For me the desirability of bringing Schlupp in entirely hinges on whether it leaves enough in the kitty to bring in what we need in the priority positions of striker and winger. IF it does (Massive if) I can't see the problem. Schlupp or Hedges. No brainer isn't it? FWIW though I can't see Schlupp happening as a) His wages will be too much and b) The player himself will probably want to move to a Club who will guarantee him a permanent deal after the loan period ends.

Yes, but I think I missed the bit saying the Transfer "Committee" were in unanimous agreement........

Where is that reported?

Be plenty regarding other Clubs.

I would assume any money needed for potential transfers in January is outside the "normal" agreed budget and needs separate authorisation.

Riveting game. If the fixture would have been here it would have been called off in case someone fell over and twisted a shoelace on the way to the game or something. Weird how Man Ure nearly always play well against City and Liverpool no matter how poor they are in general.

2009/10 was before Venky's even took over. After that 15th and relegated. Compelling argument.

Guessing he meant after the game.

Do we think the fact we haven't brought in anyone to replace Park (was his official title Chief Scout?) will just melt slowly away into the background and be forgotten about?

Of course not. He's trolling/being the Board contrarian as always.

I can't see the problem with Schlupp on loan as cover down the left side as long as we also sign a striker and a winger (preferably permanently) If Schlupp is so expensive to do in terms of wages he ends up being our marquee signing then that then becomes a problem and I wouldn't be enthusiastic about him getting a permanent deal either.

They haven't spent any years in League 1 or battling to stave off relegation that's for sure. Unlike us.

Beep beep beep .....Caution ..........Mani reversing..........Beep beep beep...........

Someone tell Eustace not to panic. Chaddy has decreed that none of the players signed thus far are better than what we've got already and this isn't Football Manager 19 (or whatever the up to date version is called) you can't just go around signing players on the first day.

I didn't see Doets against Smith when he presumably must have played exceptionally well but thought he was dreadful thereafter despite scraping through a couple of rounds and a prime example of what I was talking about.

Really don't agree but leaving aside my views on Tronstad I'd say Batth, and before his injury, Travis are our players of the season by a mile. Beck a creditable 3rd. Back on Tronstad I think we're now seeing how generally ineffective he really is without an all round player like Travis alongside him. You would no doubt disagree so let's see how we go on with a theoretically slightly easier run of fixtures to come.

I came to Ted Lasso very late and am at the early stages of season 3. We could do with that Zava fellow as well!

Agreed. I took it to mean, we'd be the ones signing him permanently and giving him the security. If he is available on loan without an obligation to purchase permanently I'd snap him up.

What's your view on these two potential acquisitions chaddy? Just want to get it on the record because if they go elsewhere we know you'll denounce them as not being good enough for us! (I'd post a smiley emoticon at this stage if I could to indicate the comment is meant in good humour but the feature doesn't work for me.)

Never been impressed with Kent when I've been flicking through the Sky Channels and happened upon a Rangers game. Schlupp isn't too bad, do we want to be giving him long term security at age 32 though?

Yep.

I saw an article online claiming Las Palmas were not willing to let him go as they were approaching a crucial phase of the season and felt they needed him themselves etc etc.

Fairly convenient the next Forum has been slotted in after the end of the Transfer Window. No point crying over spilt milk now etc. Question that will or hopefully will still be valid by then - "Given the heightened level of interest from elsewhere recently in Head Coach John Eustace in light of his success are the Club planning to reward him with an improved contract?" ("We're looking into it")

The Dog one.

If Waggott didn't ask for extra funding do you think they would bypass him and ask Eustace directly if he wanted anything? I don't, I don't think they're hands on enough. Hopefully irrelevant anyway as Waggott stated as per the Fans Forum minutes he had requested funding. IF that's true then it's like you say 100% on them.