January Transfer window 2022

[chaddyrovers]

I can't see Brighton recalling the players at this stage given that they will learn more whilst playing regular here. Plus I believe that their sporting director Dan Ainsworth is holding discussions with Newcastle about joining them as Sporting Director. So that could impact certain things at the club. 

I don't see Brereton being any factor in this given that he is our player and we have good chance of promotion 

a question for anyone, would you be happy if our 2 only incoming transfers were Tommy Doyle and Josh Maja both on loan in January? or do you think we need more? if so which position?

And what do people think of offering Hedges a contract on pre contract terms to sign him in the summer? 

 

My own opinion is on Doyle I don't know enough about him to form an opinion but I would it be worth having both Clarkson and Doyle on loan here. Not sure on that. On Maja, if it a loan deal with an option to buy in the summer then I would tempt to do the deal given he is 22 years old, good player and someone I rated when at Sunderland. On Hedges pre contract potential deal, Rovers seem very keen on him and one they don't want to move on. I would if Poveda loan deal is cancel then could we do a deal in January. Possible depends on finances

Edited December 22, 2021 by chaddyrovers

[Admiral Nelsen]

4 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

I can't see Brighton recalling the players at this stage given that they will learn more whilst playing regular here. Plus I believe that their sporting director Dan Ainsworth is holding discussions with Newcastle about joining them as Sporting Director. So that could impact certain things at the club. 

I don't see Brereton being any factor in this given that he is our player and we have good chance of promotion 

a question for anyone, would you be happy if our 2 only incoming transfers were Tommy Doyle and Josh Maja both on loan in January? or do you think we need more? if so which position?

 

Two additions to the squad will probably be enough provided there are no outgoings and we get a fair run of injuries. That said, I know next to nothing about Doyle other than he's highly rated at City but has only managed a handful of appearances at second-tier Hamburg this year. Could be great, but I'd be a little sceptical of his ability to come in and improve the XI, and there's basically no chance of City letting him go permanently. On the fence.

Maja, provided it's on the cheap with no obligation to buy, I'd be happy enough with. We already have a pretty good array of options in attacking positions, but an x-factor player to replace Poveda would be very useful and if if the deal doesn't expose to too much risk in terms of his injury, then it could be a shrewd move. 

[47er]

 

My question to our Scottish posters---is Hedges good enough? I've seen him a few times admittedly on TV but he doesn't look that great to me. 

On anther track, its interesting that we have pursued him and apparently persuaded him to leave Aberdeen without a fee.

We can't then have any moral authority to blame Lenihan and co if they do exactly the same thing can we?

But we have had comments questioning their loyalty and suggesting they owed us in some way.

 

[roversfan99]

The 2 question marks about Hedges (I like the vast majority on here haven't seen much of him) are the timing and his position.

Do we need a wide man when we seemingly have moved to not playing wide men, is this the formation going forward or are we going to change back? 

And I quite like the element of forward planning in the potential free agent market, but what if we did go up, is Hedges a signing only suitable if we stay down?

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

 

a question for anyone, would you be happy if our 2 only incoming transfers were Tommy Doyle and Josh Maja both on loan in January? or do you think we need more? if so which position?

 

Very much a big jump to make such an assumption based on a previous target and in Doyle, someone who we have been linked with in passing. So its obviously a totally hypothetical question.

But we definitely need competition for Nyambe more than a central midfielder, we have absolutely no alternative and Nyambe gets through some serious work down the right hand side, so we need more than him.

1 hour ago, RevidgeBlue said:

 

Time for Waggott to earn his £300k p.a. for once.

Sales will be down to the owners, Mowbray said as much the other day. Nothing to do with Waggott really.

[only2garners]

20 minutes ago, 47er said:

 

My question to our Scottish posters---is Hedges good enough? I've seen him a few times admittedly on TV but he doesn't look that great to me. 

On anther track, its interesting that we have pursued him and apparently persuaded him to leave Aberdeen without a fee.

We can't then have any moral authority to blame Lenihan and co if they do exactly the same thing can we?

But we have had comments questioning their loyalty and suggesting they owed us in some way.

 

Moral authority - football? that's a good one.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

26 minutes ago, 47er said:

 

My question to our Scottish posters---is Hedges good enough? I've seen him a few times admittedly on TV but he doesn't look that great to me. 

