CONFIRMED Ryan Leonard

[Blade for Sale]

Doesn't think Hoof would work but would still like to watch it...

Mmmmm. Only in S2.

But you too have admitted enjoying SUFC under Bassett. Case closed m'lud.

 

[Mesut Özil's Lawnmower]

I'd love to go into a rumour thread one day without seeing a Pinchy led argument

 

[Weasel]

He's also a pretty knowledgeable fellah too....

Though clearly not when he's imparting his nonsensical 'words of wisdom' ?? about Bassett though.

 

[LSF]

Though clearly not when he's imparting his nonsensical 'words of wisdom' ?? about Bassett though.

If you believe him, then yes. It's a wind up in my opinion.

 

[I should coco]

Can we have a forum for wannabee comedians and another forum for inane pointless banter and keep this one for the purpose intended FFS

Where would you suggest we put your 'contribution' then?

 

[Grizzly blade]

So....this Leonard fella....is he signing or not?

 

[Teddy]

So....this Leonard fella....is he signing or not?

Piss off mate! This is the Dave Basset thread (aka the Pinchy show)

Oh sorry, no you're right.

 

[Pinchy]

I'm utterly convinced you're the bloke who was in the Sentinel toilets after the Bradford game whilst I had a big piss

'Mature' bloke finished his business and gets drawn into conversation with bloke just coming in who comments what a season it's been, and the best since Bassett in his view.

Cue 'mature' bloke saying he didn't like Bassett and didn't enjoy it under him. Cue bemused look on other blokes face and me zipping up with huge wry smile.

I can hand on heart say that, ignoring the end of his tenure when fellow Blades clashed, I've only seen 2 Blades ever say they didn't enjoy it in general under Bassett.

One in the Sentinel toilets and you on here.

Only one then, because I certainly did. I'm quite a gregarious bloke and chat to anyone so it could in theory have been me but wasn't on that occasion. Two sensible Blades in the world. Remarkable.

My problem with Bassett is his legacy.

The continuing suspicion bordering on mistrust amongst our fan base about good passing football.

The feeling that we're uncomfortable (fans, certainly not players and management) about outplaying the opposition and prefer to prevail by being the courageous upanatem underdog. By definition, of course, the latter can't happen very often. A very good football team on the other hand, will win consistently. This is where the "winning football is more important than attractive football" mantra fails to recognise an essential reality. The teams who win regularly do it by playing the 'right way', a favourite phrase of our excellent manager. The way you play has a direct correlation with how successful you are. It's cause and effect not coincidence.

Sensing that however well we're playing the first groan is only a misplaced pass away and the first cry of Gerritintbox imminent.

You may say that's true of fans all over the land but in my view it's acute and excessive at the Lane.

All this is, at least in part, a symptom of the Bassett (and to some extent Warnock) generation and their failure to understand that a particular style has been consigned to history.

That's why I ask myself, on many years reflection, whether 4 years of over-achievement; followed, let it be said by a pretty rapid downward spiral to exactly where we started, was worth the damage done.

No losing manager was ever beaten by Sheffield United's superiority. It was always, without fail, "we couldn't cope with their style of play" and that was never intended as a compliment.

They can't say that now. We outplay and outclass them with the quality of our football. That's what makes me proud. That's what I want to see. That, contrary to popular belief is the Sheffield United way. The Currie, Badger and Woodward way. The Carlin, Addison and Reece way. Now we are living down the long-ball, hoofit, miss-out-midfield approach. It's taking a long time, not helped by Warnock and the former semi-professional, non-league, reserve goalkeeper, but we're now getting there.

Thank Pele for Tufty.

. ️.

 

[Pinchy]

So....this Leonard fella....is he signing or not?

Southend's chairman is trying everything he can to persuade him to remain part of the Shrimpers family:

 

[Gimli]

Only one then, because I certainly did. I'm quite a gregarious bloke and chat to anyone so it could in theory have been me but wasn't on that occasion. Two sensible Blades in the world. Remarkable.

My problem with Bassett is his legacy.

The continuing suspicion bordering on mistrust amongst our fan base about good passing football.

