Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 can only apologise on behalf of fans i know about the way you have been treated, truly the most embarrassing / baffling signing ever regards minutes played. I'm afraid you fell victim to internal politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lack of Action Man Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 9 minutes ago, Spoons said: can only apologise on behalf of fans i know about the way you have been treated, truly the most embarrassing / baffling signing ever regards minutes played. I'm afraid you fell victim to internal politics. Surely you can elaborate on the last point a little bit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 6 minutes ago, OddBallJim said: Surely you can elaborate on the last point a little bit? Keith Burt signed him and SC didn't want him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tiger Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Or he could just be too overweight to be considered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phileas Fogg Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 3 minutes ago, Spoons said: Keith Burt signed him and SC didn't want him. Based on how little he's played that wouldn't surprise me.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screech Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 3 minutes ago, Tiger said: Or he could just be too overweight to be considered? He's an athlete, they train every day of their lives. He may not be "match ready" but he can manage 45 minutes of as football game. It's another one of those football myths that get recycled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 4 minutes ago, Tiger said: Or he could just be too overweight to be considered? what for 22 games in a row ?? Behave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lack of Action Man Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 4 minutes ago, Spoons said: Keith Burt signed him and SC didn't want him. Interesting if true. Am I right in thinking that Burt was brought here under SOD's administration? Always assumed that Burt and Cotterill had a good relationship. If what you say is true, this could explain a lot about our transfer failings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Yea I've said it before. In his longest run for us against Fulham he had about 15-20 minutes. He assisted the goal and constantly found little pockets of space and played quick passes out. Thought he could've played the Freeman position quite comfortably but it never happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Up The City! Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 6 minutes ago, Spoons said: Keith Burt signed him and SC didn't want him. Sounds the most plausible explanation so far. There is very clearly hostilities between management and the board. The only way to resolve this is to replace management before its too late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.D Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 10 minutes ago, Spoons said: Keith Burt signed him and SC didn't want him. If this is true, then there are some serious internal issues within the club again.. This would also fit with the way I perceive the way that SC manages this club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 8 minutes ago, Spoons said: Keith Burt signed him and SC didn't want him. If true, why is this happening? Surely they should be on the same page. Surely Cotts told him he doesn't want him. Surely KB is telling the board I'm bringing in quality and it isn't getting played. Odd spell here but I do believe he could've added to our squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy1968 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Just now, JoeAman08 said: Yea I've said it before. In his longest run for us against Fulham he had about 15-20 minutes. He assisted the goal and constantly found little pockets of space and played quick passes out. Thought he could've played the Freeman position quite comfortably but it never happened. I don't think he got that long. And the 'assist' was a completely mishit shot. If you think he looked good against Fulham then you have low standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chairman Mao Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Cox looked decent vs. Fulham and then dissapeared? can't be any worse than wilbs, madening Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltshoveller Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 26 minutes ago, Spoons said: can only apologise on behalf of fans i know about the way you have been treated, truly the most embarrassing / baffling signing ever regards minutes played. I'm afraid you fell victim to internal politics. I really hate this Somebody apologising on behalf of others Its not our fault the way he has been treated so no need for us fans to apologise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 1 minute ago, Sleepy1968 said: I don't think he got that long. And the 'assist' was a completely mishit shot. If you think he looked good against Fulham then you have low standards. I've watched city all year. So you know where my standards lie. And again we looked a better side and more likely in that spell. Always an excuse with everyone. Don't think it was a shot. Looked a pass to me. That's an opinion. Fact is we were poor that day and we scored while he was on the pitch. He found more dangerous spots than Freeman did that day. All that while "out of shape." If we would've started him for 10-12 games while he was here I have no doubt our goals scored record would be at least slightly better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 3 minutes ago, OddBallJim said: Interesting if true. Am I right in thinking that Burt was brought here under SOD's administration? Always assumed that Burt and Cotterill had a good relationship. If what you say is true, this could explain a lot about our transfer failings. he was bought her by SL as he had previous of working with SC. To be fair to KB he has had issues but takes a lot of flak which I my opinion SC is due to take. Simon cox played 38 minutes in 21 games, to blame this on fitness is embarrassing. The bloke is 12 stone wet through!! Hardly fat! But heard from someone in media dept that SC was not responsible for Simon cox signing, when I asked again, KB name was given Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snufflelufagus Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 This unfit thing is laughable. Even at my age 37 if i got to train 2 hours every day for 2-3 weeks id be fit as a fiddle. The bloke has been here what 8 or 9 weeks so that would still gave left him 5 weeks or so to be ready to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samo II Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 1 minute ago, Sleepy1968 said: I don't think he got that long. And the 'assist' was a completely mishit shot. If you think he looked good against Fulham then you have low standards. What I'd would give for a mishit shot leading to a goal just now... Actually, scratch that; I'd just take the shot. And let us be fair; to critique Cox's appearance against Fulham when the rest of the team capitulated like a pub side in the first half is rich - I refuse to slag off Cox, as I've simply no idea what he could have added to the side. End of the day; he's heading back to his club, and will be interesting to see if the new Reading manager gives him any game time, and how he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 4 minutes ago, Sleepy1968 said: I don't think he got that long. And the 'assist' was a completely mishit shot. If you think he looked good against Fulham then you have low standards. and you base your opinion on simon cox on that!! This is someone who has scored goals in prem let alone a cert for relegation from championship! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lack of Action Man Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Just now, Spoons said: he was bought her by SL as he had previous of working with SC. To be fair to KB he has had issues but takes a lot of flak which I my opinion SC is due to take. Simon cox played 38 minutes in 21 games, to blame this on fitness is embarrassing. The bloke is 12 stone wet through!! Hardly fat! But heard from someone in media dept that SC was not responsible for Simon cox signing, when I asked again, KB name was given Ah okay, thanks for clearing that up. One thing I think the majority of city fans can agree on is that even with our threadbare squad, to keep using the same 11 week in and week out barring injuries is wrong. Irony is a few years ago Cox was someone I would've quite liked to have seen in a city shirt. Then we get him (albeit after injury issues) and he disappears into the twilight zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe jordans teeth Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 14 minutes ago, Tiger said: Or he could just be too overweight to be considered? 15 minutes ago, Spoons said: Keith Burt signed him and SC didn't want him. Either cotts got him on loan without seeing him or burt signed him,end of the road for cotts either way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 I don't care which one of them made the decision, either way it reflects badly on Cott's. It also fits right in with how SC comes across.... petulant and stubborn ! One minute he's moaning of a lack of bodies, and proves it by leaving the bench light *stamps feet ! Then when the man in charge of recruitment comes up with someone, and I guess a striker was asked for, he spits the dummy and doesn't play him ! Now, the fitness thing doesn't fly. When Agard was 'not fit' for 90mins we were crying out for anyone and there were times this season when one or both forwards have been dead on their feet and all they get is a minute rest at the end of the game??? Bizarre ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy1968 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 12 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said: I've watched city all year. So you know where my standards lie. And again we looked a better side and more likely in that spell. Always an excuse with everyone. Don't think it was a shot. Looked a pass to me. That's an opinion. Fact is we were poor that day and we scored while he was on the pitch. He found more dangerous spots than Freeman did that day. All that while "out of shape." If we would've started him for 10-12 games while he was here I have no doubt our goals scored record would be at least slightly better. Apologies are due - I looked at Player highlights - it does look like it was a purposeful ball, and does not appear to have been mishit like I remembered. Also he didn't look overweight, and for the brief seconds of highlights he was in he was taking up good positions on the pitch . I think I've just been wanting to believe the manager had a good excuse for not giving him any game time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 46 minutes ago, Spoons said: Keith Burt signed him and SC didn't want him. Madness if we are signing players the manager doesn't want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmersonsKev Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 As mentioned it's seems a plausible explanation, Keith burt has done a few interviews in respect of transfer windows etc. Nothing for around 12 months I think. Sems to be a very strained relationship with the hierarchy and management, not sure if it's broken promises but would love for someone to explain to us what is going on or has gone on. We just keep coming up with Chinese whispers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargent Pepper Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 With the greatest of respect to the OP, are we really taking that as fact because someone on the forum said so??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 13 minutes ago, cynic said: Total of 1 goal in the Premiership Max 10 goals in one season in the Championship. Made his name in League 1 with 32 goals in one season. Hardly prolific at this level which is why Reading let him come on loan here. and he's not good enough for us? Or even worthy of getting 30 mins as sub?