Jump to content
IGNORED

Hinds, Moore and Morrell join Cheltenham


View from the Dolman

Recommended Posts

I've not read the whole of this thread. And I'm benefitting from a free Gin bar (12 choices since 1pm), but if anyone thinks that this move is nothing to do with SL being bezzy mates with GJ (and LJ being his son), then they're incredibly dense. 

It is beyond belief that TM would benefit from going down a league. And quite frankly I think it's ridiculous (even though I'm a massive fan of GJ), that anyone would think he'd benefit from a few months in league two.

What a complete joke. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

I've not read the whole of this thread. And I'm benefitting from a free Gin bar (12 choices since 1pm), but if anyone thinks that this move is nothing to do with SL being bezzy mates with GJ (and LJ being his son), then they're incredibly dense. 

It is beyond belief that TM would benefit from going down a league. And quite frankly I think it's ridiculous (even though I'm a massive fan of GJ), that anyone would think he'd benefit from a few months in league two.

What a complete joke. 

I think people would be incredibly dense if they think these deals are done over Johnsons kitchen table without any input from the players or their agents 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Big C said:

I think people would be incredibly dense if they think these deals are done over Johnsons kitchen table without any input from the players or their agents 

Clearly they're not done like that, but I bet they're not as far away from that as you'd think. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reflecting on this Moore is the only mildly surprising one.

Hinds and Morrell will benefit from the gametime at league level. Although he's had early season form, none of us can say for sure whether Hinds would thrive at L1 yet.

Bit worrying - mainly for his own sake - that Moore is regressing it seems. 

Hope they all do well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Fordy62 said:

Do you think agents give a shot about moves that have no money involved? Of course they don't. 

It's laughable if you think that any agent would let his client go to a club just to help the managers dad out if there were better offers on the table. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Big C said:

It's laughable if you think that any agent would let his client go to a club just to help the managers dad out if there were better offers on the table. 

Depends if they have other options hat the club are willing to accept. 

I think you're giving agents too much credit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

Do you think agents give a shot about moves that have no money involved? Of course they don't. 

They might not give a shit about the deal, but I suspect if they don't bother fighting their clients corner when the player is unhappy, they'd find themselves clientless pretty quickly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Big C said:

It's laughable if you think that any agent would let his client go to a club just to help the managers dad out if there were better offers on the table. 

 

12 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

Depends if they have other options hat the club are willing to accept. 

I think you're giving agents too much credit. 

Fordy I can see you've been a big downer for the last 8 months.

Do you think these loan deals will scupper our season or the chances of these young lads in regards to their future ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, stephenkibby. said:

 

Fordy I can see you've been a big downer for the last 8 months.

Do you think these loan deals will scupper our season or the chances of these young lads in regards to their future ?

I think they'll be beneficial for the three lads concerned when compared with their prospects of sitting on our bench, or worse, not being in the match day squad. 

However, do I think we've chosen to send out our loanees to the best possible places? Especially in the case of Moore and Hinds, no. I definitely don't. I strongly suspect there would've been better offers from people who aren't GJ. 

So, do I think our loans would've been sent to Cheltenham if GJ wasn't LJ's dad? No. Definitely not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

I think they'll be beneficial for the three lads concerned when compared with their prospects of sitting on our bench, or worse, not being in the match day squad. 

However, do I think we've chosen to send out our loanees to the best possible places? Especially in the case of Moore and Hinds, no. I definitely don't. I strongly suspect there would've been better offers from people who aren't GJ. 

So, do I think our loans would've been sent to Cheltenham if GJ wasn't LJ's dad? No. Definitely not. 

Do you think the better clubs would definitely have been willing to offer regular game time for the players?

That is the crux of it for me.

Don't overly care who the club is, but regular minutes at the highest level where that is on offer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

I think they'll be beneficial for the three lads concerned when compared with their prospects of sitting on our bench, or worse, not being in the match day squad. 

However, do I think we've chosen to send out our loanees to the best possible places? Especially in the case of Moore and Hinds, no. I definitely don't. I strongly suspect there would've been better offers from people who aren't GJ. 

So, do I think our loans would've been sent to Cheltenham if GJ wasn't LJ's dad? No. Definitely not. 

I agree, the Cheltenham connection is good for us and I think people have got it round the wrong way. It's not us doing Cheltenham a favour it's them doing us one and giving these lads league football when they otherwise wouldn't be getting any

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fordy62 said:

I think they'll be beneficial for the three lads concerned when compared with their prospects of sitting on our bench, or worse, not being in the match day squad. 

However, do I think we've chosen to send out our loanees to the best possible places? Especially in the case of Moore and Hinds, no. I definitely don't. I strongly suspect there would've been better offers from people who aren't GJ. 

So, do I think our loans would've been sent to Cheltenham if GJ wasn't LJ's dad? No. Definitely not. 

Much better than I was trying to type....ta.

1 hour ago, Big C said:

I agree, the Cheltenham connection is good for us and I think people have got it round the wrong way. It's not us doing Cheltenham a favour it's them doing us one and giving these lads league football when they otherwise wouldn't be getting any

Don't disagree that CTFC is a good option for us as a club overall, just don't think it's the right move for Moore (definitely in my head) or Hinds (think he'd be better training with our first team every day)...but good for Morrell.  It shouldn't be a one stop shop for our loanees.  Yeah, I know DDG has gone to Chesterfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good interview with Taylor today from cheltenham:

Said he knew for sometime he was looking for a loan this season, so has been looking "for something suitable for me and a place where I can get as many games as possible" and "Cheltenham is not too far from Bristol....so it has all planned out nicely".

Also said "when you're looking for a loan...you have to choose the right club that will give you the most opportunity and game time....Cheltenham was obviously the right choice because I feel I can help the team in a massive way....so after talking it through with the manager, with my agent and with Lee Johnson, it felt right" 

On going out on loan, he said that going out to Bury last season "was probably the best thing I've ever done, to go out and play league football week in week out, that's where you're going to learn the most"

Spoke well as always, good to hear some words from the horses mouth.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/08/2017 at 22:25, Fordy62 said:

I think they'll be beneficial for the three lads concerned when compared with their prospects of sitting on our bench, or worse, not being in the match day squad. 

However, do I think we've chosen to send out our loanees to the best possible places? Especially in the case of Moore and Hinds, no. I definitely don't. I strongly suspect there would've been better offers from people who aren't GJ. 

So, do I think our loans would've been sent to Cheltenham if GJ wasn't LJ's dad? No. Definitely not. 

 

 

If say maybe two of the three musketeers tare it up it up in league two this season(especially when it comes to the 'crunch),would another club maybe have genuine grounds to cry "fowl play..nepotism'..??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Robert the bruce said:

If say maybe two of the three musketeers tare it up it up in league two this season(especially when it comes to the 'crunch),would another club maybe have genuine grounds to cry "fowl play..nepotism'..??

Nope. City can loan players to whoever they like i'm pretty sure. Its when we send Đurić, Maggers and O'Neill there in January that the moaning might start...!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/08/2017 at 17:16, bristolcitysweden said:

Half of the players in L2 are overaged fattys that hardly can run

So little danger of our lads being caught with a nasty foul then.

You have a bit of a point concerning bad tackles but the talented youngsters  would have had this all their lives and dealt with it in order to become professional footballers.

There is always a risk wherever and whenever you enter the field of play or even in training .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...