Chris Hughton pleased with our former best player

[itsinyerblood]

Imo we did that with Murphy.

Be interested to know what those benefits are so far WHF

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Be interested to know what those benefits are so far WHF

The player wanted to leave We're better off with players who want to play rather than players who don't - that's not to denigrate him just to say that there's a very good chance he would have lacked motivation and underperformed
He put in a transfer request (I'd imagine by mutual consent) thereby adding value to the deal for the club (I think)
£1.5 or even £1.7m is good money for him

For me the problem is not the sale it's the (current) lack of spending.

Re lack of spending I think last weekend has shown some benefit of not panic-buying.

It looks a lot like Adkins has tried very much to make his 4-4-2 work, but as several posters have pointed out it looks like we're playing a 4-4-2 system with a 4-5-1 squad.

Do we persist with 4-4-2 in which case we need a CM.

Let's say we go out and buy/loan a CM, then Coutts and Wallace end up injury free. Is that money wasted?

Say we buy/loan a CH instead and Kennedy and McGahey end up injury free. Is that money wasted?

It's September. We are a work in progress.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

The player wanted to leave We're better off with players who want to play rather than players who don't

Got me thinking: if your girlfriend announced she wanted leave you would you lock her up in the cellar?

 

[itsinyerblood]

The player wanted to leave We're better off with players who want to play rather than players who don't - that's not to denigrate him just to say that there's a very good chance he would have lacked motivation and underperformed
He put in a transfer request (I'd imagine by mutual consent) thereby adding value to the deal for the club (I think)
£1.5 or even £1.7m is good money for him

For me the problem is not the sale it's the (current) lack of spending.

Re lack of spending I think last weekend has shown some benefit of not panic-buying.

It looks a lot like Adkins has tried very much to make his 4-4-2 work, but as several posters have pointed out it looks like we're playing a 4-4-2 system with a 4-5-1 squad.

Do we persist with 4-4-2 in which case we need a CM.

Let's say we go out and buy/loan a CM, then Coutts and Wallace end up injury free. Is that money wasted?

Say we buy/loan a CH instead and Kennedy and McGahey end up injury free. Is that money wasted?

It's September. We are a work in progress.

Let me respond in no particular fashion.

Key for Adkins was the players he (mostly) inherited, a mostly unexciting bunch who are, with a few exceptions, tradesmen who'll not rise above this level.

The question of unhappy players - I think the case of WBA's Berahino shows that when a player is 'unhappy' you don't simply reach for the tissues and wave goodbye. Yes, the fee was welcome, what income isn't? But as with Berahino, his current value to the team is such that between Tony Pulis and their chairman they've decided they need his services for a while longer. I think the question of squad harmony is an overplayed card. What's Berahino, or any other disgruntled player going to do? Text his team-mates with plans to disrupt the dressing room? Tell his fellow players that he's not being treated fairly? And as for the question of a slump in form, well this doesn't add up. Why wouldn't a player want to play to the best of his ability? Showing he's effective and consistent is a sure way of creating demand, and remember, Berahino threatened not to play under his current chairman ever again. So a lot of hot air and infantile posturing. I'd also imagine that the more experienced members of WBA's squad will know where their bread is buttered, so why jeopardise their places in the first team because a young talent stamps his feet? Wise heads, such as Pulis, will have seen it all before, and as we've just seen, Berahino played well even after his remonstrations where petulance took a grip of the player. He'll stay for as long as WBA decide he'll stay, and when it's time for him to leave they'll pocket a nice wedge to be reinvested. I guess that is my response to your conclusion that Murphy might have underperformed. What we did do was to view a sale as the best thing for this club, and it's as if no one behind the scenes can connect the sale of good players with the stagnation we've been gripped by.

Murphy had a further 2 years remaining on his contract, so it's not as if United didn't have room to plan more effectively when it came to Murphy's departure, while reminding Murphy that he'd only signed a new agreement a few months earlier. I don't buy the 'it just occurred to Murphy that moving would help his international chances' line. As I've written elsewhere, we've all been lead to believe that promotion is our priority this season, so tell Murphy that he's a vital part of those plans and that his departure would be damaging to this objective. He may be unhappy, but he's got good reasons to apply himself. Should United gain promotion then he's achieved what he says he wanted all along, and if United remain in Division 1 then he and SUFC can shake hands and he can depart to pastures new as he's shown he's a decent professional who's maintained standards that have ensured his admirers remain willing to buy him. After all, isn't that what any club pays good money for?