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 5 minutes ago, cynic said: I very much doubt that is the case. i very much doubt that i would have said what i said with out telling the truth from a high up source from within the club. And hi if you reading this but couldn't bite my tounge any longer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 3 minutes ago, Sargent Pepper said: With the greatest of respect to the OP, are we really taking that as fact because someone on the forum said so??? thanks for the respect, im telling you 100% that I've been told this from a high up paid employee of media team. First time I've ever said anything like this but im angry. I will get in trouble for this but don't care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargent Pepper Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 I'm not saying you are wrong i just find it hard to believe people automatically take it as fact. If it was true then it still doesn't paint SC in a very good light. We are hardly blessed with a large squad and doesn't excuse his lack of use of the other subs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 1 hour ago, Spoons said: can only apologise on behalf of fans i know about the way you have been treated, truly the most embarrassing / baffling signing ever regards minutes played. I'm afraid you fell victim to internal politics. one of many funny threads tonight.....really... apologise to a player who was only here 2mins and for what he could get; no need to apologise for this fan as Cox wont give a sh1te about us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 10 minutes ago, glos old boy said: one of many funny threads tonight.....really... apologise to a player who was only here 2mins and for what he could get; no need to apologise for this fan as Cox wont give a sh1te about us. he more than could have done a job for us! Were in bottom 3 ! Simon cox is getting paid if he's at reading or Bristol city , he genuinely came here to score goals. On another note do you honestly think we will ever get any decent loan players again after the way we have treated cox , Robinson etc. Cox never got the chance to give a shit about us as cotterill to stubborn to give him a chance. Stop sticking up for SC inability to change team and mot stay so loyal to last years team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS4 on Tour... Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 1 hour ago, Spoons said: he was bought her by SL as he had previous of working with SC. To be fair to KB he has had issues but takes a lot of flak which I my opinion SC is due to take. Simon cox played 38 minutes in 21 games, to blame this on fitness is embarrassing. The bloke is 12 stone wet through!! Hardly fat! But heard from someone in media dept that SC was not responsible for Simon cox signing, when I asked again, KB name was given When you say SL had 'previous of working with SC...' - do you mean Simon Cox or Steve Cotterill? If you meant Cox, when did SL previously work with him? Or have I missed something?! Cheers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 3 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said: When you say SL had 'previous of working with SC...' - do you mean Simon Cox or Steve Cotterill? If you meant Cox, when did SL previously work with him? Or have I missed something?! Cheers... no mean KB with SC at forest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS4 on Tour... Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 2 minutes ago, Spoons said: no mean KB with SC at forest Oh right, cheers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View from the Dolman Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 1 minute ago, Spoons said: no mean KB with SC at forest Ummm... Keith Burt was appointed during the SO'D era. Appointed Lead Scout on March 28th 2013 (http://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/20130328-keithburt-723795.aspx) then appointed DoF on May 7th 2013 (http://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/20130507-keithburt-811786.aspx). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finbarr_in_z Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 7 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said: Ummm... Keith Burt was appointed during the SO'D era. Appointed Lead Scout on March 28th 2013 (http://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/20130328-keithburt-723795.aspx) then appointed DoF on May 7th 2013 (http://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/20130507-keithburt-811786.aspx). He's right http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22437591 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRock Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Thought for a while the politic is that with SL signing the cheques he has Burt as 'his' man on the signings ( this may be a consequence of his GJ 'experience' or a desire to be 'involved'). However, SC wants total control over everything and is registering his dissatisfaction with the perceived/actual meddling by SL by not playing new signings by Burt, not filling the bench and making no substitutions. Two grown men shouldn't have a problem sorting this issue out, particularly as both have the same goal. Whether things have got muddied by SC alledgedly interest in the Leics job in the summer, the FFP situation is anyone's guess. All I see is while this game of Russsian Roulette game is going on in the background we're headed in one direction - to League 1. SL needs to act now to sort it out. Either compromise or act. If that means SC out, with regret from me, then so be it. Relegation is not an option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sniper Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 1 hour ago, cynic said: Total of 1 goal in the Premiership Max 10 goals in one season in the Championship. Made his name in League 1 with 32 goals in one season. Hardly prolific at this level which is why Reading let him come on loan here. Better get him back then, ready and match fit for next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Up The City! Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 This is reminding me of the situation Pardew had at Newcastle. I'm not Cotts biggest fan right now but I do believe that a manager needs to have 100% control of signings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 1 hour ago, Spoons said: thanks for the respect, im telling you 100% that I've been told this from a high up paid employee of media team. First time I've ever said anything like this but im angry. I will get in trouble for this but don't care. I don't think of the 'media team' as being important people at the club all, and there's no reason for them to have any particular inside information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 2 hours ago, cynic said: Total of 1 goal in the Premiership Max 10 goals in one season in the Championship. Made his name in League 1 with 32 goals in one season. Hardly prolific at this level which is why Reading let him come on loan here. Indeed, vastly inflated reputation with some, in fact his career scoring record is fairly poor. Brought here as cover, wasn't needed, now dispatched back to Reading. He won't play for them either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lack of Action Man Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 7 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said: I don't think of the 'media team' as being important people at the club all, and there's no reason for them to have any particular inside information. The media team will work with the players regularly for their media commitments, media training etc. I'd imagine they would be privy to quite a bit of information, off the record, if you catch my drift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YorkshireSection Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 2 hours ago, Spoons said: thanks for the respect, im telling you 100% that I've been told this from a high up paid employee of media team. First time I've ever said anything like this but im angry. I will get in trouble for this but don't care. Another ITK FFS? Why don't you just spill the beans on all you know? Maybe just maybe, only the board, and management team actually know what's going on. If not then let's have it all, the Stasi were disbanded a while ago and only were ever active in Geermany, what's to be scared of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 13 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said: Indeed, vastly inflated reputation with some, in fact his career scoring record is fairly poor. Brought here as cover, wasn't needed, now dispatched back to Reading. He won't play for them either. wasnt needed?? Yeah we are full of goals aren't we! Boxing day prime example of us needing a finished like cox. I'm sure if we used cox properly he could have taken pressure off wilbs and kodja. But hey you carry on sticking up for SC and his bizzare use of Simon cox. As for the media team not being In the know I don't know what planet your on. You just bury your head in the sand and when you wake up we will be back in league1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 2 hours ago, Spoons said: _ 21 minutes ago, OddBallJim said: The media team will work with the players regularly for their media commitments, media training etc. I'd imagine they would be privy to quite a bit of information, off the record, if you catch my drift. I very much doubt it. What makes you think the players have any particular interest in confiding in the 'media team'? They're footballers, not gossipy schoolgirls, and contact with the media team will mostly be confined to tedious enforced interviews, a chore most will want to get out the way as quickly as possible, not a cosy chat amongst best pals. I thought it was common knowledge Cox has been far from match fit, and that's the most likely reason he's seen so little action. Plus we've got 3 better strikers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm Brian Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 My money says Cox next contract is not with a Championship club. No better than what we already have. Neither Burt nor Cotts could have known his current standard when signing him because he hasn't played for ages. A gamble that didn't work out. Move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gillies Downs Leeds Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 1 minute ago, I'm Brian said: My money says Cox next contract is not with a Championship club. No better than what we already have. Neither Burt nor Cotts could have known his current standard when signing him because he hasn't played for ages. A gamble that didn't work out. Move on. I thought we had a policy of doing "due diligence" on incoming players. What happened to that on this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 17 minutes ago, Spoons said: wasnt needed?? Yeah we are full of goals aren't we! Boxing day prime example of us needing a finished like cox. I'm sure if we used cox properly he could have taken pressure off wilbs and kodja. But hey you carry on sticking up for SC and his bizzare use of Simon cox. As for the media team not being In the know I don't know what planet your on. You just bury your head in the sand and when you wake up we will be back in league1. Simon Cox has an average of 7 goals per season in the last 3 Championship seasons. 21 goals in 110 games. Goal ratio less than 1:5. So if he had played 21 games for us he might have scored 4 goals. He's not a great finisher at this level by any stretch of the imagination. You over rate him, hugely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1t_ref_again Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Yeah all makes sense, we can't score for toffee, have a world beater on the bench but SC who is coming under increasing pressure to keep his job, won't use him to prove a point as he did not sign him. No doubt this high up reliable media source was also at training each day and told you how fit, committed and good he is I'm not itk but apologising on behave of fans to a player we have not played, now that's embarrassing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phileas Fogg Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Seems obvious to me, SC says he will only sign players who are better than what he has - I assume he means loans too. We can't really judge Liam Moore due to his injury but if we take SC's words literally; Baker and Bennett he wanted - Moore and Hamer unsure (you can only have one goalkeeper); Cox and Robinson potentially not SC 'approved' signings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 9 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said: I very much doubt it. What makes you think the players have any particular interest in confiding in the 'media team'? They're footballers, not gossipy schoolgirls, and contact with the media team will mostly be confined to tedious enforced interviews, a chore most will want to get out the way as quickly as possible, not a cosy chat amongst best pals. I thought it was common knowledge Cox has been far from match fit, and that's the most likely reason he's seen so little action. Plus we've got 3 better strikers. you seem as out of touch on this as SC. The media team are part of first team squad and banter! Just check twitter etc how close they are with first team players. And if you honestly think we have 3 better strikers than cox than fair enough, but he deserved a chance after all we did sign him. As for him being unfit Tha is a joke,he has been sitting on the bench for 20 plus games. How was he ever going to get match sharp. Cotterill didn't even use him in u21 games. Pathetic. Embarrassing. And the worse thing is that this Simon cox saga isn't even a big issue compared to the rest of the mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 6 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said: Simon Cox has an average of 7 goals per season in the last 3 Championship seasons. 