and Cartwright were instrumental in those transfers. So why did only Hughes pay the price of such failure? So how would you interpret the quote? Rowett, Scholes and the scouting team would have had a chat to compile the transfer shortlist. The scouting team would have had their input (Etebo etc) and Rowett would have had his input (Ritchie etc). They then try and reach an agreement. But Rowett has the final say on who they should go after. I interpreted the part where is says they're trying to get some of the players they've agreed on to mean that they will only sign a fraction of the targets on the shortlist. Obviously won't sign everyone.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 10, 2018 6:57:36 GMT
Isn't this how all 'transfer teams' work?
Of course they succeed as one or fail as one. That's what a 'team' is.
People mock the 'there's nothing wrong with the structure' line but that bit is actually true. It works fine if you've got people who know what they're doing and can actually work a lot better than an autocrat who's lost the plot filling up his world cup 2006 sticker book and then realising they don't fit into his system at all.
It stops working, same as anything, when the personnel is completely fuckwitted and doesn't know their arse from their elbow. That's unfortunately what we had for the last 2-3 years.
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Jul 10, 2018 7:11:30 GMT
“We are working very hard. Tony (Scholes) and Mark (Cartwright) are working very hard to try to get some of the targets we have all agreed upon and ultimately it’s like anything: I want them tomorrow and they want the best deals! We then work together to try to find the middle ground.” I simply read the quote and interpreted it as meaning that Mr Rowett can't actually get a player in unless Scholes and Cartwright agree to it. That means he has to compromise. That to me means GR does not rule the roost on recruitment. He might have the final say on whether or not a player comes in, but only providing Scholes and Cartwright have already said he can have the said player if he wants them. This process got us Wimmer, Imbula and Berahino. It suggests Scholes and Cartwright were instrumental in those transfers. So why did only Hughes pay the price of such failure? So how would you interpret the quote? Rowett, Scholes and the scouting team would have had a chat to compile the transfer shortlist. The scouting team would have had their input (Etebo etc) and Rowett would have had his input (Ritchie etc). They then try and reach an agreement. But Rowett has the final say on who they should go after. I interpreted the part where is says they're trying to get some of the players they've agreed on to mean that they will only sign a fraction of the targets on the shortlist. Obviously won't sign everyone. That’s Rowett who hasn’t actually won anything but that might be because he was never properly backed , I wonder whose view that Is
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 10, 2018 7:19:02 GMT
Rowett, Scholes and the scouting team would have had a chat to compile the transfer shortlist. The scouting team would have had their input (Etebo etc) and Rowett would have had his input (Ritchie etc). They then try and reach an agreement. But Rowett has the final say on who they should go after. I interpreted the part where is says they're trying to get some of the players they've agreed on to mean that they will only sign a fraction of the targets on the shortlist. Obviously won't sign everyone. That’s Rowett who hasn’t actually won anything but that might be because he was never properly backed , I wonder whose view that Is It's not so much a view as, erm, the truth, isn't it? Rather than repeat the same tired old mantra based on fuck all, why not scratch below the surface for once? I realise that's less fun, but it might just be a nice change of pace for the rest of us.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2018 7:56:49 GMT
Isn't this how all 'transfer teams' work? Of course they succeed as one or fail as one. That's what a 'team' is. People mock the 'there's nothing wrong with the structure' line but that bit is actually true. It works fine if you've got people who know what they're doing and can actually work a lot better than an autocrat who's lost the plot filling up his world cup 2006 sticker book and then realising they don't fit into his system at all. It stops working, same as anything, when the personnel is completely fuckwitted and doesn't know their arse from their elbow. That's unfortunately what we had for the last 2-3 years. I wonder what the owners meant in the summer when they came rushing to the media promising overhauls? Are we talking about a different type of grass seed for the pitch, a slightly different tone of Magnolia in the manager's office? None of us know the inner workings of the football club and who exactly is responsible for what, and it is indeed all guesswork, but I think there are undoubtedly going to be questions raised when owners promise overhauls and senior figures are continuing in their day to day jobs, which look identical to the last 2-3 years from the outside. I agree with your view on transfer teams, heavy stat based scouting and suchlike. I really believe there is a place in modern football for it and it is actually underused so much - in a sense of it being done properly with people who can do it effectively. If you read into Huddersfield Town and their recent success, you'll uncover some interesting people and their links to Pro Zone, Opta and ironcially, Sports Interactive and Football Manager!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2018 7:57:30 GMT
This signing is inevitable, time to get used to the idea of him being our player.
