John Stones

Totally agree, that was my thought at the time. We may have got a bigger fee for him in the summer. But what if he got a similar injury to Butterfield? I am sure that is something both Stones and Barnsley considered at the time. Take the risk? or get the money in the bank (Stones and Barnsley)?

I would be absolutely delighted if he came back on loan, I reckon Flicker would be too.

 

Oh, and as for a loan move, I'd have him back here no problem. But he'd have to earn a start, and not just walk straight in like Tunnicliffe.
However, the manager of the parent club often decides which club to send them to, and just like Hughton at Norwich with Butterfield, I reckon Martinez wouldn't see a return to Barnsley as aiding his development. Which I find strange.

 

In essence. It's ok for us to boo, write ***** and personal abuse on forums and force players/managers out of the club...But if someone has the temerity to leave and better themselves they are a Judas and traitor to the cause?

Footy fans, eh...Dunno why our lass calls us softlads...

 

Flicker is good friends with Roberto Martinez. Changing/switching to the wing-back formation was first instigated by a chat with him.

At least if (big if) Martinez wants Stones to go out on loan and maybe get experience in a wing back system, he will be aware that Barnsley FC would give him this opportunity.

 

Not really, at least one of the three was making a genuine step change in progression and chances of success, the other two went pretty much sideways for a better cheque in the same part of the same league. I just don't think you can argue that Stones only went for the money. Plus the money from his transfer was probably used partly to fund the strikers that then kept us up...arguably... Arguably not... And of course Don would say he didn't hold all the cards... Football clubs never do anymore below the giants, and even then...

 

I would have thought that if the club wanted to keep him, they could have done. They did their usual of getting excited at the first half decent offer. It was crass to sell him. It nearly sent us down. It is a miracle that we didn't go down with the injuries we had, compounded by selling John stones. I don't get the impression he was beating the door down to leave. I imagine that the club received an offer and he was allowed to talk in the formal channels. Sometimes agents are tapped up first and push the club to allow the player to talk, sometimes a contractual clause dictates, other times the club allows the player to talk because they need the money. I expect it was more the latter than stones begging to leave in this case mate.

 

Boo'ed by about 12 people with nothing better to do. Certainly not boo'ed by me.

 

I've just been told that there is some substance to the Stones loan rumour.

 

Jason Shackall? Booed by hundreds, if not thousands. Same with McIndoe.

Someone said in this thread that the homegrown players like butterfield and stones get more stick for leaving. Funny that because 90% of Barnsley fans think stones is some kind of god and there aren't many who slate butterfield either (though there are some). Mention Shackall or McIndoe's name and you get a torrent of abuse.

 

Don't be thick, it had a huge negative impact and we stayed up thanks to a miracle and our best run of form in years.

 

Really hope not. I don't know why so many people are delighted at the prospect of us giving Everton an even better deal, use our resources improving him as a player yet another season. Another season we could have kept improving him as our own player to sell for more money at the end, for us to pay his wages and give him back all nice and polished at the end. Crackers. My mate who is an Everton fan pissed himself when I said it had been proposed, as I'm sure Everton the club did. Stones doesn't care about BFC end of, he's moved on I won't harbour ill will towards him but I think a line needs to be drawn underneath it. Move on.

 

Yep absolutely huge effect. Our results improved when he left as you have just stated. Who knows we might have gone down had he stayed.

 

Our results improved with him still here, he played through January, I think only missing the cup game at Hull where he was sub. The best game I saw him play was v Millwall at Oakwell, where it was clear to see we'd turned a corner and were on a roll by then. He left 2 days later on deadline day. But we were still bottom of the league and a banker for relegation. And he left us there. Which is fine, just don't come this I love my hometown club ********.

 

We wouldn't have won v Hull if he hadn't come on either.

Don't give it that mate - he no doubt does. He's a supporter. But he looked after his career like any other right minded non insane lad would do.

 

Seriously -why are you focussing on him so much ? What's your problem ? It seems pretty much what you (and me and everyone else) berates Hemsworth for with regard to Hassell and Steele.

 

Broken record.

 

We're focusing on Stones because he's the only player under discussion here and I've adequately given reasons. Loyalty works both ways and Stones showed none to BFC, in my view. The opportunity and money was more important than seeing a difficult job through in the short term at BFC before assessing his options at a more appropriate point in time. It's not a problem for me, don't worry. But my regard and loyalty to that player, is equal to that he demonstrated for the club when he bailed out in a crisis. Bobby turned down a double money move to Leeds 3 seasons ago and Luke expressed several times last season his wish to sign a new deal and stay at Oakwell, so that is hardly comparable.

Again, good luck to John Stones. I'm not even making an argument for or against him, just expressing an opinion on a situation as I saw it. It appears to be a bigger deal than it is because I having to repeat myself to people obsessing over a remote opinion that is different to theirs. :smile:

 

We sold John Stones though.

 

That's true, but had he wanted to stay i believe that would have been honoured too. I think the club saw it as an opportunity to absorb the financial loss of relegation, which is some compensation if you can't retain the staff to defeat it. Had Flicker not been so new to the job and unproven to a great extent, I really believe he would have fought against that transfer far harder than he appeared to.

I know anyone would have trouble resisting a dream move to a top premiership club, but Stones was having a medical at Wigan when Everton got on the phone that evening. That disappoints more, that he was ready to join a relegation favourite. It is because I like him though, that this transfer pisses me off so much. If this thread had have been about Craig Davies, I wouldn't have even looked at it.