On anther track, its interesting that we have pursued him and apparently persuaded him to leave Aberdeen without a fee.

We can't then have any moral authority to blame Lenihan and co if they do exactly the same thing can we?

But we have had comments questioning their loyalty and suggesting they owed us in some way.

 

Did we not offer to buy him in the summer ? So yes pursued - but Aberdeen did have the opportunity to cash in.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

8 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

The 2 question marks about Hedges (I like the vast majority on here haven't seen much of him) are the timing and his position.

Do we need a wide man when we seemingly have moved to not playing wide men, is this the formation going forward or are we going to change back? 

And I quite like the element of forward planning in the potential free agent market, but what if we did go up, is Hedges a signing only suitable if we stay down?

Very much a big jump to make such an assumption based on a previous target and in Doyle, someone who we have been linked with in passing. So its obviously a totally hypothetical question.

But we definitely need competition for Nyambe more than a central midfielder, we have absolutely no alternative and Nyambe gets through some serious work down the right hand side, so we need more than him.

Sales will be down to the owners, Mowbray said as much the other day. Nothing to do with Waggott really.

Totally agree about cover for Nyambe - obviously in an ideal world that would be JRC - but two injury prone players fighting for the same place will only end one way. The other side of this - is that Nyambe is a reasonable alternative for centre half (if we had an injury/suspension crisis) - so having decent cover for Nyambe is needed for more than one reason IMO

[RevidgeBlue]

2 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Sales will be down to the owners, Mowbray said as much the other day. Nothing to do with Waggott really.

It 's up to Waggott and Mowbray to convince the out of contract three to stay. I'm sure it wouldn't have been the owners choice to end up in a position whereby we face losing them for peanuts now or nothing in the summer and I doubt they're busting a gut to sell them for a pittance in January.

Similarly if there's any doubt about Brighton wanting to recall their duo, it's up to Waggott and Mowbray to persuade them and the players to extend their deals here. I'm even more certain Venky's won't  be pressing for them to be sent back

[JHRover]

If it is true that Venkys have to approve any bids for our players before they are sold (which Mowbray says is their decision) then I would be quite confident of keeping Brereton until the summer. By the time a bid comes in, it then goes to India for them to think about and a response comes back January will be done. They don't do things quickly and I don't believe the manager has any direct contact with them in any event so if they won't even speak to him I can't see them speaking to interested clubs.

If they would rather shift him now than wait and see what unfolds over the next 23 games they need their heads looking at but then again we know that already.

I still maintain that either these players haven't been offered new contracts or if they have they are utterly derisory and not worth the time of day looking at.

I really struggle to comprehend how players who have been here for years, progressed through the academy, clearly enjoying their football at the moment at a club in a good place in the league would want to turn down improved terms to take their chances elsewhere in the Championship. Who are all these clubs that are in a position to offer them substantially more than we can at this moment in time?

No looking at these players they don't have many options at present. Strike me as the sort of performances they are putting in to try and convince the club to pull out all the stops to keep them here.

Going to look extremely suspect come the summer if they've taken us to the play-offs and been star performers in the Championship and then toddle off to sides finishing miles behind us in the table.

Listening to Mowbray's comments he is trying to put public pressure on the owners to make them suitable offers.

[RevidgeBlue]

8 minutes ago, DavidMailsTightPerm said:

Totally agree about cover for Nyambe - obviously in an ideal world that would be JRC - but two injury prone players fighting for the same place will only end one way. The other side of this - is that Nyambe is a reasonable alternative for centre half (if we had an injury/suspension crisis) - so having decent cover for Nyambe is needed for more than one reason IMO

I'm not sure if cover for Nyambe would be my top priority - if he stays for the time being at least (and stays fit) said cover is unlikely to see much if any action at all.

If we could only afford to bring in 2 players I'd much rather they be players who would be likely to feature regularly and give us extra options.

Obviously I don't know what the January budget is. If it stretched to two players who could possibly make a difference when needed and cover for Nyambe then that's fine. Otherwise it'd be number three on my list of priorities.

 

[roversfan99]

15 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

It 's up to Waggott and Mowbray to convince the out of contract three to stay. I'm sure it wouldn't have been the owners choice to end up in a position whereby we face losing them for peanuts now or nothing in the summer and I doubt they're busting a gut to sell them for a pittance in January.

