transfer reader

Had an interesting week or so in game.

First, my first youth batch of wholly computer generated players came through and one name instantly stood out to me- Kal Naismith!

I then played, in successive rounds of the cup, a Motherwell side managed by Derek McInnes who had Harry Cornick up front, then a Ross County side with Rob Atkinson playing.

Big Rob got man of the match to knock my Clyde side out.

In my third season now. Fluked my way through the playoffs in season 1, had a safe mid table season first year at League 1 and currently the outsiders of 4 teams fighting for 2 playoff spots, although a run of 9 without a win really hurt my chances.

1 hour ago, Gimme Shelton said:

For some reason Diony had a nightmare time with us,he can't possibly be as bad as he showed then.

One of his first games (possibly his first) he gone done with a nasty tackle quite early after coming on.

Shortly after there was a poor miss, with the same person who left a mark on him rapidly closing him down.

I do think this got to him a bit, then a poor miss and his confidence plummeted.

3 hours ago, TammyAB said:

Yep. You need the Welsh granny too mind.

Wazza has had her already.

Oh, not what you meant?

4 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

So, this is what, the seventh or eighth time that since having been promoted to his current role, which in his boss (Jon Lansdown) has acknowledged this week that communication must be better, that he’s shit the bed on Twitter and had to delete it.

Communication is part of his job. Being twelve isn’t. And I’ll say again, he’s one of the three most senior people in a multi million pound organisation. Show me another company where such hamfisted communication from a senior leader is acceptable.

Clue: There isn’t one. And he’s either too stupid or too arrogant to learn.

Edit: And for those who said he’d done nothing wrong in his original tweet, then riddle me this Batman, why did he need to delete it…

Deleted it because of the backlash and snide comments received about making the post to start with perhaps?

There's a really insidious and nasty nature to a lot of posts on here.

What we have here is he's said something, got backlash for saying something so deleted it and now is getting backlash for deleting it by the exact same people.

8 minutes ago, grifty said:

To be fair, Henderson wasn’t being picked just down to footballing ability. He’s there as almost a manager on the pitch, his professionalism and experience.

He’s obviously not technically one of our best centre mids but mentally he’s one of the best and that can be a huge advantage in a squad.

I would presume his performance levels have now dropped below the level which outweighs the positives from having him around.

Think Andy King for us last year.

That would have been borderline fine as an excuse for him to be part of the squad. Not for starting as often as he was though.

He should have been dropped for about a year before he went chasing oil money.

On 16/05/2024 at 20:24, transfer reader said:

Started a Clyde one, and ended up having to play Queen's Park in a cup game.

Day before the game they tried to buy my best player which made him agitate for the move. Played the game and got a 1-0 smash and grab win, transfer was about to go through but I had a game against St Mirren that I needed a win to get an unlikely space in the next round so I delayed the transfer for a week.

Lost to St Mirren (kept it down to just 2-0) and went out, the player has gone as well but at least I got a win over a rival 2 divisions higher.

Best player (Left back who got 20 assists) wanted by a Scottish Prem club for a huge fee.

A whopping £8k.

Top scorer got 33, and was nothing to should about stat wise for even Scottish League 2, except his heading and strength. He scored at least 20 of his goals as headers.

2 hours ago, Lrrr said:

My favourite, RWD Molenbeek in Belgium sign Ernest Nuamah from FC Nordsjaelland in Denmark for a reported €26m, Molenbeek's record signing before that? €3m, he then gets loaned to Molenbeek's partner club Lyon who for financial reasons couldn't sign Nuamah last summer. 

It's the type of thing I'd do on Championship Manager as a kid to get good players at City.

Sign them for a big club, then immediately loan them to City with no wages or fee.

1 minute ago, downendcity said:

Man City's owners are effectively a nation state - and one of the wealthiest on earth - so there is little doubt they can afford it.

However, for  some time now there have been financial rules in place that limit how much owners are allowed to "invest" in their team. While the 115 charges have yet to be proved, the indications are that Man City's owners have, over a significant period of time, broken a number of financial rules in order to be able to introduce more of their massive wealth to the footballing side of the club than the financial rules would otherwise allow.

