Summer Transfer Window

[roversfan99]

Lets assume that there is genuine interest in Phillips, Iversen and Muric.

Why is the first target one that will cost a fee and the other 2 are kids on loan?

Last year we had a permanent keeper. We couldnt get in a permanent replacement because wed blown our money elsewhere and the Walton loan seemed very much a late in the window last resort. So IF that happened again and we ended up with a kid on loan, I think people would be very entitled to be annoyed.

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

How many goalkeepers have Brighton got ? That Sanchez who was on loan at Rochdale last season is a Brighton player also.

Ryan, Button, Walton, Steele, Sanchez

[arbitro]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

Nicko, Crooke, Sharpe all say we have an interest in Philips. Thats three different source. 

so they are wrong are there and you are correct Sparks? 

 

I think that those three just feed off each other. Typically after the Portsmouth paper ran the Mulgrew story today Sharpe has run a version of it.

The truth is nobody knows but because they are hacks there seems to be credence added by some of their readers.

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, Sparks Rover said:

No bid has gone in, we might be interested.  Proof?

That Crooke just gets stuff off here anyway,....why do you bum lick him?

Its you that is questioning the Philips interest. Not me, so if you don't believe the interest just scroll past comments about it. 

This isn't a competition 

 

[Mike E]

6 minutes ago, Richard Oakley said:

Charlton have no owner. Unless the appeal is successful, administration Why would anyone offer Charlton anything for anyone until the ownership or administration is known?

To get the player, rather than risk someone else coming in with peanuts and pocket lint.

[chaddyrovers]

8 minutes ago, Richard Oakley said:

Charlton have no owner. Unless the appeal is successful, administration Why would anyone offer Charlton anything for anyone until the ownership or administration is known?

surely Administration can't happen as East Street Investment owned Charlton Athletic according to reports despite failing the EFL director test

[Richard Oakley]

Just now, Mike E said:

To get the player, rather than risk someone else coming in with peanuts and pocket lint.

So you approve of paying money in the pockets of dodgy owners, do you? How's the conversation gone with Dillon? We like you, but we''re talking with half a dozen others, in case we don't like you as much as we thought we did. You'll have to fight for your place, is that okay?

Player will still be there after an administrator comes in.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Just now, Richard Oakley said:

So you approve of paying money in the pockets of dodgy owners, do you? How's the conversation gone with Dillon? We like you, but we''re talking with half a dozen others, in case we don't like you as much as we thought we did. You'll have to fight for your place, is that okay?

Player will still be there after an administrator comes in.

That's our cunning plan, we'll get him for buttons when it all goes tits up. Just like we did with Fergie when Accy went to the wall.

[Rover8T4]

23 minutes ago, Richard Oakley said:

Charlton have no owner. Unless the appeal is successful, administration Why would anyone offer Charlton anything for anyone until the ownership or administration is known?

Because sometime you have to bite the bullet to get the player you want, If we wait we stand no chance 

[K-Hod]

@Sparks Rover & @chaddyrovers

Any chance you could leave each other alone for a bit and let other people have a turn posting?

[Richard Oakley]

Just now, Jlee1984 said:

Because sometime you have to bite the bullet to get the player you want, If we wait we stand no chance 

Project Fear rears its ugly head.

[Rover8T4]

Just now, Richard Oakley said:

Project Fear rears its ugly head.

Sadly that's the way its been lately, should be exploiting these situations

[simongarnerisgod]

lets be realistic fellow fans,we are shopping in b&m bargains this season,not necessarily a bad thing imo,give tony some money and the results are a bit on the disastrous side,more concerning to me is the fact everyone in the club appears to be on holiday and no one is actively on the lookout for new players,they`ve just had 3 months off,we should be scouring the free transfer and any offers considered market

[Mike E]

25 minutes ago, Richard Oakley said:

So you approve of paying money in the pockets of dodgy owners, do you? How's the conversation gone with Dillon? We like you, but we''re talking with half a dozen others, in case we don't like you as much as we thought we did. You'll have to fight for your place, is that okay?

