Transfer News 2022/23 Season Incoming Transfers and a few other things

Status
Not open for further replies.
RgYellows said:
I think most people are concerned that having a 6th choice CB that we don't want to play feels like a total waste of money.
Click to expand...

He’s got a contract for pittance due to his PFA role?

It’s just a weird thing to get annoyed about. An influential guy off the pitch, who has never let us down on it, will be available to play in case of emergency. Sack the manager!
 
Followtheox1 said:
I find it strange that losing one defender means the idea of three at the back is gone from Robinson. Should he not have an idea of how he wants us to play and then get players into suit that, rather than trying to build a whole formation around one player!
Click to expand...
I can understand why. The characteristics of McNally are going to be difficult to replace and his qualities really suit a back three. It's also why he shone so well because we allowed him freedom to get forward (you only need to look at the 'highlight reels' to know what people appreciate!). With respect, John Mousinho, Elliott Moore or many more traditional centre halves they can't do that so it definitely blunts us offensively because centre halves are generally more static. Without that offensive centre half with pace and composure to carry the ball through the midfield lines, we are less likely to get the ball forward and transition from defensive unit to offensive, quickly.

He's essentially 'cheating' and becomes more of a winger or direct midfielder which is an incredibly rare commodity. Very simply, we aren't going to find another player in our budget like him barring a miracle. You might find another traditional centre half (an Elliott Moore for example) who isn't a bad player, he just won't have the same attributes as McNally who makes the three at the back so workable and attractive. Maybe that will see a change in style? Who knows.
 
tatabanya said:
He’s got a contract for pittance due to his PFA role?

It’s just a weird thing to get annoyed about. An influential guy off the pitch, who has never let us down on it, will be available to play in case of emergency. Sack the manager!
Click to expand...
How on earth do you know what he's paid?

I find it far more odd to get annoyed about things you're pretending I have said - "sack the manager" indeed.
 
tatabanya said:
He’s got a contract for pittance due to his PFA role?

It’s just a weird thing to get annoyed about. An influential guy off the pitch, who has never let us down on it, will be available to play in case of emergency. Sack the manager!
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is annoyed that he has got a contract in order to fulfil his PFA role. I think it's much more the case that we are restricted to a squad size of 22, and that if he's registered he takes the place of another option... which is madness when we've been wafer thin at the back for the last 2 seasons and he didn't get much of a look in last season.
 
Osei Yaw said:
I don't think anyone is annoyed that he has got a contract in order to fulfil his PFA role. I think it's much more the case that we are restricted to a squad size of 22, and that if he's registered he takes the place of another option... which is madness when we've been wafer thin at the back for the last 2 seasons and he didn't get much of a look in last season.
Click to expand...
But if it was someone else taking his squad place - then presumably they'd be seen as fulfilling the same role i.e. back-up when everyone else is unavailable. Whoever has that 4th/5th centre-back role after Moore, Brown, New Bloke & possibly Golding, is going to be there as rarely used cover.
If it was a player who plays a different position taking his squad place, then we'd end up with one less defensive option and be in a worse place?
 
captainox said:
But if it was someone else taking his squad place - then presumably they'd be seen as fulfilling the same role i.e. back-up when everyone else is unavailable. Whoever has that 4th/5th centre-back role after Moore, Brown, New Bloke & possibly Golding, is going to be there as rarely used cover.
If it was a player who plays a different position taking his squad place, then we'd end up with one less defensive option and be in a worse place?
Click to expand...
Yes, if we are paying him anyway we probably have enough squad places to give him a spot. I like it when he comes on with a few minutes to go to shut up shop, or take a pen.
 
The seemingly mild debate about whether or not it is worth including Mous in the squad or not has once again raised the spectre of the whole 'positive v negative' debate - which is beyond boring now and quite frankly unnecessary.

If you're questioning whether or not Mous should be in the squad you're instantly a doom-monger and you want KR out! zzzzz
The reality is that the vast majority on here are perfectly positive, but we can still point out areas of concern and debate these. That is normal.

For example, I agree with the majority of what @battman posts, but we can still have a strong debate about the merits of 'The Model'. Likewise @tonyw was involved in a lively conversation on this last night and @Ricky Otto - specifically around McNally - this morning. None of us are negative posters, we're just all debating the nuances of OUFC life. Even the likes of @greatunclekip has this week acknowledged the good signing of Ciaron Brown!

Ok, there are a handful of posters who are more negative than others. If you don't like what @Leysboy et al say - fair enough - argue the points don't dismiss him as negative. If it's getting too repetitive for you, stop replying! You can even ignore said individual/s. Don't, however, use this as an opportunity to shutdown legitimate debate. It's helping to create this unneccessary binary culture.
Aside from the fact that often there are genuine and legitimate concerns to address - it is now becoming more boring to hear the OTT pushbacks (the favourite genre of post this week appears to be, on the back of any signing or activity anywhere "here comes the forum meltdown lol" - but of course the meltdown invariably never comes. It is a tired and pointless trope).