As regards an influx of new and better talent, well this has been exhausted, but to repeat once more, a minimum of two center halves, at least one midfield enforcer/general, maybe two players who can get a grip of our midfield and ensure we aren't brushed aside. I'd like to see a player with guile too. Baxter has this in his locker, the trouble is it remains there far too often.

Upfront? For the moment I'd stick with what we have, but always with an eye on who's available and who might be worth investing in.

It will be lovely when we see signs of better quality players entering Bramall Lane, but we can share thoughts on this as and when it happens.

 

[itsinyerblood]

Got me thinking: if your girlfriend announced she wanted leave you would you lock her up in the cellar?

Are you suggesting a pre-nup before you marry? Or that the club responds like Josef Fritzl and behave appallingly? I can't recall this ever happening in professional football, but I can recall WBA taking control of a situation with their current player, Berahino, that adhered to all contractual clauses that both parties entered into with mutual agreement? Isn't this how it's meant to work? The fact that United acted in a way that was completely different to WBA doesn't mean that we showed more smarts than they did. It meant that, once again, we allowed a valued player to leave without questioning whether there was an alternative response we might consider.

 

[Rodders]

Got me thinking: if your girlfriend announced she wanted leave you would you lock her up in the cellar?

Nonsensical analogy.

 

[Pollingtonblade]

Nonsensical analogy.

yeah in this day and age he could have a boyfriend.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

On the basis of literally no evidence the deduction is the club is crap.

And Steve Bruce tells everyone how great he is at striking a bargain so it must be true that the club is crap.

What sort of evidence are you looking for?

Quinn was sold to Hull.
United refused to disclose the fee.
Bruce has disclosed it in a well publicised interview that I linked to.
Nobody from United or anywhere else has since disputed what Bruce said.

Which part do you believe is untrue?

 

[Lord Bos of Eckington.]

Once we signed N#2 the board must have thought we have pleased the fans so much we can get away with anything!

That said I have 100% faith said manager will use the cash to change us from a cheap average injury ridden squad to a promotion team

I think it was the board who actually thought Adkins would turn a average side into a promotion chasing side , without any great , additional financial investment , working on the pretence , that certain managers ( Adkins ) , can get more improvemrnt out of players , than other managers ( Clough ).

Adkins is definitely the right man , at the right time for us , but the board have to be enthusiastic , as he is , and have total belief in him , especially that he knows what he is doing , on the player investment side of the football equation, when spending / investing there ( the clubs ) money.

UTB

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

The question of unhappy players - I think the case of WBA's Berahino shows that when a player is 'unhappy' you don't simply reach for the tissues and wave goodbye.

I'd prefer to believe Jim's account.

Also I imagine negotiated transfer policy before he joined. He has since praised the people working on that policy and has also repeatedly stated how hard the club is working on new acquisitions. Maybe it's all PR guff and/or a pack of lies. I doubt it.

I think the question of squad harmony is an overplayed card.

Personally, I haven't played it at all.

What we did do was to view a sale as the best thing for this club, and it's as if no one behind the scenes can connect the sale of good players with the stagnation we've been gripped by.

This just doesn't follow.

I don't buy the 'it just occurred to Murphy that moving would help his international chances' line.

Despite, from memory, Murphy publicly stating that was the reason.

a minimum of two center halves, at least one midfield enforcer/general, maybe two players who can get a grip of our midfield and ensure we aren't brushed aside. I'd like to see a player with guile too.

What value should each of these players have (roughly) and how should they be paid for?

It meant that, once again, we allowed a valued player to leave without questioning whether there was an alternative response we might consider.

I think this is an insult to some people who work very hard for the benefit of the club.

What do the club gain by working long term to damage our chances of promotion?

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

What sort of evidence are you looking for?

Quinn was sold to Hull.
United refused to disclose the fee.
Bruce has disclosed it in a well publicised interview that I linked to.
Nobody from United or anywhere else has since disputed what Bruce said.

Which part do you believe is untrue?