Player will still be there after an administrator comes in.

Probably more along the lines of 'You're our first choice', but we just happen to be looking at loans if we can't get him. Sensible.

Yes, I'd rather pay £1m to get the player we want than miss out, especially in a key position, regardless who the owners are.

 

Edited August 9, 2020 by Mike E

[Sparks Rover]

Just now, Mike E said:

Yes, I'd rather pay £1m to get the player we want than miss out, especially in a key position, regardless who the owners are.

Its conceivable that we agree a deal in principle with the player, tell him to sit tight and we give him a cut of the amount saved. Then we dont pay wages for him sittimg around. 

[Richard Oakley]

Just now, Mike E said:

Probably more along the lines of 'You're our first choice', but we just happen to be looking at loans if we can't get him. Sensible.

Yes, I'd rather pay £1m to get the player we want than miss out, regardless who the owners are.

 

You've made your position clear. I disagree with you. Let's leave it here and see what unfolds.

[Mike E]

3 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

Its conceivable that we agree a deal in principle with the player, tell him to sit tight and we give him a cut of the amount saved. Then we dont pay wages for him sittimg around. 

Possibly. Trouble is our history of hoping players hang on for us isn't one that inspires confidence.

3 minutes ago, Richard Oakley said:

You've made your position clear. I disagree with you. Let's leave it here and see what unfolds.

Erm... yeah ok? Were we arguing?

[tomphil]

So if Mulgrew is on 12 grand per week here ( it's probably more ) then they can only pay 1.5pwk. The rest is allowed to be covered in a loan fee.

A) Already clubs finding loopholes

B ) How do Pompey come up with over half a million quid in one go for a 34 year old ?  And surely if that's in installments it's just like paying him directly anyway ?

Chip paper !

[Richard Oakley]

4 minutes ago, tomphil said:

So if Mulgrew is on 12 grand per week here ( it's probably more ) then they can only pay 1.5pwk. The rest is allowed to be covered in a loan fee.

A) Already clubs finding loopholes

B ) How do Pompey come up with over half a million quid in one go for a 34 year old ?  And surely if that's in installments it's just like paying him directly anyway ?

Chip paper !

Pompey's owner, Michael Eisner is a billionaire.

[tomphil]

Just now, Richard Oakley said:

Pompey's owner, Michael Eisner is a billionaire.

But they've already stretched the rules if they did it the way the reports say so how does he give some of his billions to Charlie buoy without breaking them ?

It's still bunging money in to fund signings so they might as well just let him get paid normally.

[roversfan99]

http://www.footballforums.net/threads/transfer-rumours-20-21.276622/page-12

From a Forest fan on Muric as apparently Rotherham want him, ironically to replace Iversen:

"Muric was horrifically bad - to the point he handed 3 points to WBA and then was laughed out the stadium at the Valley by the Charlton fans. I would rather have a 58 year old Lee Camp back than him in goal."

Also interestingly they also are close to signing Dominic Samuel according to that.

 

[CD_93]

36 minutes ago, Richard Oakley said:

Michael Eisner

TIL.

[roversfan99]

Further views on Iversen to a Leicester fan asking for views on him from Rotherham fans. Mixed views. Common view seems to be that he was good but there is better out there. Weak coming for crosses. Talented but makes mistakes.

You look back at Walton and people said the same. 

[Sparks Rover]

2 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Further views on Iversen to a Leicester fan asking for views on him from Rotherham fans. Mixed views. Common view seems to be that he was good but there is better out there. Weak coming for crosses. Talented but makes mistakes.

You look back at Walton and people said the same. 

Sounds like a tall Raya

[Amo]

To paraphrase Roy Keane:
"Good shot-stopper? Isn't that what they're supposed to do?"