Similarly if there's any doubt about Brighton wanting to recall their duo, it's up to Waggott and Mowbray to persuade them and the players to extend their deals here. I'm even more certain Venky's won't  be pressing for them to be sent back

Its about money, and seemingly because of "how tough" Venkys have had it, there isnt much of it rattling around. Mowbray keeps saying that he wants to keep the team together and has shown signs of frustration that the owners wont increase the budget slightly to get the deals done. But it isnt in his best interests either way to let them go, if he got us up then it would be a brilliant achievement and really look good on him, selling key players wont help that. If we go up, Waggott would see the pound signs too. 

With the Brighton players, the power lies with Brighton. There is no doubt that in terms of loan spells, both playing regularly for the team in third means that as far as Mowbray is concerned, he couldnt be doing any more both to please Brighton and also the players. But if Brighton plan to bring them back as a contingency with Covid and just to avoid being at risk of postponing games, how could Mowbray and Waggott possibly protect against that?

[RevidgeBlue]

4 minutes ago, JHRover said:

I still maintain that either these players haven't been offered new contracts or if they have they are utterly derisory and not worth the time of day looking at.

Obviously I don't know how much we've offered these players and  the offers that have been made have seemingly not been enough to tempt them to sign. (Yet)

That said, the offer that has been made to Gallagher seems to be acceptable to him (unfortunately).

In devil's advocate mode, it flies in the face of common sense doesn't it to assume that Gallagher has been made a decent offer yet the other three have been offered buttons?

[roversfan99]

Gallagher will already be on one of if not the highest wages at the club having joined from Southampton, to increase the length of his deal will not necessarily require a pay rise.

The other 3 signed a while ago when they certainly would not have been able to justify the demands that they likely could now, Rothwell had been in and out at League 1 Oxford, Lenihan wasnt captain and Nyambe was just starting to get regular game time.

This implied theory that we could just offer what we are offering to Gallagher to any of the other 3 makes no sense. Even assuming that none of the 3 want wages beyond a current self imposed wage ceiling, and knowing that no one including myself knows on here what those players earn, but ill use easy figures. Say Gallagher is on 15k, and the other 3 want the same but are only on 5k each. Giving them 10k extra will increase the current wage bill by that amount, obviously doing so to Gallagher wouldnt.

The only issue with offering Gallagher a new deal is that we are extending having a decent wage beyond 2023 on our books. It is all about risk and reward and I can sort of understand especially having seen Armstrong and Brereton coming to the fore and also with the lack of general long terms deals within the squad why we might take a prudent approach and get him tied down for longer. I have never been a big fan and certainly dont see a development anything like the other 2 (who were/are also much younger) so would let the deal run for now.

[RevidgeBlue]

17 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Its about money, and seemingly because of "how tough" Venkys have had it, there isnt much of it rattling around. Mowbray keeps saying that he wants to keep the team together and has shown signs of frustration that the owners wont increase the budget slightly to get the deals done. But it isnt in his best interests either way to let them go, if he got us up then it would be a brilliant achievement and really look good on him, selling key players wont help that. If we go up, Waggott would see the pound signs too. 

With the Brighton players, the power lies with Brighton. There is no doubt that in terms of loan spells, both playing regularly for the team in third means that as far as Mowbray is concerned, he couldnt be doing any more both to please Brighton and also the players. But if Brighton plan to bring them back as a contingency with Covid and just to avoid being at risk of postponing games, how could Mowbray and Waggott possibly protect against that?

Few points:

1) We don't know that there isn't much money rattling about.

2) We don't know that improved offers haven't been made to try and get the players to sign. I rather suspect they have and that there has been a lot of toing and froing  to date and that that is still going on. The problem imo has been not prioritising the right players and not getting the deals done early enough.

3) I agree if Brighton decide at the end of the day they want the players back there's only so much we can do about it, that's one of the many downsides of signing loan players. That doesn't prevent us putting forward a compelling case for them to stay and/or offering Brighton improved terms for the second half of the season etc.

[RevidgeBlue]

8 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Gallagher will already be on one of if not the highest wages at the club having joined from Southampton, to increase the length of his deal will not necessarily require a pay rise.

