The One wrote:Do not think loan players can refuse to come back, they are under contract.
Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:The One wrote:Do not think loan players can refuse to come back, they are under contract.
No they can’t refuse but we aren’t known for making players play when they don’t want to be here. I can’t see us recalling them if they want to stay at their new teams especially if we can turn the loans into permanent deals and get some sort of fee.
Sedgwick wrote:Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:The One wrote:Do not think loan players can refuse to come back, they are under contract.
No they can’t refuse but we aren’t known for making players play when they don’t want to be here. I can’t see us recalling them if they want to stay at their new teams especially if we can turn the loans into permanent deals and get some sort of fee.
All Ive heard, is O'keefe being recalled is more likely if he being sold. Could be good business is he keeps playing well.
bobbystagsfan wrote:Sedgwick wrote:Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:The One wrote:Do not think loan players can refuse to come back, they are under contract.
No they can’t refuse but we aren’t known for making players play when they don’t want to be here. I can’t see us recalling them if they want to stay at their new teams especially if we can turn the loans into permanent deals and get some sort of fee.
All Ive heard, is O'keefe being recalled is more likely if he being sold. Could be good business is he keeps playing well.
Can't see him coming back here unless sold like you said. I know fans might want him back and in the team because of his good performances but he might not want to come back when he'll be settled in Rochdale
Sedgwick wrote:bobbystagsfan wrote:Sedgwick wrote:Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:The One wrote:Do not think loan players can refuse to come back, they are under contract.
No they can’t refuse but we aren’t known for making players play when they don’t want to be here. I can’t see us recalling them if they want to stay at their new teams especially if we can turn the loans into permanent deals and get some sort of fee.
All Ive heard, is O'keefe being recalled is more likely if he being sold. Could be good business is he keeps playing well.
Can't see him coming back here unless sold like you said. I know fans might want him back and in the team because of his good performances but he might not want to come back when he'll be settled in Rochdale
Need to highlight they play a back 5, he's impressing as an attacker... assists and goals. His defensive stats are average. Still think he'd do well for us regardless.
Sadly looks to be like another player who comes here with potential and rave reviews, never pulls up any trees but does as soon as he leaves.
I'd just love to know what happened with Clough and why he hardly got a chance
Sedgwick wrote:Sadly looks to be like another player who comes here with potential and rave reviews, never pulls up any trees but does as soon as he leaves.
I'd just love to know what happened with Clough and why he hardly got a chance
Clough has already said why... I must have posted this about 10 times along with musings.
Corey was only used to playing in a back 5 as a RWB and that put him below Perch and Gordon at right back. He wanted him playing regularly and thus went on loan.
Dont know why, but any player leaves Mansfield on loan and its automatically "why does the manager hate him??!" Like when Knowles went out and everyone was like well that's him done then.
MTFCMusings wrote:Gazza will be pleased to hear that in his radio Notts interview, Clough said he made a mistake in not taking both centre backs off at half time on Saturday, and putting Rawson and McLaughlin there
Marky Mark wrote:I'd imagine the reason that Stevo doesnt ask the 'searching' questions is that he's employed by the club to provide club friendly communication and media content, not to put the manager on the spot about his transfer policy. It's not about integrity, it's simply not his job.
Marky Mark wrote:I'd imagine the reason that Stevo doesnt ask the 'searching' questions is that he's employed by the club to provide club friendly communication and media content, not to put the manager on the spot about his transfer policy. It's not about integrity, it's simply not his job.
Sedgwick wrote:yeah but you're acting like we missed out on Naylor and did nothing for weeks... you know the narrative, we had other targets we went for and missed out.
You are genuinely acting like its not possible that mighty Masnfield town can miss out on players, like we have a given right to just be able to go and sign some super star, and if they don't come, find and sign another a the drop of a hat. And because we didn't do just that the "policy" isn't any good.
You're still also to say what you think our "transfer policy" is... if its that bad, talk us through what exactly it is.