The important part that I don't believe is true is that undisclosed implies worse than we were led to believe.

No comment. He must be guilty.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

yeah in this day and age he could have a boyfriend.

Or a rabbit

 

[Blade56]

I think it was the board who actually thought Adkins would turn a average side into a promotion chasing side , without any great , additional financial investment , working on the pretence , that certain managers ( Adkins ) , can get more improvemrnt out of players , than other managers ( Clough ).

Adkins is definitely the right man , at the right time for us , but the board have to be enthusiastic , as he is , and have total belief in him , especially that he knows what he is doing , on the player investment side of the football equation, when spending / investing there ( the clubs ) money.

UTB

Think we will find out how enthusiastic they are in the next 10 dats LBE

 

[Lord Bos of Eckington.]

Or a rabbit

The board perhaps thought Adkins could pull the rabbit out of the hat, but boiling pan may be the way it goes for the rabbit , if we dont crack the loan market .

UTB

 

[itsinyerblood]

I'd prefer to believe Jim's account.

Also I imagine negotiated transfer policy before he joined. He has since praised the people working on that policy and has also repeatedly stated how hard the club is working on new acquisitions. Maybe it's all PR guff and/or a pack of lies. I doubt it.



Personally, I haven't played it at all.



This just doesn't follow.



Despite, from memory, Murphy publicly stating that was the reason.



What value should each of these players have (roughly) and how should they be paid for?



I think this is an insult to some people who work very hard for the benefit of the club.

What do the club gain by working long term to damage our chances of promotion?

Let me work backwards. I can't look into the minds of the power-brokers at SUFC. Sometimes things aren't always what they appear, so who can tell what the motivations are for what decisions are reached?

You comment that my words are insulting to those people who you claim work hard for the benefit of the club. I'd have thought a fair and reasoned discussion should be welcomed, but I guess we all have a set of very personal criteria for what we choose to believe in.

As for the value of players, that's not my job, surely that's obvious? And how they're paid for, either through recouped funds via the sale of players or a benefactor dipping his/her hands into their pockets, isn't that how it works?

Yes, Murphy and his agent said he wanted to move. The same applies to Berahino, or has something been lost in translation?

You say my point doesn't add up. So the fact that for consecutive seasons we've sold our better players, and then we remain in this division, isn't glaringly obvious? Maybe this is recognised at boardroom level, perhaps they think it's incidental that by selling your better players you can somehow hope to progress?

I do recall you raising the point that an unhappy player was someone we should allow to leave because their mood would act in a negative manner on the rest of the squad. I already offered a flipside to that by demonstrating how WBA have dealt with Berahino. There's more than one way of handling a situation.

As for Jim, he's a legal bod, apparently a decent one too. He may have reasons for doing what he does that sometimes doesn't fit in with what's currently acceptable. Perhaps it's not that he's telling fibs, but his first commitment is towards those who employ him, not you or I. Black and white interpretations are the stuff of life, so are those grey areas that we sometimes struggle to navigate around. Jim is an enabler, a halfway house if you like, he'll absorb and decide how to use whatever information he possesses. I've no doubt he'd prefer to engage on a level playing field, but he'll also be sensitive to matters that for whatever reason should sometimes be kept under wraps.

 

[metalblade]

Let me respond in no particular fashion.

Key for Adkins was the players he (mostly) inherited, a mostly unexciting bunch who are, with a few exceptions, tradesmen who'll not rise above this level.

The question of unhappy players - I think the case of WBA's Berahino shows that when a player is 'unhappy' you don't simply reach for the tissues and wave goodbye. Yes, the fee was welcome, what income isn't? But as with Berahino, his current value to the team is such that between Tony Pulis and their chairman they've decided they need his services for a while longer. I think the question of squad harmony is an overplayed card. What's Berahino, or any other disgruntled player going to do? Text his team-mates with plans to disrupt the dressing room? Tell his fellow players that he's not being treated fairly? And as for the question of a slump in form, well this doesn't add up. Why wouldn't a player want to play to the best of his ability? Showing he's effective and consistent is a sure way of creating demand, and remember, Berahino threatened not to play under his current chairman ever again. So a lot of hot air and infantile posturing. I'd also imagine that the more experienced members of WBA's squad will know where their bread is buttered, so why jeopardise their places in the first team because a young talent stamps his feet? Wise heads, such as Pulis, will have seen it all before, and as we've just seen, Berahino played well even after his remonstrations where petulance took a grip of the player. He'll stay for as long as WBA decide he'll stay, and when it's time for him to leave they'll pocket a nice wedge to be reinvested. I guess that is my response to your conclusion that Murphy might have underperformed. What we did do was to view a sale as the best thing for this club, and it's as if no one behind the scenes can connect the sale of good players with the stagnation we've been gripped by.