21 goals in 110 games. Goal ratio less than 1:5. So if he had played 21 games for us he might have scored 4 goals. He's not a great finisher at this level by any stretch of the imagination. You over rate him, hugely. my problem is that Simon cox never got the chance to prove himself, we signed him remember!! Badly let down by our club and embarrassing way to treat a professional player. Who would ever loan us a player again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samo II Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 1 minute ago, Nogbad the Bad said: Simon Cox has an average of 7 goals per season in the last 3 Championship seasons. 21 goals in 110 games. Goal ratio less than 1:5. So if he had played 21 games for us he might have scored 4 goals. He's not a great finisher at this level by any stretch of the imagination. You over rate him, hugely. Not defending him too much here, because as you rightly point out he's was never going to be the saviour some seem to think he could have been, but compared to the rest of our forward line, Cox's ratio is pretty decent. Asides from Kodjia, and the five Wilbraham has snagged (which markedly improves his goals-to-games at this level to be fair), Agard and Burns have no real record in the Championship, so someone with any kind of experience here would have been welcome over the period Cox was here. As someone else pointed out; Cox played less than one half of football for us and yet set up a goal - doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things, but don't think waving away his abilities when he may have been able to contribute makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm Brian Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 12 minutes ago, Gillies Downs Leeds said: I thought we had a policy of doing "due diligence" on incoming players. What happened to that on this one? Agreed a bad signing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 7 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said: Yeah all makes sense, we can't score for toffee, have a world beater on the bench but SC who is coming under increasing pressure to keep his job, won't use him to prove a point as he did not sign him. No doubt this high up reliable media source was also at training each day and told you how fit, committed and good he is I'm not itk but apologising on behave of fans to a player we have not played, now that's embarrassing its not about will he wont he score goals , as a manger SC job is to get us to stay up at least. His management of simon cox etc shows us a small reason to why we are in the bottom 3. He should have least gave him chance to fail! He hasn't had a sniff. And if you honestly believe all this guff about him being unfit then more fall you. Wake up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lack of Action Man Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 26 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said: I very much doubt it. What makes you think the players have any particular interest in confiding in the 'media team'? They're footballers, not gossipy schoolgirls Have you ever played football? Even park footballers love to gossip! Don't think I've ever been part of a club (park, district, county or regional league for that matter) that hasn't had either one player who can't keep his mouth shut, or a small sub-group who like to have a gossip. Some of the media team have been at City for a long time. They have seen faces come and go. Its inevitable they get hold of tidbits of information from the squad, since they're in such frequent contact with them and have been there for far longer than most of our players. They're familiar, friendly faces after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfOfWestStreet Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 4 hours ago, Spoons said: can only apologise on behalf of fans i know about the way you have been treated, truly the most embarrassing / baffling signing ever regards minutes played. I'm afraid you fell victim to internal politics. Don't apologise on my behalf. It would appear he hasn't done enough in training to warrant a start, and if that is the case maybe he should ask himself why his parent club don't want him either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phileas Fogg Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 3 minutes ago, WolfOfWestStreet said: Don't apologise on my behalf. It would appear he hasn't done enough in training to warrant a start, and if that is the case maybe he should ask himself why his parent club don't want him either. You've got to question though, presumably we watched him, warranted him as good enough to invest our wage budget in to loan.. SC says he'll only bring in better than what we've got.. And he doesn't play. All this points to our recruitment failing and the buck stops with the management and lack of due diligence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfOfWestStreet Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 6 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said: You've got to question though, presumably we watched him, warranted him as good enough to invest our wage budget in to loan.. SC says he'll only bring in better than what we've got.. And he doesn't play. All this points to our recruitment failing and the buck stops with the management and lack of due diligence. He may have been brought in as injury cover only, and given that there were no injuries he wasn't played. we don't know what he was paid or how much that impacted our budget, if at all. Im going to take the line that cotterill as an experienced and successful manager wouldn't leave a player out of the team unnecessarily. If it turns out Cotts is purposely leaving out good players because of any agenda then that wouldn't be acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChippenhamRed Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 No apology necessary on my behalf thanks. Why are we so keen to find a juicy back-story behind Cox's limited action in the side? Could it not just simply be that we desperately needed another striker, we took a chance on him, he did nothing to impress and/or wasn't fit, and Cotts was therefore reluctant to use him? We've seen Bennett and Baker come here on loan and make an impression on the first team; dare I suggest Cox's failure to do the same has more to do with the player himself than any "internal politics", whatever that actually means? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 3 hours ago, Spoons said: _ 1 hour ago, OddBallJim said: 26 minutes ago, Spoons said: its not about will he wont he score goals , as a manger SC job is to get us to stay up at least. His management of simon cox etc shows us a small reason to why we are in the bottom 3. He should have least gave him chance to fail! He hasn't had a sniff. And if you honestly believe all this guff about him being unfit then more fall you. Wake up. Did you miss this thread Spoons? Post #8 worth a read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Up The City! Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 I wish to apologise to all the Season Ticket holders who's money was spent on this signing. Would hate to know how much money was spunkedup the wall on this signing. Complete waste of good money and that's quite shocking considering SL made his millions in the financial sector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1t_ref_again Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 29 minutes ago, Spoons said: its not about will he wont he score goals , as a manger SC job is to get us to stay up at least. His management of simon cox etc shows us a small reason to why we are in the bottom 3. He should have least gave him chance to fail! He hasn't had a sniff. And if you honestly believe all this guff about him being unfit then more fall you. Wake up. I'm more inclined to believe that or guess he did not make enough of an impression in training to force his way Into the team than wanting to peddle some conspiracy theory from some unnamed "media person" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phileas Fogg Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 15 minutes ago, WolfOfWestStreet said: He may have been brought in as injury cover only, and given that there were no injuries he wasn't played. we don't know what he was paid or how much that impacted our budget, if at all. Im going to take the line that cotterill as an experienced and successful manager wouldn't leave a player out of the team unnecessarily. If it turns out Cotts is purposely leaving out good players because of any agenda then that wouldn't be acceptable. WOWS I admire your loyalty to the management team which has been consistent all season. I'm only going on what we've been told; SC has said he will only sign what is an improvement on what we have - obviously he doesn't see Cox as that - so why is he signed? The rumour is that SC has said Cox is unfit and overweight - that may or may not have happened but if it's true, why on earth was he signed? We would have, I assume, done our research and he had to pass a medical.. Again, if he's in such bad shape, why is he here? All we've got is very little detail, if he's not SC's 'signing', I can see him purposely leaving him out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 1 hour ago, Nogbad the Bad said: I very much doubt it. What makes you think the players have any particular interest in confiding in the 'media team'? They're footballers, not gossipy schoolgirls, and contact with the media team will mostly be confined to tedious enforced interviews, a chore most will want to get out the way as quickly as possible, not a cosy chat amongst best pals. I thought it was common knowledge Cox has been far from match fit, and that's the most likely reason he's seen so little action. Plus we've got 3 better strikers. Wow...I'm sorry fella...I respect your opinion, but if you think Footballers don't gossip, then you really should have a quiet think about it. They are just as bad, if not worse than Gossipy schoolgirls. Do you not think other people in football...players, scouts, agents...will not be wondering, and asking Cox why he isn't being played? Do you think he is going to stay quiet, and let people think SC doesn't rate him or he's not fit? Of course not...he will make sure as many people know, as he will want another contract. Footballers are always talking...especially about deals. A lot of things that are 'leaked' are often pre meditated. So Cox is brought in and never played, because he's unfit...yet we've played Agard and Little when both carrying injuries...think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockinredrobin Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 Was told this afternoon by somebody who works for BCFC that Cox came overweight and unfit butbas SC and KB both had worked with him believed they could get him fit and firing it became apparent that they couldnt and he lacked the necessary drive to get himself fit enough hence he goes -nothing more to it than that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickJ Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 3 hours ago, rockinredrobin said: Was told this afternoon by somebody who works for BCFC that Cox came overweight and unfit butbas SC and KB both had worked with him believed they could get him fit and firing it became apparent that they couldnt and he lacked the necessary drive to get himself fit enough hence he goes -nothing more to it than that Unfortunately that won't fit certain persons agendas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 5 hours ago, Spoons said: my problem is that Simon cox never got the chance to prove himself, we signed him remember!! Badly let down by our club and embarrassing way to treat a professional player. Who would ever loan us a player again. Money talks and he wasn't "let down" as we paid most/all his wages no doubt. Calm down we will soon see who would loan us players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.