Possibly 8th signing by end of the week

This, if there’s an upgrade available we go for it, no room for sentiment, and regardless of that the whole squad will have a part to play.

Around March last season I thought Goldson, for example, looked fatigued, hopefully there won’t be the need to ask too much of players this season if we get the squad strong enough.


Spot on mate.
 
I’m struggling to agree.

Worral?
One of the main reasons Worrall played so many games is he had a clause in his loan contract stipulating a minimum number of games to be played, or Forest would recall him.

I'd imagine that the clause also contained financial penalties for not playing a set amount of minutes, but we can't be sure on that.
 
Bollocks mate to most of that.
I take it you never watched him yesterday? Probably had a better game than Tav, defended ok, crossing was good (1 assist) and scored from free kick.


Barisic did well mate, but once again Tav was outstanding yesterday.

He provides terrific width and athleticism down the right and constantly linked well with Ojo.
 
It would an utterly pointless signing. If we're signing a CH he should be going in to the starting 11, or at least be able to challenge.

The only way we improve as a team is if we sign players better than the ones we have.

We won nothing last year.

Signing players who are not better or even on a level with our current players will not win us the league.

Thankfully our management team/DOF/board will reaslie this also.
 
Barisic did well mate, but once again Tav was outstanding yesterday.

He provides terrific width and athleticism down the right and constantly linked well with Ojo.

Not saying Tav never played well, I am saying I thought Barasic was better and had his assist and goal.:)
 
One of the main reasons Worrall played so many games is he had a clause in his loan contract stipulating a minimum number of games to be played, or Forest would recall him.

I'd imagine that the clause also contained financial penalties for not playing a set amount of minutes, but we can't be sure on that.

The reason Worrall played so many games was the manager thought he was the best man for the job.

Nothing to do with any clause, we wouldn't risk our season just to save a few quid.
 
You just made that up.
It was confirmed in various press reports last year that O'Neill tried to take him back to Forest but he couldn't, because we had played him for the required number of minutes.

Here's the article: https://www.nottinghampost.com/sport/football/football-news/joe-worrall-would-played-part-2532826

"But that would have required the Scottish giants to tear up the agreement reached back in the summer, when Aitor Karanka was in charge, which stipulated that he would remain a Rangers player if he played a required number of games before January. "
 
The Katic v Benkovic situation shows that what you are saying is totally correct.

Katic was reported as being £1m at the time. He already had 1 Croatia full cap and was an Under 21 regular. Leicester bought Benkovic for £12m iirc with no full caps, loaned him out to Celtic. They recently played together for the Croatia U21 and Katic was superb compared to Benkovic, who was then dropped for the next games. The Celtic fans loved Benkovic but I'd argue some of him performances were suspect. Niko, on the other hand, has continued to improve and will surely get another call up to the Croatia squad soon.

So far we've spent about £1.4m on transfer fees/compensation (Edmundson, Hastie, Aribo), and our new signings are already making an impact and impressing.

At our level cost doesnt always equal quality. I think the club have done a superb job so far. If we can add quality and spend a fraction of our rivals then I will be a very happy girl!

Lots of sense.

The fascination with transfer fees comes across as very immature IMO.
 
You just made that up.

He didn’t though, Martin O’Neill confirmed in January that he couldn’t be recalled as we’d played him enough times that it meant a clause in the loan deal triggered and he wasn’t able to.

That doesn’t mean we ‘have’ to play loan signings but the deals always encourage the team taking them to play their player. Rangers will do the same otherwise its pointless.
 
I thought Barisic and Tav were our worst players yesterday. One got 2 assists and the other a goal and an assist.

Used to happen with Boyd all the time 'He was shite today, even though he scored a double'. :))
 
Yur right pal how can barasic be our best left back when he’s been dug sh!te.
Forget how much we payed.
Forget he’s a Croatian international.
Has he been better than Halliday or Flanagan in that left bck position absolutely not.
I go on performances and he’s been rotten I would take what payed for him tomorrow. The guy has no heart or fight, Halliday and Flanagan have that in abundance.
Barasic has not kicked his own @rse since the two games for Osijek, makes me think wer they a flash in the pan certainly looks that way.
Did you miss the game last night?
 
This, if there’s an upgrade available we go for it, no room for sentiment, and regardless of that the whole squad will have a part to play.

Around March last season I thought Goldson, for example, looked fatigued, hopefully there won’t be the need to ask too much of players this season if we get the squad strong enough.

Exactly what I said yesterday, If upgrades are available for any position we go for them.

Katic is a very good prospect but still rough around the edges another season or 2 learning his trade won’t do him any harm it’s also more than possible he will be able to displace Goldson.
 
Not saying Tav never played well, I am saying I thought Barasic was better and had his assist and goal.:)


Fair enough mate, opinions I guess.

I thought Barisic played well too, but with 2 assists in half an hour Sunday and another one last night, I think Tav looks different class and has started this season exactly as he finished the last one.
 
It was confirmed in various press reports last year that O'Neill tried to take him back to Forest but he couldn't, because we had played him for the required number of minutes.

Here's the article: https://www.nottinghampost.com/sport/football/football-news/joe-worrall-would-played-part-2532826

"But that would have required the Scottish giants to tear up the agreement reached back in the summer, when Aitor Karanka was in charge, which stipulated that he would remain a Rangers player if he played a required number of games before January. "

Worrall wasn't playing just to ensure we reached the set number of games, he was playing as Katic's form had severely dropped - Motherwell at Home and Hamilton Away being 2 examples.
 
A CH or a striker is the obvious area but are there other areas we need to fill? If Jack is injured/suspended who is his cover, will Barasic last the whole season, is Jones our only choice at left wing?
 