Murphy had a further 2 years remaining on his contract, so it's not as if United didn't have room to plan more effectively when it came to Murphy's departure, while reminding Murphy that he'd only signed a new agreement a few months earlier. I don't buy the 'it just occurred to Murphy that moving would help his international chances' line. As I've written elsewhere, we've all been lead to believe that promotion is our priority this season, so tell Murphy that he's a vital part of those plans and that his departure would be damaging to this objective. He may be unhappy, but he's got good reasons to apply himself. Should United gain promotion then he's achieved what he says he wanted all along, and if United remain in Division 1 then he and SUFC can shake hands and he can depart to pastures new as he's shown he's a decent professional who's maintained standards that have ensured his admirers remain willing to buy him. After all, isn't that what any club pays good money for?

As regards an influx of new and better talent, well this has been exhausted, but to repeat once more, a minimum of two center halves, at least one midfield enforcer/general, maybe two players who can get a grip of our midfield and ensure we aren't brushed aside. I'd like to see a player with guile too. Baxter has this in his locker, the trouble is it remains there far too often.

Upfront? For the moment I'd stick with what we have, but always with an eye on who's available and who might be worth investing in.

It will be lovely when we see signs of better quality players entering Bramall Lane, but we can share thoughts on this as and when it happens.

Great post ........................... far too sensible, some of our fans need to shed their blinkers and think for themselves rather than listening to and believing all Jim's propaganda.

 

[BushBlade]

Let me work backwards. I can't look into the minds of the power-brokers at SUFC. Sometimes things aren't always what they appear, so who can tell what the motivations are for what decisions are reached?

You comment that my words are insulting to those people who you claim work hard for the benefit of the club. I'd have thought a fair and reasoned discussion should be welcomed, but I guess we all have a set of very personal criteria for what we choose to believe in.

As for the value of players, that's not my job, surely that's obvious? And how they're paid for, either through recouped funds via the sale of players or a benefactor dipping his/her hands into their pockets, isn't that how it works?

Yes, Murphy and his agent said he wanted to move. The same applies to Berahino, or has something been lost in translation?

You say my point doesn't add up. So the fact that for consecutive seasons we've sold our better players, and then we remain in this division, isn't glaringly obvious? Maybe this is recognised at boardroom level, perhaps they think it's incidental that by selling your better players you can somehow hope to progress?

I do recall you raising the point that an unhappy player was someone we should allow to leave because their mood would act in a negative manner on the rest of the squad. I already offered a flipside to that by demonstrating how WBA have dealt with Berahino. There's more than one way of handling a situation.

As for Jim, he's a legal bod, apparently a decent one too. He may have reasons for doing what he does that sometimes doesn't fit in with what's currently acceptable. Perhaps it's not that he's telling fibs, but his first commitment is towards those who employ him, not you or I. Black and white interpretations are the stuff of life, so are those grey areas that we sometimes struggle to navigate around. Jim is an enabler, a halfway house if you like, he'll absorb and decide how to use whatever information he possesses. I've no doubt he'd prefer to engage on a level playing field, but he'll also be sensitive to matters that for whatever reason should sometimes be kept under wraps.

There's a big difference between Berahino and Murphy; Berahino is a rich man at the start of his career, Murphy is not. He needed to take his chance now, to go to a club that will challenge in the Championship and possibly give him a crack at the PL before he's too old.

Murphy didn't have to kick off and throw his toys out of the pram. He just needed to put in a few uninterested performances and have a few 'injuries' until January by which time the club would be fed up paying him for doing very little.

Sometimes you can force players to stay and it works, often it doesn't. PL clubs can afford to take a risk, I'm not sure L1 clubs can.

