A selling club.

[olaftab]

Sorry but "silly money" comfort argument that we make  to justify we are not a selling club is bunk.  Sometimes just sometimes you have to make a stand  and I thought  that was the "bright future" . A future that states that we will keep our best and add to them. All we have done  in the last two years is to  sell the best and buy average at best.

Regardless of the situation re selling Milner, I don't think you can blame the buy average bit on the board. They weren't the ones choosing the players.

Fair enough however you could say that the Board are influencing the type  of player by implementing low spend limits.

[pauliewalnuts]

I agree, as I said above it's too simplistic to say that we are a selling club. However, this summer they had the perfect excuse to say to Milner that with no manager we can't make decisions on players leaving and he'd have to wait. Why didn't they?

Maybe the negotiations had gone so far down the line, and Milner was so keen to go, it was futile to put the blocks on it?

I don't know, we're guessing really. I admit that there's not enough evidence to say they did their best to keep him, but by the same chalk I don't think there's enough evidence to the contrary to give them a hard time over it.

The only way we're really going to get an idea what the situation is re player investment is in the transfer window. Unfortunately, it is probably going to be harder to do business this January than it is most Januaries, so we get into this damaging "selling club" loop where we can't do anything to disprove it.

That's what annoyed me so much about Lawrenson last night.

[pauliewalnuts]

Sorry but "silly money" comfort argument that we make  to justify we are not a selling club is bunk.  Sometimes just sometimes you have to make a stand  and I thought  that was the "bright future" . A future that states that we will keep our best and add to them. All we have done  in the last two years is to  sell the best and buy average at best.

Regardless of the situation re selling Milner, I don't think you can blame the buy average bit on the board. They weren't the ones choosing the players.

Fair enough however you could say that the Board are influencing the type  of player by implementing low spend limits.

But you're talking about the players we've bought over the last few years - why wasn't anyone mentioning spending limits until the manager left? Where were the spending limits that stopped him spending nigh on 30 million pounds on four centre halves?

Until he left we all thought he was backed brilliantly. Seems a bit unfair to now say, actually, the reason the players aren't that good is because we wouldn't let him spend more.

What's more, if he was operating under restrictive spending limits, why was he only shopping in the overpriced UK market?

[Chris Smith]

It's not just Lawrenson though, Paulie, that is how we are nor perceived by most people not just a few journalists and pundits. All the stories coming out of VP over the summer have been about selling rather than buying and the wage bill needing to be trimmed. The club have done little to counter that so the accepted view is that we're now reigning in our ambitions.

As I said on another thread that might not be fair but until we do something to show otherwise that is how we will be seen.

It will be hard in January, I agree, but if we're serious about staying competitive then we just have to overcome the difficulties and make sure we get what we need.

[olaftab]

I am equally  not impressed with MON's  overall transfer record so as I don't know if he had a single player limit I will leave it at your summing up PW.

[pauliewalnuts]

It's not just Lawrenson though, Paulie, that is how we are nor perceived by most people not just a few journalists and pundits. All the stories coming out of VP over the summer have been about selling rather than buying and the wage bill needing to be trimmed. The club have done little to counter that so the accepted view is that we're now reigning in our ambitions.

As I said on another thread that might not be fair but until we do something to show otherwise that is how we will be seen.

It will be hard in January, I agree, but if we're serious about staying competitive then we just have to overcome the difficulties and make sure we get what we need.

Agreed

Although I do think there was not a great deal they could do over the summer re the timing of things. I'd also say that they can't really be blamed for the sell to buy stories taking hold - it seems that that was what was pounced on as the reason for MON's departure, and fair enough, it is one slant that could be put on his going.

You're right, it is far from just Lawrenson, there are plenty parroting the same story. It seems like it is one of those things which got raised and has been repeated and repeated until eventually everyone accepts it is true, without any real evidence.

What annoys me is how seemingly totally it has been grasped by the media, with something approaching blood lust, with relish, they're loving it.

[TimTheVillain]

It could be turned round to 'Man Citeh are a buying club'.

We can't say 'no' to very large bids, and I guess, if that makes us a 'selling club' - we are a 'selling club'.

The football argument is always, 'if he wants to go, we can't stop him - we don't want players who aren't committed'.

The truth is that we aren't necessarily a 'selling club' but we can't turn large bids down.

Because Citeh are considerably richer than us, Barry thinks he can win medals there, and he does stand a better chance than at AVFC.

Lawrenson is being very simplistic by saying we're a 'selling club' - instead he should be intelectually analysing the 'Citeh effect' - but he isn't that bright.

[ktvillan]

You echoed my thoughts exactly Paulie.  Spurs and Arsenal sell two of their best players to United and Citeh respectively for silly money and there is no hint of them being called selling clubs.  We do similar and suddenly we are a selling club.  Just like the "fickle" nonsense, these media idiots (and Lawrenson and his MOTD cronies are prize specimens) seem only too keen to buy into any perceived negatives attached to our club and propagate them.   Asking MON to sell players he wasnt using is a different matter - it simply doesnt make sense to hold on to assets that are of no or limited use to you, that applies at any club.  Isnt this why Spurs were trying to offload Keane and Jenas, why Chelsea sold the likes of Parker and Sidwell?