While other of their competitors will have compromised their competitive position to stay within the financial limits those rules allow- selling players they could not afford to retain, or not buying players that were beyond their budget - if the charges are proved, then Man City will have gained an advantage over their competitors by cheating and breaking those same rules. 

Might Pep have left some time ago had they not bumped his salary by paying a chunk of it through another company? Had they not, and Pep had left, how would that have impacted on their success over the last few seasons?

If Man City are proved to have broken the rules, then it is them that are the problem, as their cheating enabled them to bring to bear far more of their wealth to Man City's on field position - whether that be player wages, transfer fees, or even manager's salary - thereby causing other owners to stretch their financial positions further than they otherwise would have, in order to try and compete with the Mancs. 

 

Not just Pep that's had payments like that, wasn't there something similar reported about Mancini too?

53 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

This is a new one for me.

Not that I doubt you, but I should be very interested to learn the identity of this player so I can have a look at the background - I have been wracking my brain, but have no idea.

As @Hocca says, the player's name is Savio.

The Man City move isn't 100% confirmed yet, but looks as good as done.

Here's one of a number of articles about the transfer.

https://www.football365.com/news/savio-man-city-absolute-sham-multi-club-ownership-model-opinion

1 minute ago, David Brent said:

Don’t really see the issue any more. People can follow whatever club they want. I don’t think they warrant such an insult. 

Not sure I’d rather see a Rovers shirt either.

We have many fans who don’t, or can’t, go for whatever reason. Not everyone is as lucky as us to have been brought up in an area or raised in a certain way which led to many of us supporting City. 

Bit of a difference isn't there between someone supporting City because of their familial ties but not being local, versus someone who follows Man City or whoever happened to be winning at the time and has never even tried to go to a game.

42 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

But the same options are open to other clubs of course. Man City scout, recruit and develop incredibly well. 

If you're making 80 million profits then that does give you the ability to spend more than others. 

I do agree about a wage cap. I like the NFL model. 

I'm a football fan so I appreciate how historic 4 in a row is. Just like how I remember and appreciate Man Utds treble. 

Those options like being part of a 13 club group and shady transfer dealings between them?

Like Troyes making a record signing, then loaning him out to Girona (part owned by Pep's brother) and then selling that player to Man City without ever playing a game for Troyes?

With there having to be a change in the Girona ownership for next season or they'll be demoted to the Europa League because it would otherwise conflict with the UEFA policy of clubs owned by the same people not being in the same competition.

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yes, if anyone, or any company, spends a high level of money, more than their neighbours or competitors, over a decade, then that will likely embed superiority.

We see this elsewhere when we talk about societal generational privilege, or hereditary wealth. 

Anyway, Arsenal are no angels in that department of course. Moving from Woolwich for financial gain, buying their way into the first division (allegedly but almost certainly), being the original "Bank of England" club (so rich they could build that old art deco frontage at Highbury). 

So being financially/morally dodgy isn't something that Man City invented.

Yes, but I doubt they'd get a sporting sanction (points deduction) for failing to cooperate. So I didn't refer to those.

I suspect those 35 are the easiest to prove for the PL. But likely to bring only a slap on the wrist for procedural failures. Maybe.

Not disputing that other clubs have benefitted from spending big money before 

Blackburn and Chelsea both other examples

Has a club done it with so many (alleged) breaches and cheating as Man City though? 

2 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Yes Man City have spent a lot, but then so have others, yet Man City are the only ones on the cusp of 4 in a row. 

The only ones denying reality is those who say spending money = success. I thought we were all football fans on here and understood how incredibly difficult it would be to motivate a team every day for 4 years in a row. Obviously not. 

The premier league isn't a farmers league. 

I was replying to this which was about this season. "Team that spends the most money wins the league"

 

Do I get to do what you do now and focus on this and cry about being insulted instead of addressing the flaws in what you said?

How dare you scorn me so!

4 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

It probably wouldn't impact this season. The latest charges against them are, iirc, related to 2017/18, so it's likely that is the latest season where they could possibly have a title stripped from them (either directly, or perhaps indirectly through something like a retrospective points deduction). These are example punishments only, none really knows exactly what punishment they may suffer.

But, even if they didn't get the most recent trophies taken off them, any finding of guilt would still mean that the entire foundation of their dynasty is shit. Big stinky fraudulent shit.