And the Berahino business might not be over yet and only time will tell whether or not it's a good decision. As some have said, if he'd kept his agent, who's also Sterling's agent, he'd be at Spurs now.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

at least one midfield enforcer/general, maybe two players who can get a grip of our midfield and ensure we aren't brushed aside. I'd like to see a player with guile too.

As for the value of players, that's not my job, surely that's obvious? And how they're paid for, either through recouped funds via the sale of players or a benefactor dipping his/her hands into their pockets, isn't that how it works?

Selling players(!). Who and for what value? £1.7m might get us a decent loan or two. Beyond that?

Our main benefactor has pledged £20m (from memory) and almost certainly spent most of that. Should he pledge and spend more? If so, how much?

We pay off Clough and entourage. Get in Adkins, the best man for the job - and then seek to undermine him because...we're insane?

You comment that my words are insulting to those people who you claim work hard for the benefit of the club. I'd have thought a fair and reasoned discussion should be welcomed, but I guess we all have a set of very personal criteria for what we choose to believe in.

It'd be very hard for the club to do more. They spend their own money. They get the best people for the job. they communicate with the fans - even when a contingent are giving them dogs' abuse. They act on our suggestions and requests.

I don't see any(?) posts questioning their commitment as part of a reasoned discussion. If there were then reasons for this self-destructive behaviour would be advanced surely?

Stating that Murphy was simply allowed to walk is, aisi, tantamount to calling eg Adkins and Jim deceitful isn't it?

Let me work backwards. I can't look into the minds of the power-brokers at SUFC. Sometimes things aren't always what they appear, so who can tell what the motivations are for what decisions are reached?

This is the point about reasoned discussion. No reason is offered.

Constructive criticism is fine, and in fact benefits the club.

I don't see how simply stating they sell players against the best interests of the club and then offering no rationale for this pathology does.




(I disagree with much else of what was posted, but it's late and I'm very tired - and reserve the right to cite this later.)

 

[SWB]

Let me respond in no particular fashion.

Key for Adkins was the players he (mostly) inherited, a mostly unexciting bunch who are, with a few exceptions, tradesmen who'll not rise above this level.

The question of unhappy players - I think the case of WBA's Berahino shows that when a player is 'unhappy' you don't simply reach for the tissues and wave goodbye. Yes, the fee was welcome, what income isn't? But as with Berahino, his current value to the team is such that between Tony Pulis and their chairman they've decided they need his services for a while longer. I think the question of squad harmony is an overplayed card. What's Berahino, or any other disgruntled player going to do? Text his team-mates with plans to disrupt the dressing room? Tell his fellow players that he's not being treated fairly? And as for the question of a slump in form, well this doesn't add up. Why wouldn't a player want to play to the best of his ability? Showing he's effective and consistent is a sure way of creating demand, and remember, Berahino threatened not to play under his current chairman ever again. So a lot of hot air and infantile posturing. I'd also imagine that the more experienced members of WBA's squad will know where their bread is buttered, so why jeopardise their places in the first team because a young talent stamps his feet? Wise heads, such as Pulis, will have seen it all before, and as we've just seen, Berahino played well even after his remonstrations where petulance took a grip of the player. He'll stay for as long as WBA decide he'll stay, and when it's time for him to leave they'll pocket a nice wedge to be reinvested. I guess that is my response to your conclusion that Murphy might have underperformed. What we did do was to view a sale as the best thing for this club, and it's as if no one behind the scenes can connect the sale of good players with the stagnation we've been gripped by.

Murphy had a further 2 years remaining on his contract, so it's not as if United didn't have room to plan more effectively when it came to Murphy's departure, while reminding Murphy that he'd only signed a new agreement a few months earlier. I don't buy the 'it just occurred to Murphy that moving would help his international chances' line. As I've written elsewhere, we've all been lead to believe that promotion is our priority this season, so tell Murphy that he's a vital part of those plans and that his departure would be damaging to this objective. He may be unhappy, but he's got good reasons to apply himself. Should United gain promotion then he's achieved what he says he wanted all along, and if United remain in Division 1 then he and SUFC can shake hands and he can depart to pastures new as he's shown he's a decent professional who's maintained standards that have ensured his admirers remain willing to buy him. After all, isn't that what any club pays good money for?