|
|
|
Post by johnnysoul60 on Jul 10, 2018 8:29:09 GMT
Putting aside all the political backage this player brings, when was the last time we signed a player from WBA that was any good? thats my main issue , his politics are understandable given his background pretty much the same as the working class british lads giving him grief if they had been brought up catholicsa in derry he is a product of his birthplace . I dont know if he is that good , he will try and be a good team player but not sure about his quality for 6m and premiership wages if Im honest
|
|
|
Post by JurgenVandeurzen on Jul 10, 2018 8:37:13 GMT
I'm far more concerned he's not turned up to pre-season than any of this other political bullshit - not the right attitude at all.
If Rowett wants him, I'll back him all the way.
|
|
|
Post by colinroberts1 on Jul 10, 2018 10:20:09 GMT
Great get him signed up, will be decent championship player. When played against us for Sunderland he used to beat the man and smack the ball hard and low into the box. All we have to do is get someone to make runs into the box to finish 😁😁
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Jul 10, 2018 11:04:48 GMT
That’s Rowett who hasn’t actually won anything but that might be because he was never properly backed , I wonder whose view that Is It's not so much a view as, erm, the truth, isn't it? Rather than repeat the same tired old mantra based on fuck all, why not scratch below the surface for once? I realise that's less fun, but it might just be a nice change of pace for the rest of us. Based on fuck all .? I think you will find a club senior figure said it , the question is why ?
|
|
|
Post by stokiebis on Jul 10, 2018 11:24:44 GMT
Thankfully your opinion doesn't count for much! It counts for the same as yours which is fuck all. Fact remains i’ll get behind any player who pulls on a Stoke shirt. His politics mean sod all, he’s entitled to them. So you would let an Isis supporter join our club it's exactly the same both r scum
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2018 11:25:07 GMT
I'm far more concerned he's not turned up to pre-season than any of this other political bullshit - not the right attitude at all. If Rowett wants him, I'll back him all the way. This - absolutely. So we do sign him and he doesn't get his way on one issue or another. Will do something similar? It's a genuine concern.
|
|
|
Post by stokeramblers on Jul 10, 2018 11:30:15 GMT
I'm far more concerned he's not turned up to pre-season than any of this other political bullshit - not the right attitude at all. If Rowett wants him, I'll back him all the way. Walters refused to train at Ipswich when he was trying to force through a move to us. Similar situation I feel. At least this suggests all the player stuff is sorted, it’s just about sorting the fee now. As an aside, great news for us that a close rival has had three players refuse to return for pre season training. Undermines the new boss puts a downer on things for them.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 10, 2018 12:00:19 GMT
It's not so much a view as, erm, the truth, isn't it? Rather than repeat the same tired old mantra based on fuck all, why not scratch below the surface for once? I realise that's less fun, but it might just be a nice change of pace for the rest of us. Based on fuck all .? I think you will find a club senior figure said it , the question is why ? Which of the clubs he was at do you think he should have won something with?
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Jul 10, 2018 12:12:02 GMT
Based on fuck all .? I think you will find a club senior figure said it , the question is why ? Which of the clubs he was at do you think he should have won something with? Don’t ask me ask the bloke who said it , it wasn’t me , look inside the club
|
|
|
Post by 1982stokie on Jul 10, 2018 12:15:18 GMT
I'm far more concerned he's not turned up to pre-season than any of this other political bullshit - not the right attitude at all. If Rowett wants him, I'll back him all the way. Have to agree with all the issues with player behaviour last season it doesn't look good, shows a lack of professionalism.
|
|