The feeling that we're uncomfortable (fans, certainly not players and management) about outplaying the opposition and prefer to prevail by being the courageous upanatem underdog. By definition, of course, the latter can't happen very often. A very good football team on the other hand, will win consistently. This is where the "winning football is more important than attractive football" mantra fails to recognise an essential reality. The teams who win regularly do it by playing the 'right way', a favourite phrase of our excellent manager. The way you play has a direct correlation with how successful you are. It's cause and effect not coincidence.

Sensing that however well we're playing the first groan is only a misplaced pass away and the first cry of Gerritintbox imminent.

You may say that's true of fans all over the land but in my view it's acute and excessive at the Lane.

All this is, at least in part, a symptom of the Bassett (and to some extent Warnock) generation and their failure to understand that a particular style has been consigned to history.

That's why I ask myself, on many years reflection, whether 4 years of over-achievement; followed, let it be said by a pretty rapid downward spiral to exactly where we started, was worth the damage done.

No losing manager was ever beaten by Sheffield United's superiority. It was always, without fail, "we couldn't cope with their style of play" and that was never intended as a compliment.

They can't say that now. We outplay and outclass them with the quality of our football. That's what makes me proud. That's what I want to see. That, contrary to popular belief is the Sheffield United way. The Currie, Badger and Woodward way. The Carlin, Addison and Reece way. Now we are living down the long-ball, hoofit, miss-out-midfield approach. It's taking a long time, not helped by Warnock and the former semi-professional, non-league, reserve goalkeeper, but we're now getting there.

Thank Pele for Tufty.

. ️.

I don't think you'll find many that actually feel this way. As has been said before, the achievement of Bassett is rightly celebrated, not the style of football. I can't think of many comments (probably there are one or two) where people have bemoaned the style of football that wilder implemented. I think you try to make out that all Blades except yourself are idiots and love hoof just to try and make yourself stand out more as a 'football purist' and the only one who understands how the game should be played.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Well it's nothing new. It's what I've always said.

I've done you the courtesy of answering your question. Will you reciprocate?

It seems strange to say he was the right man for the time but to then apologise for him and his approach (given how successful it was). The constant suggestions that people have a problem with the way Wilder plays are also very strange and seem desperate.


I’ve no problem with Tufty referring to the ‘right way’ even if I only partially agree with him. Obviously winning in style is better than winning ugly. But winning ugly is better than losing in style. Tufty himself has allowed the team to resort to hoof when the conditions have necessitated it (Oldham away being a prime example) but where possible, has played the ‘ right’ way.


Re your response to my post. I’m not saying Bassett wasn’t primarily a long ball merchant. He found something that worked for him and made a successful career out of it. But it still takes a wild leap to suggest a ‘loathing for proper football’. But like I say, he’s not revered for his style. He’s revered for other qualities he brought to the team. Team spirit, bargain purchases who went on to be very good players (Kelly, Deane, Tracey, Agana, Blake, Hodges, to name but a few), bringing youth through the ranks to good effect (Whitehouse, Ward, Bradders), and for instilling such battling qualities (yes, sometimes at the expense of footballing ability) to allow us to compete with and fairly regularly turn over teams with far more resource than ourselves. You refer to Wembley in 93 as an embarrassment after losing 2-1 in extra time (yes could and should have been more but we had a wonderful goalkeeper in Alan Kelly- signed by Bassett) against a more expensively assembled team including internationals like Waddle, Hirst, Sheridan, Walker, Woods etc. I hate losing derbies but certainly wouldn’t call it an embarrassment and am proud of knocking the likes of Man U out en route to Wembley.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

Only one then, because I certainly did. I'm quite a gregarious bloke and chat to anyone so it could in theory have been me but wasn't on that occasion. Two sensible Blades in the world. Remarkable.

My problem with Bassett is his legacy.

The continuing suspicion bordering on mistrust amongst our fan base about good passing football.

The feeling that we're uncomfortable (fans, certainly not players and management) about outplaying the opposition and prefer to prevail by being the courageous upanatem underdog. By definition, of course, the latter can't happen very often. A very good football team on the other hand, will win consistently. This is where the "winning football is more important than attractive football" mantra fails to recognise an essential reality. The teams who win regularly do it by playing the 'right way', a favourite phrase of our excellent manager. The way you play has a direct correlation with how successful you are. It's cause and effect not coincidence.

Sensing that however well we're playing the first groan is only a misplaced pass away and the first cry of Gerritintbox imminent.