As regards an influx of new and better talent, well this has been exhausted, but to repeat once more, a minimum of two center halves, at least one midfield enforcer/general, maybe two players who can get a grip of our midfield and ensure we aren't brushed aside. I'd like to see a player with guile too. Baxter has this in his locker, the trouble is it remains there far too often.

Upfront? For the moment I'd stick with what we have, but always with an eye on who's available and who might be worth investing in.

It will be lovely when we see signs of better quality players entering Bramall Lane, but we can share thoughts on this as and when it happens.

Selling players(!). Who and for what value? £1.7m might get us a decent loan or two. Beyond that?

Our main benefactor has pledged £20m (from memory) and almost certainly spent most of that. Should he pledge and spend more? If so, how much?

We pay off Clough and entourage. Get in Adkins, the best man for the job - and then seek to undermine him because...we're insane?



It'd be very hard for the club to do more. They spend their own money. They get the best people for the job. they communicate with the fans - even when a contingent are giving them dogs' abuse. They act on our suggestions and requests.

I don't see any(?) posts questioning their commitment as part of a reasoned discussion. If there were then reasons for this self-destructive behaviour would be advanced surely?

Stating that Murphy was simply allowed to walk is, aisi, tantamount to calling eg Adkins and Jim deceitful isn't it?



This is the point about reasoned discussion. No reason is offered.

Constructive criticism is fine, and in fact benefits the club.

I don't see how simply stating they sell players against the best interests of the club and then offering no rationale for this pathology does.




(I disagree with much else of what was posted, but it's late and I'm very tired - and reserve the right to cite this later.)

 

[Keef Chedwyn]

Selling players(!). Who and for what value? £1.7m might get us a decent loan or two. Beyond that?

Our main benefactor has pledged £20m (from memory) and almost certainly spent most of that. Should he pledge and spend more? If so, how much?

We pay off Clough and entourage. Get in Adkins, the best man for the job - and then seek to undermine him because...we're insane?



It'd be very hard for the club to do more. They spend their own money. They get the best people for the job. they communicate with the fans - even when a contingent are giving them dogs' abuse. They act on our suggestions and requests.

I don't see any(?) posts questioning their commitment as part of a reasoned discussion. If there were then reasons for this self-destructive behaviour would be advanced surely?

Stating that Murphy was simply allowed to walk is, aisi, tantamount to calling eg Adkins and Jim deceitful isn't it?



This is the point about reasoned discussion. No reason is offered.

Constructive criticism is fine, and in fact benefits the club.

I don't see how simply stating they sell players against the best interests of the club and then offering no rationale for this pathology does.




(I disagree with much else of what was posted, but it's late and I'm very tired - and reserve the right to cite this later.)

Word of advice... Don't ever question itsinyerblood's posts. He's much smarter than you and not patronising at all. You're welcome.

 

[itsinyerblood]

Selling players(!). Who and for what value? £1.7m might get us a decent loan or two. Beyond that?

Our main benefactor has pledged £20m (from memory) and almost certainly spent most of that. Should he pledge and spend more? If so, how much?

We pay off Clough and entourage. Get in Adkins, the best man for the job - and then seek to undermine him because...we're insane?



It'd be very hard for the club to do more. They spend their own money. They get the best people for the job. they communicate with the fans - even when a contingent are giving them dogs' abuse. They act on our suggestions and requests.

I don't see any(?) posts questioning their commitment as part of a reasoned discussion. If there were then reasons for this self-destructive behaviour would be advanced surely?

Stating that Murphy was simply allowed to walk is, aisi, tantamount to calling eg Adkins and Jim deceitful isn't it?



This is the point about reasoned discussion. No reason is offered.

Constructive criticism is fine, and in fact benefits the club.

I don't see how simply stating they sell players against the best interests of the club and then offering no rationale for this pathology does.




(I disagree with much else of what was posted, but it's late and I'm very tired - and reserve the right to cite this later.)

I'm a night owl, poor sleep patterns etc, so bear with me while I do my best to address your comments.

You say there's no rationale for this selling policy. I presume it's based on financial survival, but apart from that I'm not the person to ask, you'll need to address it with the club, or at least those within the club you consider above reproach.