The other 3 signed a while ago when they certainly would not have been able to justify the demands that they likely could now, Rothwell had been in and out at League 1 Oxford, Lenihan wasnt captain and Nyambe was just starting to get regular game time.

This implied theory that we could just offer what we are offering to Gallagher to any of the other 3 makes no sense. Even assuming that none of the 3 want wages beyond a current self imposed wage ceiling, and knowing that no one including myself knows on here what those players earn, but ill use easy figures. Say Gallagher is on 15k, and the other 3 want the same but are only on 5k each. Giving them 10k extra will increase the current wage bill by that amount, obviously doing so to Gallagher wouldnt.

The only issue with offering Gallagher a new deal is that we are extending having a decent wage beyond 2023 on our books. It is all about risk and reward and I can sort of understand especially having seen Armstrong and Brereton coming to the fore and also with the lack of general long terms deals within the squad why we might take a prudent approach and get him tied down for longer. I have never been a big fan and certainly dont see a development anything like the other 2 (who were/are also much younger) so would let the deal run for now.

I would imagine Mowbray and Waggott have been bollocked by the owners over the contracts farce and the only real reason Gallagher has been offered a new deal is that it has been determined that similar situations should not be allowed to happen again.

However imo each situation needs judging individually on it's merits and Gallagher needs writing off as a bad job. Even if we could only persuade someone to take him off our hands for free, it would free up the wage budget to the tune of around £1m p.a.

On it's own, how far would that hypothetically go to persuading at least two of the out of contract three to stay?

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Few points:

1) We don't know that there isn't much money rattling about.

2) We don't know that improved offers haven't been made to try and get the players to sign. I rather suspect they have and that there has been a lot of toing and froing  to date and that that is still going on. The problem imo has been not prioritising the right players and not getting the deals done early enough.

3) I agree if Brighton decide at the end of the day they want the players back there's only so much we can do about it, that's one of the many downsides of signing loan players. That doesn't prevent us putting forward a compelling case for them to stay and/or offering Brighton improved terms for the second half of the season etc.

The deals that we have managed to get done in the last few years seem mainly to be the easy/cheap ones. Dack signed a new deal on the cusp of returning from a serious knee injury whereby his bargaining power was severly impacted. Wharton signed a new deal whilst injured and also as a young player with little Championship experience at that time. Dolan signed an extension on the deal he signed as a player intended to play for the under 23s, and Buckley signed a year ago before establishing himself. Rankin Costello also signed both injured and again before establishing himself. Gallagher as mentioned in my last post will presumably be an easy one too, it was suggested in the LT that there will be a  minimal if any wage rise, I share your opinion that I wouldnt extend it but it wont significantly the current wage bill.

We do know that there hasnt been much money around lately hence the sale of Armstrong, a culling of high earners yet only 500k and a few loans in. Hopefully there can be scope for that to change in January as it has been regularly implied that we have offered the soon to be out of contractors "as much as in in the budget." They are all problematic in that they can justifiably expect a significant wage rise and due to budget cuts from India it seems that we cannot pay that. Contrary to what people have suggested in the past, I doubt that it is a dislike of Mowbray or due to anything footballing related, we are doing well.

[roversfan99]

Just now, RevidgeBlue said:

I would imagine Mowbray and Waggott have been bollocked by the owners over the contracts farce and the only real reason Gallagher has been offered a new deal is that it has been determined that similar situations should not be allowed to happen again.

However imo each situation needs judging individually on it's merits and Gallagher needs writing off as a bad job. Even if we could only persuade someone to take him off our hands for free, it would free up the wage budget to the tune of around £1m p.a.

On it's own, how far would that hypothetically go to persuading at least two of the out of contract three to stay?

Would anyone take his full wage for free? We would still need to replace Gallagher if he left, he is not totally useless and he would leave a gap, so take that off any saving.

You think Venkys are interested enough to "bollock" the manager and CEO over specific contractual issues? Nothing stopping them slightly increasing that budget now and protecting the assets, as I mentioned I suspect those 3 based on the difference in circumstances between now and when they signed their last deal makes the gap between current wage and demand to be significant, and that would be similar for the last year or 2. The reason the other deals have been done is not because that they were prioritised, they were clearly easier and/or cheaper.