You may say that's true of fans all over the land but in my view it's acute and excessive at the Lane.

All this is, at least in part, a symptom of the Bassett (and to some extent Warnock) generation and their failure to understand that a particular style has been consigned to history.

That's why I ask myself, on many years reflection, whether 4 years of over-achievement; followed, let it be said by a pretty rapid downward spiral to exactly where we started, was worth the damage done.

No losing manager was ever beaten by Sheffield United's superiority. It was always, without fail, "we couldn't cope with their style of play" and that was never intended as a compliment.

They can't say that now. We outplay and outclass them with the quality of our football. That's what makes me proud. That's what I want to see. That, contrary to popular belief is the Sheffield United way. The Currie, Badger and Woodward way. The Carlin, Addison and Reece way. Now we are living down the long-ball, hoofit, miss-out-midfield approach. It's taking a long time, not helped by Warnock and the former semi-professional, non-league, reserve goalkeeper, but we're now getting there.

Thank Pele for Tufty.

. ️.

Quick question, do you rate Mourinho?

 

[Rootshallbloke]

Southend's chairman is trying everything he can to persuade him to remain part of the Shrimpers family:

View attachment 27978

But they're not our colours Pinchy. I doubt Ron would be seen dead in anything light blue so you've obviously picked the wrong cartoon. Never mind.

 

[Booker4]

Only one then, because I certainly did. I'm quite a gregarious bloke and chat to anyone so it could in theory have been me but wasn't on that occasion. Two sensible Blades in the world. Remarkable.

My problem with Bassett is his legacy.

The continuing suspicion bordering on mistrust amongst our fan base about good passing football.

The feeling that we're uncomfortable (fans, certainly not players and management) about outplaying the opposition and prefer to prevail by being the courageous upanatem underdog. By definition, of course, the latter can't happen very often. A very good football team on the other hand, will win consistently. This is where the "winning football is more important than attractive football" mantra fails to recognise an essential reality. The teams who win regularly do it by playing the 'right way', a favourite phrase of our excellent manager. The way you play has a direct correlation with how successful you are. It's cause and effect not coincidence.

Sensing that however well we're playing the first groan is only a misplaced pass away and the first cry of Gerritintbox imminent.

You may say that's true of fans all over the land but in my view it's acute and excessive at the Lane.

All this is, at least in part, a symptom of the Bassett (and to some extent Warnock) generation and their failure to understand that a particular style has been consigned to history.

That's why I ask myself, on many years reflection, whether 4 years of over-achievement; followed, let it be said by a pretty rapid downward spiral to exactly where we started, was worth the damage done.

No losing manager was ever beaten by Sheffield United's superiority. It was always, without fail, "we couldn't cope with their style of play" and that was never intended as a compliment.

They can't say that now. We outplay and outclass them with the quality of our football. That's what makes me proud. That's what I want to see. That, contrary to popular belief is the Sheffield United way. The Currie, Badger and Woodward way. The Carlin, Addison and Reece way. Now we are living down the long-ball, hoofit, miss-out-midfield approach. It's taking a long time, not helped by Warnock and the former semi-professional, non-league, reserve goalkeeper, but we're now getting there.

Thank Pele for Tufty.

. ️.

Ok, I'll bite! You're right that its much more attractive to see us play the way we do now. But I would still say watching Harry's teams was exciting, particularly the two promotions when we scored for fun and played the ball quickly wither to Deane or Agana or used quality wing play through the likes of Roberts and Bryson to get an accurate cross in which was then joyfully finished usually by Deane or Agana. We were by no means the only team playing long ball either. Arsenal did it a lot under George Graham, Leeds did to an extent under Wilkinson and all team played more direct as a whole than they do now. At the time of Harry and Warnock the style of play wasn't consigned to history either. We were masters of it as were Wimbledon and I might add Tony Pulis continues to this day to be successful with a direct style as is Big Sam. Even now its still used.

We were also on a far smaller budget than the vast majority of the league. I don't recall other teams spending £50,000 on Paul Rogers from Sutton and putting him straight into the team! Deane and Agana at £90,000 between them. After that Adrian Littlejohn on a free didn't do badly for that did he?! No other manager in the country could have achieved what Harry did on that budget. So many decent small buys too mention and he proved at Forest he could play passing football and winning football. Sadly the board sold their better players! Sounds familiar?!