Like yourself, I've no idea about the characters of anyone employed by SUFC, so it's a trad facile to adopt a 'How dare you?' stance when all any of us can do is to draw conclusions based on.....well that's often the most irrational form of decision making there is. It's sometimes based on what we want someone to be, as you appear to do. You may well be correct, but unless you know any of these individuals well, or even at all, then to suggest that it (meaning the possibility of either withholding or denying the truth) couldn't possibly be so is a bit daft. I suspect Nigel Adkins is a decent guy, but the timescales surrounding Murphy's sale, and Adkins assertion that Murphy was going nowhere are too close to call for the likelihood of there not being some kind of overlap between both clubs. I'm happy to be wrong in at least considering such a contrived scenario, but I happen to think that's healthy, rather than state that it couldn't possibly be the case. That way lies the possibility of an abuse of trust. A healthy disregard for words uttered by the guardians of SUFC never harmed anyone. If they speak truthfully, all well and good, but if they speak with a forked tongue then it's best to at least anticipate this lesser talent. It saves a lot of indignant outrage and helps to focus on what might have occurred.

By not mentioning it, you appear to have swept aside the WBA comparison to one side. It's completely relevant, but I guess it doesn't figure in how you view this. A pity, as it shows that 'unhappy' players aren't always able to dictate the terms of their departure.

As for the abuse that someone like Phipps receives, that's awful and should never be condoned. I suspect that most of what goes on at United is done with the best of intentions. The trouble is, life isn't black and white, but it seems that to suggest otherwise doesn't meet with your approval. I can live with that, and whether we agree or not really doesn't matter.

Not sure about your life's experience William, but I've met many genuinely wealthy men. I mention this because you suggest that the commitment of those who run the club isn't in question. I think you may be right, but there again, based on decisions that are made regarding transfer policy, it feeds into itself as one good player follows another out of the club, and then this sets the scene where other players ask what this club is really determined to achieve? They may ask if United really does intend to hold onto it's best players, or should they consider their options and seek to achieve their ambitions elsewhere? These are just possibilities you understand, but just as many supporters feel a huge sense of deflation because of this apparently consistent transfer policy, so players of ambition may challenge whatever orthodoxies they come up against within the club. These men of wealth will realise that investing in a club, one that proclaims it's goal is to arrive in the Premiership, should also know that to invest £20million in today's climate is to be almost on a par with dipping your toe in the water. McCabe has spent far more than this, sometimes unwisely, but United have never been one of the game's big spenders, so what I assume we're all hoping for is a counter-revolution that tells everyone that United has some very savvy people on board who realise what will be needed to reach the promised land. Given that the figure of £20million is spread over transfers and general overheads, I reckon that this figure, if not already spent, won't be long in arriving. If that's the case, I guess we can look forward to one sale quickly followed by another, then another etc.

As it's late I'm going to leave this. I fear you and I are going around in ever decreasing circles, the type of thing that happens where posts are concerned, but would perhaps be best suited to a one to one chat. At least in that context much of this could be discussed in a less oppositional fashion.

 

[itsinyerblood]

There's a big difference between Berahino and Murphy; Berahino is a rich man at the start of his career, Murphy is not. He needed to take his chance now, to go to a club that will challenge in the Championship and possibly give him a crack at the PL before he's too old.

Murphy didn't have to kick off and throw his toys out of the pram. He just needed to put in a few uninterested performances and have a few 'injuries' until January by which time the club would be fed up paying him for doing very little.

Sometimes you can force players to stay and it works, often it doesn't. PL clubs can afford to take a risk, I'm not sure L1 clubs can.

And the Berahino business might not be over yet and only time will tell whether or not it's a good decision. As some have said, if he'd kept his agent, who's also Sterling's agent, he'd be at Spurs now.

In all of this I've not questioned whether a player shouldn't wish to better himself. In their shoes I would want the same. Yes, Murphy will have boosted his income with his move. My point all along has been more to do with how do United hope to progress without its best players? If anyone can answer that I'd be happy to read their conclusions. You may be right, Murphy could choose to be injured in order to lessen his contribution, but that's not the only reaction that should be envisioned. A player that's viewed as injury prone suddenly raises the question of whether he's a good bet to buy, especially if he's got form on the treatment table. Any player will know that playing consistently well will be the most direct route in gathering interest from other clubs.