[JHRover]

29 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Obviously I don't know how much we've offered these players and  the offers that have been made have seemingly not been enough to tempt them to sign. (Yet)

That said, the offer that has been made to Gallagher seems to be acceptable to him (unfortunately).

In devil's advocate mode, it flies in the face of common sense doesn't it to assume that Gallagher has been made a decent offer yet the other three have been offered buttons?

I don't think Gallagher has actually signed a new deal yet has he?

That isn't to say he won't do, but we've heard these things before about something being 'imminent' and then it not actually happening.

It wouldn't be the first time Waggott has told people that things are happening that then don't. Then come the excuses as to why it didn't happen - goalposts moved, covid etc.

But yes - it does fly in the face of common sense as to why they would be willing and able to offer Gallagher what he wants but not the other lads. I come back to my original point that perhaps they haven't made offers to the others as there is no capital outlay to protect in people like Rothwell and Nyambe - whereas Gallagher was a big buy for someone in India and they are eager to ensure he doesn't walk for nothing like the others.

[RevidgeBlue]

2 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

The deals that we have managed to get done in the last few years seem mainly to be the easy/cheap ones. Dack signed a new deal on the cusp of returning from a serious knee injury whereby his bargaining power was severly impacted. Wharton signed a new deal whilst injured and also as a young player with little Championship experience at that time. Dolan signed an extension on the deal he signed as a player intended to play for the under 23s, and Buckley signed a year ago before establishing himself. Rankin Costello also signed both injured and again before establishing himself. Gallagher as mentioned in my last post will presumably be an easy one too, it was suggested in the LT that there will be a  minimal if any wage rise, I share your opinion that I wouldnt extend it but it wont significantly the current wage bill.

We do know that there hasnt been much money around lately hence the sale of Armstrong, a culling of high earners yet only 500k and a few loans in. Hopefully there can be scope for that to change in January as it has been regularly implied that we have offered the soon to be out of contractors "as much as in in the budget." They are all problematic in that they can justifiably expect a significant wage rise and due to budget cuts from India it seems that we cannot pay that. Contrary to what people have suggested in the past, I doubt that it is a dislike of Mowbray or due to anything footballing related, we are doing well.

What "budget cuts from India"?

Don't know how many times this needs explaining to you, to the extent we ran into difficulties last season that was due to Mowbray and Waggott running us into FFP difficulties over the course of a few seasons.

There "should" be a lot more leeway in the budget now given that the owners took remedial action for FFP purposes with the training ground exercise in the last FFP cycle and the Armstrong money hitting the books in the current one.

If there isn't I'll be with you in querying the lack of funding.

[Blue blood]

My priorities:

1) Keep everyone. If it isn't broken don't fix it. And if possible we need to hold on to players, even if they are going to go elsewhere this summer. The risks of replacements not being as good or even taking time to settle in is too much to take, so let's keep everyone if possible. 

2) A right back. There is no cover and if Nayambe is out there's inferior players there, Buckley may be moved meaning the midfield is weakened as well, it's not a good situation. Plus as someone else said, we need a fair number of centre backs for this system and since Nayambe, can play there we have double the cover needs for RB. (Not my point but my word I agree.) 

3) Another striker who can get goals. Let's be honest we are doing well but there's a lot of pressure on Ben. And unless sending Gally to South America is equally going to pay dividends I can't see him stepping up if Ben is injured or in a loss of form. Wasn't our death spiral partly tied in last year with Armstrong's injury and loss of form. A bit less dependence would be nice. 

4) Finally a cb if Carter isn't deemed good enough. We are playing 3 CB per game, so that means there's more chances of injury and suspension. Never thought I would say it but 3 CB is working so let's make sure we can keep the system. We have 4 quality CB which means that it doesn't take much for us to struggle in this area. Granted Johnson can cover here a bit but he is arguably needed in midfield. 

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

The 2 question marks about Hedges (I like the vast majority on here haven't seen much of him) are the timing and his position.

Do we need a wide man when we seemingly have moved to not playing wide men, is this the formation going forward or are we going to change back? 

And I quite like the element of forward planning in the potential free agent market, but what if we did go up, is Hedges a signing only suitable if we stay down?

What about a plan B or if we change formation and play an extra attacker instead 3 at the back? I have always been a fan of couple of different formations being used during a season like many other clubs do so why not us

If we go up then we have a squad player for next season and maybe he can step up and perform to the higher standard. 