He didn’t though, Martin O’Neill confirmed in January that he couldn’t be recalled as we’d played him enough times that it meant a clause in the loan deal triggered and he wasn’t able to.

That doesn’t mean we ‘have’ to play loan signings but the deals always encourage the team taking them to play their player. Rangers will do the same otherwise its pointless.

F*ck off

:)
 
Worrall wasn't playing just to ensure we reached the set number of games, he was playing as Katic's form had severely dropped - Motherwell at Home and Hamilton Away being 2 examples.

It never severely dropped.

Katic was dropped for the Villarreal away game and never played until those 2 games and at best was a bit rusty.
He never caused any goals due to cock ups like Worrall and Goldson did.
 
We do need another striker, regardless if Morelos stays or not.

Centre back as Goldson needs cover too.

I still feel quality out wide right is something we are lacking
 
Worrall wasn't playing just to ensure we reached the set number of games, he was playing as Katic's form had severely dropped - Motherwell at Home and Hamilton Away being 2 examples.
Regardless, I didn't just "make up" the clause. It existed.

It was certainly a major factor in Worrall playing. The other of course being that we played 60 games last year, and it's simply not sensible to ask a CB pairing to play 60 game in a season - Worrall had to be rotated in eventually to give one of the CB's a break.
 
A CH or a striker is the obvious area but are there other areas we need to fill? If Jack is injured/suspended who is his cover, will Barasic last the whole season, is Jones our only choice at left wing?
Aribo, Arfield, Docherty can replace Jack is he is injured.
We have plenty wingers to replace Jones - Ojo, Hastie, Candeias, Stewart, Arfield (if we play similar formation to end of last season) and potentially Kent.
 
Worral wasnt even close to as bad as some people are making out. He was outstanding against celtic at Ibrox in December, outstanding in the big europa league games aswell. One bad mistake against killie and a few loose passes here and there seriously cloud peoples judgement
 
Worrall wasn't playing just to ensure we reached the set number of games, he was playing as Katic's form had severely dropped - Motherwell at Home and Hamilton Away being 2 examples.

This is being quickly forgotten, Katic is still a young man and will be managed properly by the Management team.
 
Our Andy is the best left back at the club.No idea why Barisic gets the start ahead of him.
Probably because we spent money on him.Bet ya Andy is frustrated,I know that I am.:confused:
Halliday does well when asked to cover left back but he's not the best left back imo. Barisic is the best going forward and has the greatest potential I'd say, Flanagan is the best defensive left back and Halliday is somewhere in the middle of both. Can get forward and can defend but doesn't Excel at either imo.
 
Worral wasnt even close to as bad as some people are making out. He was outstanding against celtic at Ibrox in December, outstanding in the big europa league games aswell. One bad mistake against killie and a few loose passes here and there seriously cloud peoples judgement
He was a good siege defender, in that when it came to games where our backs were against the wall and we had to defend constantly, he was pretty good at that.

When we were expected to dominate a game and he had to be wary of counter attacks, he was not good at that.
 
I would expect any other addition to be a replacement for McAuley as such and we pull the trigger on the idea Katic is going to play a lot.

If we are keeping Morelos I would be totally at ease with him, Defoe and Stewart as our forward options.
 
This, if there’s an upgrade available we go for it, no room for sentiment, and regardless of that the whole squad will have a part to play.

Around March last season I thought Goldson, for example, looked fatigued, hopefully there won’t be the need to ask too much of players this season if we get the squad strong enough.

Absolutely agree on Goldson mate
 
It never severely dropped.

Katic was dropped for the Villarreal away game and never played until those 2 games and at best was a bit rusty.
He never caused any goals due to cock ups like Worrall and Goldson did.

Why was he subbed against the mighty Hamilton then?

He was having a terrible game and was lucky he wasnt taken off at half time.
 
Said it countless times before on here, but we would be far better off pouring our money into first team wages rather than transfer fees. You get a much better hit rate in the transfer market when you prioritise that way.
Yup! Exactly. Folk forget that players need paid, a £5m player needs paid £5m player wages. If we can spend less on transfer fees and use that money to sign top quality free agents or promising young players by offering them a decent package then we should. IMO the Aribo signing is an example of a good bit of business from the club.
 
One of the main reasons Worrall played so many games is he had a clause in his loan contract stipulating a minimum number of games to be played, or Forest would recall him.

I'd imagine that the clause also contained financial penalties for not playing a set amount of minutes, but we can't be sure on that.

Only that isn’t - quite - correct. The clause stipulated that if he hadn’t played 19 games by the Winter break they COULD, if they chose to, recall him. It’s an entirely different thing. Gerrard played Worrall because he thought, at that stage, he was the better option. It really is that simple despite the love for Katic on here.
 
One of the main reasons Worrall played so many games is he had a clause in his loan contract stipulating a minimum number of games to be played, or Forest would recall him.

I'd imagine that the clause also contained financial penalties for not playing a set amount of minutes, but we can't be sure on that.
Seems like we have gone round and round on this argument for months.

Taking aside the stipulated number of games argument, do you really think that clubs are going to be eager to loan players to ANY club that doesn't play them .

Especially when it's a development player.

That goes for any club , not just ours .

There is a certain pressure to play a young loanee and if you want future loan players from the same source you have to be seen to be doing it the right way.

It's logic and common sense .
 
Mad how people are arguing over just stab in the dark guesses about who the player is :D

Nobody knows and thats the way it should be the ITK’ers will be beelin :cool:
 
Worral wasnt even close to as bad as some people are making out. He was outstanding against celtic at Ibrox in December, outstanding in the big europa league games aswell. One bad mistake against killie and a few loose passes here and there seriously cloud peoples judgement

He really wasn’t that bad. Rangers/FF needs a whipping boy though.
 
Back
Top