I totally disagree that teams weren't beaten by our superiority. Not many teams had a better forward than Deane in the early 90's and we played to the strengths of the team which made Deano the focal point. Hodges was also a sublime footballer that made many an opposing defender look average on his day. As a team I could pick out others like Bryson but overall the some of the parts was greater than the individuals but we had some decent footballers too and we outplayed or were superior to teams regularly - the Forest games come to mind, the 6 - 0 v Spurs, the derby wins in 1990 - 91, the 8 game winning streak in the same season and a similar feat in the season after where we finished 9h. It wasn't all due to our system, no way do I accept that. It was because we played an effective system that teams couldn't cope with the quality we had within it and there is a difference. If managers said things like "we couldn't cope with their system" they knew what we were going to do - we did it every week and you also forget that once ahead we played more football than we did behind or level. The players used to relax more and express themselves more.

The worst bit of your post is "That's why I ask myself, on many years reflection, whether 4 years of over-achievement; followed, let it be said by a pretty rapid downward spiral to exactly where we started, was worth the damage done".

I'm sorry Pinchy but that's probably the most stupid comment I've ever heard on here! For starters is was 6 years of over achievement - given the budget he had. But more importantly we would have never been relegated had the board not sold Deane without warning whilst Harry was on holiday. We almost stayed up even then. As for the club and future managers been scared to play football, or the fans were wanting the ball in the box too much? I don't recall Kendall having a problem playing football or Spackman and complaining about the fans wanting it direct. Yes our fans do shout "get it in the box"! but I think you'll find that's far more common at other teams too and because Harry played winning football we don't want to see passing football that doesn't win matches. David Weir and Bryson Robson spring to mind here. Then you've got Clough and Adkins who played passing football - but in my view the worst football I've seen at the Lane entertainment wise came under Adkins and it was to a lesser extent the same under Clough - aside from the cups when his counter attack suited playing better teams.

Without Harry and Warnock I don't know if we'd have had any Premier League football over the last 30 years, or re-built the Kop and John Street and so on. The way the club was going prior to Harry was lower league oblivion and prior to Warnock we were heading for financial meltdown and lower league football - he kept us up in that first season and signed Michael Brown, Carl Asaba and got the best out of previously indifferent players like Devlin and Shaun Murphy.Then we had the semi finals and play offs and eventually promotion to the Prem.

You also forget that Wilder is very much a Basset prodigy.

 

[Ricky]

Sorry to go off topic, but about Ryan Leonard...

For a while now, I've thought it will take between 450k to 600k to get him.

If this is the case, then United will be aware of it. So why, given the competition from Millwall and given that he seems to be our first choice target, would we take our time in submitting separate bids well below that valuation? 325k is our latest bid according to Southend sources.

I think we should have bid 400k by now. I'd expect to see a bit more urgency from us all things considered.

Maybe 400k with add ons to about 550k would do it. We seem to have a similarly strong interest in him as we have in Holmes, and if Wilder rates a player that much I expect he'd easily be worth it.

 

[Grizzly blade]

Sorry to go off topic, but about Ryan Leonard...

For a while now, I've thought it will take between 450k to 600k to get him.

If this is the case, then United will be aware of it. So why, given the competition from Millwall and given that he seems to be our first choice target, would we take our time in submitting separate bids well below that valuation? 325k is our latest bid according to Southend sources.

I think we should have bid 400k by now. I'd expect to see a bit more urgency from us all things considered.

Maybe 400k with add ons to about 550k would do it. We seem to have a similarly strong interest in him as we have in Holmes, and if Wilder rates a player that much I expect he'd easily be worth it.

Clearly, all the cards are in our favour.

If someone else was interested, they would have bid. There is either nobody else actually prepared to pay what they want, or the lad has made it clear he wishes to come to us so the others aren't bothering to bid. And who knows if he's out first choice? It might only be that this is one we are aware of.

So we can hold out up to the fee our manager values him at. And if our manager feels that 325k is the price for him, then that's the limit. Not what Southend want. We cave in we lose. I don't care if Southend can't replace him for that, that's their problem. They can go hunting the same way we are. We might agree to loaning them a player on top, but at the moment that is our price.