Allegedly.

I'm torn between not wanting them to win anything, and thinking that the more they win the funnier it will be to see the PL/UAE's darlings come tumbling down.

The season they signed Laporte, Mendy, Walker, Bernardo Silva and Ederson then?

A not insignificant number of big signings who played a part of their squad in more titles after that.

The season before that there was Stones, Jesus, Sane and Gundogan.

The season before that having De Bruyne, Otamendi and Sterling.

A large chunk of their squad that's still winning (as it stands) the title this season were players signed under the period that's getting investigated.

1 minute ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

https://www.teamtalk.com/news/ranking-the-premier-league-clubs-by-their-transfer-net-spend-in-2023

Net spend on transfers for one season.

But not what they've spent on the squad, the wages they pay etc 

You bitch and moan when people point out you being disingenuous, or outright denying reality, but then you go and be disingenuous over and over.

2 hours ago, Bar BS3 said:

Accrington Stanley are the only current league side, after Crawley will.

Hartlepool never have & missed out because of Christian Roberts, at Ashton Gate & then had their covid period play off final at Ashton Gate, but are obviously currently not a league club. 

That was Millenium Stadium era 

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

In your opinion. 

Say we spent 15 of the 25 million we got for Scott. I wouldn't class that as us spending most of it. Maybe you would, I wouldn't. Fair enough. 

If we spent £12.5m and one penny of the £25m for Scott we would have spent most of it.

It would be by the smallest possible amount, but it would be "most".

This is literally the type of thing children learn at about 6 years old.

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Awaits more insults. 

Perhaps you should try addressing the questions asked instead of finding excuses.

21 hours ago, Winterstoke toad said:

Queen’s Park ? 

Started a Clyde one, and ended up having to play Queen's Park in a cup game.

Day before the game they tried to buy my best player which made him agitate for the move. Played the game and got a 1-0 smash and grab win, transfer was about to go through but I had a game against St Mirren that I needed a win to get an unlikely space in the next round so I delayed the transfer for a week.

Lost to St Mirren (kept it down to just 2-0) and went out, the player has gone as well but at least I got a win over a rival 2 divisions higher.

18 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Quite. Of course people remember the errors and ignore all the correct decisions so the debate generates more heat than light. But the proportion of correct decisions has increased from 87% to 94%.

One manager (possibly Nuno but I can't be sure) said he had to get his decisions 100% right and so should officials. It's good to know there is a manager who has achieved perfection and it's not even Pep!

Was he claiming he achieved perfection, or saying that's the standard he has to reach/is judged against?

Saying "I have to get decisions 100% right" and "I get 100% of my decisions right" are very different things.

11 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Merge it all. One country one league.

They can keep their sectarian shit.

No place for the religious bigotry.

3 hours ago, Winterstoke toad said:

Queen’s Park ? 

Not a bad shout and might try them if Clyde is too long term, went for the biggest challenge by starting in the lowest league I could though.

7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Haha.

Do they still have “fog of war” option, where you hide the players stats until you scout them?

Yes, to varying degrees I think.

If the player is in a league that your club/scouts will have some knowledge of them you might get a range for the stats until you scout them. Not sure exactly how this is determined.

The way I play is attribute masking (their term for it) is turned on, and I can only sign players that my scouts/recruitment team show to me.

I do allow myself to sign players from a club I've already managed if I move though. The way some managers have players they'll sign at multiple clubs.

Likewise I can't search for known good quality scouts, but have to hire ones that apply for the position.

Makes it a fair bit more challenging, and certainly slows progress down.

I did get a freak signing on last year's one though, a 37 year old Brazilian who'd spent most of his career in Russia. Signed for about 40k and scored a dozen goals and got a dozen from the wing and the winning goal in a playoff final then retired.

Was thinking of starting one with a club in/around Glasgow and try to make them bigger than Celtic/Rangers.

Was looking at Clyde in Scottish League 2 and hoping they aren't part of the sectarian crap that Celtic and Rangers are.

5 hours ago, harvey54 said:

4 points from 15 looks slightly wobbly. Man City are unbeaten in 22 I think

You started off your comment with "a few weeks ago"

I spoke about "this year"

And now you've gone back to last year.