That lot on MOTD,  Lineker, Shearer, Hansen and Lawrenson, they just come across as bland, lacking in any insight whatsoever, and all too willing to trot out cliches and throwaway comments rather than actually do some thinking and come up with an original opinion or insight.  Lee Dixon is a bit different and actually seems to give some thought to what he says.  I'm not sure why they see us as fair game in al of this though.

[saunders_heroes]

You echoed my thoughts exactly Paulie.  Spurs and Arsenal sell two of their best players to United and Citeh respectively for silly money and there is no hint of them being called selling clubs.  We do similar and suddenly we are a selling club.  Just like the "fickle" nonsense, these media idiots (and Lawrenson and his MOTD cronies are prize specimens) seem only too keen to buy into any perceived negatives attached to our club and propagate them.   Asking MON to sell players he wasnt using is a different matter - it simply doesnt make sense to hold on to assets that are of no or limited use to you, that applies at any club.  Isnt this why Spurs were trying to offload Keane and Jenas, why Chelsea sold the likes of Parker and Sidwell?

That lot on MOTD,  Lineker, Shearer, Hansen and Lawrenson, they just come across as bland, lacking in any insight whatsoever, and all too willing to trot out cliches and throwaway comments rather than actually do some thinking and come up with an original opinion or insight.  Lee Dixon is a bit different and actually seems to give some thought to what he says.  I'm not sure why they see us as fair game in al of this though.

Spurs have sold some of their best players over recent years, but the difference between them and us is that they actually go out and sign replacements that get their fans excited. We don't.

[ktvillan]

Well isn't that at least partly down to O'Neill ?  He seemed to see Downing as Barry's replacement and his idea of replacing Milner was, apparently, McGeady. 

[barrysleftfoot]

   I don't think we are more of a selling club than we have been for the last 20 yrs.Yorkie went when we feel we got a good price, as did Barry and Milner.

  Much as i like Milner, i still think we got the better end of the deal, and if someone offers in excess of £25m, then i think Ashley will go as well.I have'nt got a problem with that as long as we buy a good replacement.

  Where i reluctantly agree with MOTD though is where we will finish.

[monkeyboy]

It's not just Lawrenson though, Paulie, that is how we are nor perceived by most people not just a few journalists and pundits. All the stories coming out of VP over the summer have been about selling rather than buying and the wage bill needing to be trimmed. The club have done little to counter that so the accepted view is that we're now reigning in our ambitions.

As I said on another thread that might not be fair but until we do something to show otherwise that is how we will be seen.

It will be hard in January, I agree, but if we're serious about staying competitive then we just have to overcome the difficulties and make sure we get what we need.

Agree with this - our efforts during the summer were geared towards reducing the wage bill and not strengethening the squad, we sold Milner, which got the most press as he was the most high profile, but we sold others and gave others away - I'm quite sure that if we could have got anything for Heskey,Sidwell,Davies Beye etc they would have gone also - does this make us a selling club - no it does show we are re-evaluating and re-alighning our resources to fit a revised budget - i guess.

It's easy for the media to throw Barry into the mix and brand us - though they choose to forget that we fought of the FSW to keep him for an extra season - even though he was a dead man walking a la Fabrigas this season - but not the actions of an out and out selling club.

All clubs sell - my take though is that we don't have too many out and out top quality players so when they leave it gets highlighted more - see Ash if we have a crap year and he sods off in the summer it will come around again.

For me the issue is not with being a selling club - it's about the ambition and desire of the board going forward - we are a weaker club than we were last year from the squad perspective - and EVERY other club has improved - so we cannot in my opinion expect a 6th place - so Lawrenson (twat that he is) is probably right - 9th is about as good as it will be

(not being doom monger here - just looking at what we've got out of a relatively easy early part of the season - i would have expected 11 point from the first 5 games against who we have played - and as we know we are well short of that so not expecting us to pull up trees when we play the tougher teams)

You can't blame RL as MoN spunked  alot of his cash on dross - but the reality is that we looked in evy at the bench that Stoke had on Monday compared to our own - never thought i'd say that.

RL needs to make a statement in Jan - else we will be lucky to be top half of the table come May - I worry for us if thats the case

[Damo70]

Barry wanted to go and we got good money considering he could have gone for nothing this summer, Milner wanted to go and we got good money and a good player in return. Last year Ronaldo wanted to go and United got good money for him. Does that make them a selling club? To me, a selling club is one that sells most of it's best players regularly and replaces them with cheaper players, not a club that lets the odd top player go if A.-they aren't happy and B.-they drive a hard bargain for that player.

[Chris Smith]

In The Observer today, James Milner says:

Villa came very close to winning a trophy, they had a lot of good players but were just that tiny bit short of getting to the next level," said Milner, whose new side take on Wigan today. "They needed to bring players in but it became clear from Randy Lerner that Villa might have to sell to buy. It made me think City had a better chance of progressing and challenging for trophies. I had a great time at Villa and improved as a player but City is a club going places very quickly."

[PeterWithe]

Interesting although you wonder whether the players are actually any better informed than we are on the financial side of things.