So I have no desire or insistence to see our manager pay more than he feels the player is worth. If he wants to come the longer it goes on the lower the fee will be right down to zero.

 

[alcoblade]

Ok, I'll bite! You're right that its much more attractive to see us play the way we do now. But I would still say watching Harry's teams was exciting, particularly the two promotions when we scored for fun and played the ball quickly wither to Deane or Agana or used quality wing play through the likes of Roberts and Bryson to get an accurate cross in which was then joyfully finished usually by Deane or Agana. We were by no means the only team playing long ball either. Arsenal did it a lot under George Graham, Leeds did to an extent under Wilkinson and all team played more direct as a whole than they do now. At the time of Harry and Warnock the style of play wasn't consigned to history either. We were masters of it as were Wimbledon and I might add Tony Pulis continues to this day to be successful with a direct style as is Big Sam. Even now its still used.

We were also on a far smaller budget than the vast majority of the league. I don't recall other teams spending £50,000 on Paul Rogers from Sutton and putting him straight into the team! Deane and Agana at £90,000 between them. After that Adrian Littlejohn on a free didn't do badly for that did he?! No other manager in the country could have achieved what Harry did on that budget. So many decent small buys too mention and he proved at Forest he could play passing football and winning football. Sadly the board sold their better players! Sounds familiar?!

I totally disagree that teams weren't beaten by our superiority. Not many teams had a better forward than Deane in the early 90's and we played to the strengths of the team which made Deano the focal point. Hodges was also a sublime footballer that made many an opposing defender look average on his day. As a team I could pick out others like Bryson but overall the some of the parts was greater than the individuals but we had some decent footballers too and we outplayed or were superior to teams regularly - the Forest games come to mind, the 6 - 0 v Spurs, the derby wins in 1990 - 91, the 8 game winning streak in the same season and a similar feat in the season after where we finished 9h. It wasn't all due to our system, no way do I accept that. It was because we played an effective system that teams couldn't cope with the quality we had within it and there is a difference. If managers said things like "we couldn't cope with their system" they knew what we were going to do - we did it every week and you also forget that once ahead we played more football than we did behind or level. The players used to relax more and express themselves more.

The worst bit of your post is "That's why I ask myself, on many years reflection, whether 4 years of over-achievement; followed, let it be said by a pretty rapid downward spiral to exactly where we started, was worth the damage done".

I'm sorry Pinchy but that's probably the most stupid comment I've ever heard on here! For starters is was 6 years of over achievement - given the budget he had. But more importantly we would have never been relegated had the board not sold Deane without warning whilst Harry was on holiday. We almost stayed up even then. As for the club and future managers been scared to play football, or the fans were wanting the ball in the box too much? I don't recall Kendall having a problem playing football or Spackman and complaining about the fans wanting it direct. Yes our fans do shout "get it in the box"! but I think you'll find that's far more common at other teams too and because Harry played winning football we don't want to see passing football that doesn't win matches. David Weir and Bryson Robson spring to mind here. Then you've got Clough and Adkins who played passing football - but in my view the worst football I've seen at the Lane entertainment wise came under Adkins and it was to a lesser extent the same under Clough - aside from the cups when his counter attack suited playing better teams.

Without Harry and Warnock I don't know if we'd have had any Premier League football over the last 30 years, or re-built the Kop and John Street and so on. The way the club was going prior to Harry was lower league oblivion and prior to Warnock we were heading for financial meltdown and lower league football - he kept us up in that first season and signed Michael Brown, Carl Asaba and got the best out of previously indifferent players like Devlin and Shaun Murphy.Then we had the semi finals and play offs and eventually promotion to the Prem.

You also forget that Wilder is very much a Basset prodigy.

Our demise, since Warnock, has been almost entirely due to an over emphasis on playing "pure football". Pinchy continually rewrites history on this.

People cried out for a balanced approach, to which she coined the phrase "only in S2". He repeated it every time there was a suggestion of employing a big man, and said it even more at the suggestion of employing Wilder.

As he now coins the phrase "Tufty and I", let's always remind him that he royally scoffed at any suggestion of the successful strategy we are now employing.


Sorry Pinchy, the truth must hurt, unless you rewrite it.

 

[Booker4]

Sorry to go off topic, but about Ryan Leonard...

For a while now, I've thought it will take between 450k to 600k to get him.