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

Very much a big jump to make such an assumption based on a previous target and in Doyle, someone who we have been linked with in passing. So its obviously a totally hypothetical question.

But we definitely need competition for Nyambe more than a central midfielder, we have absolutely no alternative and Nyambe gets through some serious work down the right hand side, so we need more than him.

It was simple question I posed. I believe Rovers are still very interested in Maja and given that Mowbray doesn't like to move on from key targets. 

I guess we will hope JRC stay fit and he is back in training now. I can see people wanting in a right wing back but do you have any suggestions? 

[chaddyrovers]

 Rovers are monitoring the progress of Lincoln City's Anthony Scully and Portsmouth's Marcus Harness. Rovers may miss out on is John Souttar with Stoke City understood to be in pole position to land the Hearts central defender.

Ryan Hedges, Josh Maja and Blackburn Rovers transfer state of play ahead of January window - LancsLive

 

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Add to this Squad,strengthen,no sales.

Let's get the shyte out of this league while we still have time.

[roversfan99]

2 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

What "budget cuts from India"?

Don't know how many times this needs explaining to you, to the extent we ran into difficulties last season that was due to Mowbray and Waggott running us into FFP difficulties over the course of a few seasons.

There "should" be a lot more leeway in the budget now given that the owners took remedial action for FFP purposes with the training ground exercise in the last FFP cycle and the Armstrong money hitting the books in the current one.

If there isn't I'll be with you in querying the lack of funding.

I don't see why you can't appreciate that my interpretation on the situation is just different to yours, chaddy also uses the "how many times does it need explaining to you" patronising line, but that is just your interpretation against mine. I do find your thought process baffling though in that Venkys permit a budget and Mowbray/Waggott spend that, whether they could use that budget better (especially the manager) is a different debate but there is no way that the budget given no matter how it is spent should impede on FFP regulations.

To be honest, I don't really want to get into another FFP debate, as far as I know we haven't recently breached FFP, indeed a temporary embargo was placed due to late submission of accounts IIRC, and I certainly don't share this assumption which for me is baseless that Venkys would spend every penny up until the FFP limit and it is only regulations that is holding them back from doing so.

But anyway, back to the point in hand. I agree with you, I would hold off on a new deal for Gallagher, at least for now. Yes there is a risk that he suddenly starts banging them in, and he certainly isn't useless, but considering that he is a higher earner and I don't see many teams being interested in him personally, I would just let it run for now. But comparison to deals regarding Nyambe, Rothwell and Lenihan are impossible, the idea that we let him go for free and use the wages to put towards the aforementioned trio is a non starter for numerous reasons, notably that it assumes that someone would take his full wage, and it assumes that he provides no use to us and wouldn't require replacement, which he obviously would.

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

What about a plan B or if we change formation and play an extra attacker instead 3 at the back? I have always been a fan of couple of different formations being used during a season like many other clubs do so why not us

If we go up then we have a squad player for next season and maybe he can step up and perform to the higher standard. 

It was simple question I posed. I believe Rovers are still very interested in Maja and given that Mowbray doesn't like to move on from key targets. 

I guess we will hope JRC stay fit and he is back in training now. I can see people wanting in a right wing back but do you have any suggestions? 

Hoping JRC stays fit is quite clearly a pointless exercise, never gonna happen. He has been back training numerous times and will invariably break down again within the next month. No clue on suggestions for a new player, leave that to people paid good money and who can spend good time identifying someone.

Adding a player who doesn't fit into the current way of playing 6 months in advance when we are unsure of what league we will be in seems illogical to me. Signing him on a cut price deal now to help us achieve our ambitions for the rest of the season at the level we are now would make more sense, but would still raise the question over his position.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

3 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

I'm not sure if cover for Nyambe would be my top priority - if he stays for the time being at least (and stays fit) said cover is unlikely to see much if any action at all.

If we could only afford to bring in 2 players I'd much rather they be players who would be likely to feature regularly and give us extra options.

Obviously I don't know what the January budget is. If it stretched to two players who could possibly make a difference when needed and cover for Nyambe then that's fine. Otherwise it'd be number three on my list of priorities.

 

Its having that crystal ball to see who gets injured 😀