Joined: Dec 19 2007 Posts: 1888 Location: Somewhere between Ashton and Haydock
DaveO wrote:I am a shoe in for a start in the first team when I get back then.
Linking Colbon to Phelps and saying we should have kept the former because the latter takes an overseas spot, may be on £60K a year etc ignores the fact Colbon simply wasn't good enough and we have better players in the positions he plays.
If giving Phelps a contract was a mistake it doesn't make not giving Colbon one a mistake as well.
If Colbon was still here Ainscough would never have got a game IMO! Think about that given out coaches selection policy before ruing the loss of a less than average player.
Dave
Easy tiger, your post makes it look like your whole post is disagreeing with my general stance!
Conroy - Being a Latics fan i'm already immune to watching sh*te.
Sally Cinnamon - Treat the Saints forum as you would if you met a girl from St Helens. Best policy would be to avoid altogether but if you absolutely can't resist temptation then take every possible precaution.
AJ wrote:The difference, laddo, is this. Colbon was doing a decent job in the team. Goulding this season hasn't.
A witchhunt is a witchhunt laddo. I dont see how you can justify the witchhunt of one player as an excuse to lauch one on another. One witchhunt of a young player does not make another right. You were right though when you said it is embarrasing at times. Colbon was average and no more but he did give give his all and did not deserve the stick he got. Likewise neither has Goulding this season as he was one of the better players in his 2 games.
MrPhilb wrote:Yeah if we can get him one on one against his opposite number he'll score a fair few like that.
His kick returns and 20 metre tap drives have been very impressive also
Yeah I can imagine, we started using him 2nd row towards the end of last season and he made good yards then.. More than Coley and Fielden at times which said something
wiggywigwig wrote:now i'm no financial expert but if they did keep colbon on 30k a year that would of meant they would have 30k left and 1 space on the quota now what decent oversea's player is gonna sign for that money? But they kept phelps on a rumoured 60k does anyone not think that its a good piece of business that if we wanted to free up a oversea's space phelps would be the man to go and we'd of free'd up a 60k wage packet as well and the fee may well drop for another player as a swap deal could take place
By keeping Colbon IL could have offered an extra 30k to Buderus, which may have ment he signed for us. We'd still have had an average utility player in the squad but on half the money.
Perkin wrote:By keeping Colbon IL could have offered an extra 30k to Buderus, which may have ment he signed for us. We'd still have had an average utility player in the squad but on half the money.
Buderus been playing well for Leeds this season has he?
Glynola wrote:Buderus been playing well for Leeds this season has he?
We have a class hooker in Riddell
Yes, but last season we tried to sign Buderus but Leeds offered more money. The point I was making was we could have kept Colbon instead of Phelps and used the extra money to try and get Buderus instead of Riddell.
I do think Riddell will be good for us but Buderus is in a different class
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