If this is the case, then United will be aware of it. So why, given the competition from Millwall and given that he seems to be our first choice target, would we take our time in submitting separate bids well below that valuation? 325k is our latest bid according to Southend sources.

I think we should have bid 400k by now. I'd expect to see a bit more urgency from us all things considered.

Maybe 400k with add ons to about 550k would do it. We seem to have a similarly strong interest in him as we have in Holmes, and if Wilder rates a player that much I expect he'd easily be worth it.

I just couldn't not say something there about Harry and Warnock to a lesser extent even though I'm not as keen on Warnock as a person. As regards Leonard, you're right price wise, it just seems we're trying much lower than that and hoping Southend give in. In reality, we'll meet somewhere in the middle if this deal happens.

 

[Ricky]

Clearly, all the cards are in our favour.

If someone else was interested, they would have bid. There is either nobody else actually prepared to pay what they want, or the lad has made it clear he wishes to come to us so the others aren't bothering to bid. And who knows if he's out first choice? It might only be that this is one we are aware of.

So we can hold out up to the fee our manager values him at. And if our manager feels that 325k is the price for him, then that's the limit. Not what Southend want. We cave in we lose. I don't care if Southend can't replace him for that, that's their problem. They can go hunting the same way we are. We might agree to loaning them a player on top, but at the moment that is our price.

So I have no desire or insistence to see our manager pay more than he feels the player is worth. If he wants to come the longer it goes on the lower the fee will be right down to zero.

Millwall have bid. Financially I'd expect us to have the upper hand over them.

It's possible but unlikely that he isn't our first choice. I think he certainly has been for the last month or so.

Sometimes you have to pay a bit more than you want to. Typically when the selling club really don't want to lose the player. I wouldn't want us going way over our valuation but compromising a bit is sometimes the right thing to do.

The longer it goes on the more the price will go down, but there will still be a minimum. IMO, if they can't get at least 400k by the end of August, they'll chance it and keep him into the last year of his contract.

Another factor that should force this transfer is wanting him in for pre season. It's preferable to him arriving at the end of July. So hopefully we can get this wrapped up in the next 10 days or so.

 

[alcoblade]

Sorry to go off topic, but about Ryan Leonard...

For a while now, I've thought it will take between 450k to 600k to get him.

If this is the case, then United will be aware of it. So why, given the competition from Millwall and given that he seems to be our first choice target, would we take our time in submitting separate bids well below that valuation? 325k is our latest bid according to Southend sources.

I think we should have bid 400k by now. I'd expect to see a bit more urgency from us all things considered.

Maybe 400k with add ons to about 550k would do it. We seem to have a similarly strong interest in him as we have in Holmes, and if Wilder rates a player that much I expect he'd easily be worth it.

Thank god you've returned this oh so on topic thread back to where it belongs.

So, for the 984th post, how much is the gap between what you think he's worth and what you'd wildly guess the club have offered?

 

[Grizzly blade]

I've not seen anywhere that Millwall have bid.
Nor anywhere that they have bid more than us, that their bid has been accepted or that we need to match their bid.

If they had, their Chairman would have been all over it. I've seen it said they have shown an interest but are yet to make a bid. Perhaps they were put off bidding by the response from Southend?

 

[wizadry]

I've not seen anywhere that Millwall have bid.
Nor anywhere that they have bid more than us, that their bid has been accepted or that we need to match their bid.

If they had, their Chairman would have been all over it. I've seen it said they have shown an interest but are yet to make a bid. Perhaps they were put off bidding by the response from Southend?

Or perhaps Millwall think they don't stand a chance of out bidding the mighty Blades?

 

[FTPE]

If you increase your bid by so little I'm assuming that we are hearing rumblings that we aren't wasting our time.

 

[Grizzly blade]

Or perhaps Millwall think they don't stand a chance of out bidding the mighty Blades?

But if you were Millwall would you be trying to push the price up even if you had no chance?

 

[wizadry]

But if you were Millwall would you be trying to push the price up even if you had no chance?

You've lost me mate.

 

[FTPE]

But if you were Millwall would you be trying to push the price up even if you had no chance?

I'm sure Millwall have better things to do preparation wise than to make us spend 50k more than we wanted to.