The goal with transfers seems to be clearly identifying a shortlist of targets, that A. Dont cost a big fee and B. Dont cost the earth in wages. Theres nothing wrong with the transfer policy, yes it wasn't a good window for defenders but its the execution of landing these targets that was the problem, not the policy its self.
Unless you expect us to have 5 top tier players and start negotiations with them all just incase... It doesn't work like that.
bobbystagsfan wrote:Here's a question we'll never have an answer to.
If we hadn't lost that Bradford game, would we have gone on this run? I feel like those defensive mistakes have just been repeated again and again since that collapse.
adamstag wrote:bobbystagsfan wrote:Here's a question we'll never have an answer to.
If we hadn't lost that Bradford game, would we have gone on this run? I feel like those defensive mistakes have just been repeated again and again since that collapse.
Maybe, but he played hewitt RB at that game and it was obvious at 2-1 we were struggling down that side, it was obvious it was 2-2 we were struggling and it was obvious at 2-3, did clough do anything?
the fact their 2nd and 3rd goals were almost carbon copies (with the tap in for cook) said it all.
He stood there, watched and did nothing.
bobbystagsfan wrote:Here's a question we'll never have an answer to.
If we hadn't lost that Bradford game, would we have gone on this run? I feel like those defensive mistakes have just been repeated again and again since that collapse.
bellwhiff wrote:Sedgwick wrote:yeah but you're acting like we missed out on Naylor and did nothing for weeks... you know the narrative, we had other targets we went for and missed out.
You are genuinely acting like its not possible that mighty Masnfield town can miss out on players, like we have a given right to just be able to go and sign some super star, and if they don't come, find and sign another a the drop of a hat. And because we didn't do just that the "policy" isn't any good.
You're still also to say what you think our "transfer policy" is... if its that bad, talk us through what exactly it is.
The goal with transfers seems to be clearly identifying a shortlist of targets, that A. Dont cost a big fee and B. Dont cost the earth in wages. Theres nothing wrong with the transfer policy, yes it wasn't a good window for defenders but its the execution of landing these targets that was the problem, not the policy its self.
Unless you expect us to have 5 top tier players and start negotiations with them all just incase... It doesn't work like that.
What I know are the facts as I’ve stated them. We missed out on a player in June (?) and didn’t bring in anyone until two last minute panic signings that sees one who is not pulling up trees and another who is just pulling up.
I asked you if that was a good window after the same rubbish we saw in January where we failed to get players in of a sufficient quality. Are you involved with the club because you’re going out of your way to defend an utter raspberryshow of a situation
Conker wrote:bellwhiff wrote:Sedgwick wrote:yeah but you're acting like we missed out on Naylor and did nothing for weeks... you know the narrative, we had other targets we went for and missed out.
You are genuinely acting like its not possible that mighty Masnfield town can miss out on players, like we have a given right to just be able to go and sign some super star, and if they don't come, find and sign another a the drop of a hat. And because we didn't do just that the "policy" isn't any good.
You're still also to say what you think our "transfer policy" is... if its that bad, talk us through what exactly it is.
The goal with transfers seems to be clearly identifying a shortlist of targets, that A. Dont cost a big fee and B. Dont cost the earth in wages. Theres nothing wrong with the transfer policy, yes it wasn't a good window for defenders but its the execution of landing these targets that was the problem, not the policy its self.
Unless you expect us to have 5 top tier players and start negotiations with them all just incase... It doesn't work like that.
What I know are the facts as I’ve stated them. We missed out on a player in June (?) and didn’t bring in anyone until two last minute panic signings that sees one who is not pulling up trees and another who is just pulling up.
I asked you if that was a good window after the same rubbish we saw in January where we failed to get players in of a sufficient quality. Are you involved with the club because you’re going out of your way to defend an utter raspberryshow of a situation
Back up signings, not panic signings, you know that.
Gazmoose82 wrote:What a signing forrester is
Might aswell try stech at CB.... everyone else has had a go!.
Wouldnt be surprised to see bowery upfront and hawkins CB on sat
Return to Stagsnet Main Discussion Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 265 guests