I've also raised the point about how, in the space of a few weeks we're given a categorical assurance that Murphy won't be sold, then shortly after....well guess what happened? We seem to have created a habit of shifting good players to be replaced by players of lesser quality. That way lies stagnation.....and possible decline.

 

[Cyprus Blade]

That way lies stagnation.....and further decline.

fixed it for you - I think its already happened.

 

[Punk Blade]

With the second highest number of points not to have been promoted in The history of The Football League

Only just come across this thread and haven't read it all, so apologies if this had already been picked up.

What was the highest? I thought 90 was the record, equalling Sunderland in '98.

 

[itsinyerblood]

Word of advice... Don't ever question itsinyerblood's posts. He's much smarter than you and not patronising at all. You're welcome.

Keef darling, if you're not careful folks might think you're a stalker. You're not, are you?

 

[1danewhitehouse]

The only sweeping statement is in the op SOLD OUR BEST PLAYER , HE WASNT FACT
we had turned bids down

players who ask to leave dont deserve us wasting breath on them

There is so much wrong with this “sentence” (I use that term very loosely). You have made many sweeping statements like the ones I quoted so your above statement is again, not true. How can it be a fact that he wasn’t our best player? The question is a subjective one. If conducting a factual analysis to try to determine whether he was our best player then I would say factors like winning the player of the year award and being amongst the top of our scorers and assists chart would support claims of him being the best but as I say, it’s subjective. I would personally say he was our second best player (behind Brayford) but our best that was fit and available to sell. And yes, I include Done. I think Murphy is a slightly better player than Done but I rate both.


And

“he asked to go his poor choice”

As I’ve said before, I don’t like to see players not honouring their contract but why is it a poor choice? He is playing at a higher level, on more money and with the possibility of reaching the Prem.

You say I like to look like a Dick just because I pull you up on your absolutely ridiculous, untrue statements and straw man arguments but I think if you put this thread out to a vote, the result will be almost unanimous and you won't like it.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Sometimes you can force players to stay and it works, often it doesn't. PL clubs can afford to take a risk, I'm not sure L1 clubs can.
.

I appreciate you make some valid points Bush but just occasionally, given our track record, it’d be nice if we could try the other approach and see where that takes us. Our approach has led to 5 years in this horrible league.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Constructive criticism is fine, and in fact benefits the club.

I don't see how simply stating they sell players against the best interests of the club and then offering no rationale for this pathology does.

None of us know the motivations of those in charge. Whether the sale of a player is in the best interests of the club is subjective and difficult to know without the benefit of hindsight. But there can be little disputing that we sell these players every season (whilst making noises publicly that we won’t) and in recent times, we fail every season. I think it’s reasonable for fans to be disappointed to see the pattern being repeated as it leads to a belief that the result will be the same.

 

[Harry's Game]

Only just come across this thread and haven't read it all, so apologies if this had already been picked up.

What was the highest? I thought 90 was the record, equalling Sunderland in '98.

Sorry for that you are correct, for some reason I had in my head Sunderland got 91 points that season. shows what can be achieved when you put together the best squad of players in the division, we should have kept that squad together and just replaced Ched and we would have got out the following year.

 

[mattbianco1]

We lost our "best player" (OK, not as good as Alan Woodward but pretty much more useful in that particular season) with a handful of games to go and look how it unraveled. Only his impending trial meant he wasn't sacrificed in August, where would that actually have left us?

This thread should be pinned now for further reference in years to come!

We got enough points that season that we would have been promoted in any of the last 3 seasons. As Grecian mentions, the Ched courtcase was also a big factor in both our failure and our not selling our best player.

Let's not forget we aslo sold or moved on Ward, Yeates and Henderson that summer. If we'd had them, we might have gotten over the line when Ched went down.

I think you both missed my point.

We could have and should have got promoted that season. Was it just "The Blades Way" that something would happen like Evans going down or scoring enough points to win the league in most seasons but finish 3rd? Don't get me wrong Evans getting sent down disrupted the whole squad as we were unbeaten in 9 games going into the MK Dons game, but...

We lost a 14pt lead on SWFC whilst Evans was playing. Him getting sent down SHOULDN'T have cost us promotion. Ultimately it did, but it should have been sewn up long before then.