 

[Ricky]

Article here about Millwall bid... http://www.echo-news.co.uk/sport/15..._Leonard_despite_midfielder_wanting_to_leave/

 

[Blade56]

Millwall have bid. Financially I'd expect us to have the upper hand over them.

It's possible but unlikely that he isn't our first choice. I think he certainly has been for the last month or so.

Sometimes you have to pay a bit more than you want to. Typically when the selling club really don't want to lose the player. I wouldn't want us going way over our valuation but compromising a bit is sometimes the right thing to do.

The longer it goes on the more the price will go down, but there will still be a minimum. IMO, if they can't get at least 400k by the end of August, they'll chance it and keep him into the last year of his contract.

Another factor that should force this transfer is wanting him in for pre season. It's preferable to him arriving at the end of July. So hopefully we can get this wrapped up in the next 10 days or so.

According to McCabe once a players head is turned you can't hang on to him Harry et al

 

[Pinchy]

Quick question, do you rate Mourinho?

Not particularly. Not that I give the matter much thought. I greatly admire Arsene Wenger if that helps?

 

[HodgysBrokenThumb]

I'd like to apologise on behalf of all genuine football loving Blades for the damage inflicted on the beautiful game by the likes of Dinosaur Dave Bassett, Ol' Big Nose Warnock and Semi-Pro Blackwell.

The grotesque anti-football "played" by mediocrities like Vinnie Jones, Paul Williams, Jostein Flo, Mark Morris, Wally Fucking Downes, Nick Montgomery, Michael Doyle and countless others, was a disgrace to the shirt worn by Tony Currie, Alan Woodward, Len Badger. I am truly sorry.

We aided and abetted Charles Hughes and John Beck in bringing the Sunday League to professional football. We dispensed with skill, creativity, vision and style, in favour of a "Kick it Long; Kick it Hard; Kick it High" philosophy of despair. We sought to destroy proper football over many decades. I unreservedly apologise.

Even today, here in S2, there are those who yearn for a '3 pass rule' whereby possession is automatically turned over after a team's third touch of the ball. We like the results under Wilder but don't like the way in which they are achieved. We long to gerritforrard and gerritintbox. We want nowt-fancy, upanatem, Neanderthal pub football. We want to see football as ugly, outdated and out of place as an ill-fitting toupée.

For all this, I am ashamed and sincerely apologise. Pele forgive us.

Sometimes I come on this Forum to see if anything is likely to happen transfer-wise, on other occasions I come on hoping to join in broader discussions. This thread is doin' mi ead in, because it is, shall we say, a little disjointed. Pinchy, may I make a serious request - please start a thread on your footballing philosophy in the right section, so that there can be a proper debate, without transfer rumours occasionally intruding. I respect your love of proper football, though I disagree with some of what you say, and I would like to see you start, with a clean slate, a discussion on your footballing philosophy. I, for one, would promise to read what you say and respond to it, and I would encourage you to do the same. You do, in my view, tend to respond to what you imagine people have said rather than what they really say. You are not alone in this, as it is part and parcel of the digital world, but it does not help create a debate where we learn from each other.
I grew up watching United under John Harris, and was proud of us being a footballing team. However, and this is not a criticism of John Harris, we won very little in that era, and there were times such as after the 6th round cup defeat by S6, when we played the nice football and Wednesday played ugly, that I went to school on a Monday morning wishing United were more physical in their approach. But I retained my pride in the football we played, and then of course TC and Woody came along. I took equal pleasure in the Basset era - I always like a good underdog, and we should take pride in what he achieved, and not forget that the likes of Hodges, Deane, Agana, etc. were decent footballers.
I respect 'proper football', but I also want United to win. If those things go together, great, but if we have to try something different, fine. We played 'proper football' under Weir, but that was the worst I have ever seen United play. Passing it around the back 4 when they had not got the ability to play it and other teams were swarming all over them knowing that there was no plan B was an embarrassment. I wanted Collins and McEverly to hoof it, because we knew what would happen if they didn't. In short, good managers and players adapt to circumstances. Think Revie - he invented the deep-lying centre-forward (good thinking), and put Jackie Charlton on the near post for their corners because of his height and strength - hoofball, and very successful. Two very different approaches, both effective.
Anyway, apologies to those who came on here to see whether Leonard has signed. Pinchy, please start a thread where these things can be talked about at length.