Stop pretending there is more negativity than there is. Recognise this place is a bubble and (aside from not being a reflection of the wider support) it means that just a handful of individuals with a consistent message (sometimes negative) can feel as though certain views are more widespread than they are.
Of course some people enjoy amplifying the negativity as they get to extol their divine virtues ever more so, but they are as much (if not more) to blame.

The vast majority on here are aligned on 90% of OUFC matters. The rest is up for debate and fairly, without having to put people into a little box for your validation.

As I say, the vast majority are perfectly positive (though most of us don't try to use that 'positivity' as a character trait - or as a substitute for a personality).
 
RgYellows said:
How on earth do you know what he's paid?

I find it far more odd to get annoyed about things you're pretending I have said - "sack the manager" indeed.
Click to expand...

Yeah that’s fair. I find it annoying when people do that too, it was more in relation to another poster rather than anything you’d said.

All I’m saying on the Mous point is that, in the grand scheme of things, it’s unlikely to have any impact at all on our season. And he is being paid as you’d imagine a 36yo 6th choice cb would.
 
Followtheox1 said:
He says now McNally gone that they won't look to play 3 at the back and Mousinho seems to be having a squad place.
Click to expand...
Yes , how odd. Why do you decide not to play 3 at the back based on the sale of one player. McNally was very good, but not that good to stop your plans and go back to the drawing board!! He said he knew he was going so surely we should have been targeting a like for like.
 
Oufcrealist said:
Yes , how odd. Why do you decide not to play 3 at the back based on the sale of one player. McNally was very good, but not that good to stop your plans and go back to the drawing board!! He said he knew he was going so surely we should have been targeting a like for like.
Click to expand...
Think that’s the challenge - need someone who has that recovery pace and ability to bring the ball out to make the three work. Burnley have just spent the best part of £2m to find that ability.

It’s easier to build a back 4 and tbh, I’m not sure I trust Robinson to build a solid defensive 3 without a standout player like McNally. We desperately need an upgrade or two at full back though to even make a 4 work.
 
SirAndyOfCrosby said:
The seemingly mild debate about whether or not it is worth including Mous in the squad or not has once again raised the spectre of the whole 'positive v negative' debate - which is beyond boring now and quite frankly unnecessary.

If you're questioning whether or not Mous should be in the squad you're instantly a doom-monger and you want KR out! zzzzz
The reality is that the vast majority on here are perfectly positive, but we can still point out areas of concern and debate these. That is normal.

For example, I agree with the majority of what @battman posts, but we can still have a strong debate about the merits of 'The Model'. Likewise @tonyw was involved in a lively conversation on this last night and @Ricky Otto - specifically around McNally - this morning. None of us are negative posters, we're just all debating the nuances of OUFC life. Even the likes of @greatunclekip has this week acknowledged the good signing of Ciaron Brown!

Ok, there are a handful of posters who are more negative than others. If you don't like what @Leysboy et al say - fair enough - argue the points don't dismiss him as negative. If it's getting too repetitive for you, stop replying! You can even ignore said individual/s. Don't, however, use this as an opportunity to shutdown legitimate debate. It's helping to create this unneccessary binary culture.
Aside from the fact that often there are genuine and legitimate concerns to address - it is now becoming more boring to hear the OTT pushbacks (the favourite genre of post this week appears to be, on the back of any signing or activity anywhere "here comes the forum meltdown lol" - but of course the meltdown invariably never comes. It is a tired and pointless trope).

Stop pretending there is more negativity than there is. Recognise this place is a bubble and (aside from not being a reflection of the wider support) it means that just a handful of individuals with a consistent message (sometimes negative) can feel as though certain views are more widespread than they are.
Of course some people enjoy amplifying the negativity as they get to extol their divine virtues ever more so, but they are as much (if not more) to blame.

The vast majority on here are aligned on 90% of OUFC matters. The rest is up for debate and fairly, without having to put people into a little box for your validation.

As I say, the vast majority are perfectly positive (though most of us don't try to use that 'positivity' as a character trait - or as a substitute for a personality).
Click to expand...

“Don’t shut down legitimate debate”

Followed by lots of instructions on how to post?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

BristolOx
  • Locked
Transfer News January 2022/23 Transfer Window preview
31 32 33
Replies
642
Views
60K
MJB
MJB
MarkG
General February 2022 goal of the month
Replies
6
Views
2K
MarkG
MarkG
G
  • Locked
Transfer News Summer 2022 Transfer thread.
Replies
9
Views
4K
Malc
Malc
F
General Next Season
2 3
Replies
49
Views
3K
Mad Dog
Mad Dog
captainox
Current Player Squad for Remainder of the Season
Replies
6
Views
724
Left Wing Cross
Left Wing Cross
Back
Top Bottom