If that the case then don't loan him out with a few hours to spare on deadline day making us significantly weaker
Maybe should’ve found that out before going out and signing a new LWB. Whether this deal is better for the club than keeping him is up for debate, but it’s still a screw up
Yep, Khaledo has really excelled himsenn here. And rather than pulling a few miraculous rabbits out of the hat, hes gone further and pulled a few stinkers out of the U-bend.
We are talking about Styles aren't we? If so, he has been playing but he wanted to leave. If he did want to leave then selling him would have been the best option given our financial circumstances. However if no-one was interested in buying him how could we sell him? Loaning him out and getting him off the wage bill was the next best option. Seems logical to me.
Aren't you forgetting that its what happens on the pitch that matters. I don't suppose you've ever read Heidi, but there's a bit in there where she goes and picks strawberries and her grandfather tells her to do ad the other children do. They all sell theirs but when she gets back her grandad says whats the use of the money when he'd been locking forward to the delicious juicy berries all day. I feel like the grandfather, no sense whatsoever
Wheth The proof of whether we'll be weaker or not won't be evident until we've played a few games without him. You might disagree but I've always thought it's pointless employing someone who doesn't want to work for you.
Also Kane,Sahara both publicly wanted to leave their clubs last summer. Didn't stop them playing well last season and this though. Footballers want to play football, win games and get promoted. They don't want to sulk around on the sidelines.
Well we are already significantly weaker for the next game. Long term we might get away with it but Cadden isn't likely to be fit so we have no LWB for the next game
Why would you think that? We won’t. This isn’t Man City or Chelsea loaning a kid out to league one and paying them anyway. Millwall will be paying him. If it goes through that is.
I would’ve thought so too. But I’m not sure that will be making much of a dent into the deficit we face. He’s on a contract signed 2 years ago, having only played a handful of games for the first team, so won’t exactly be astronomical wages. Hopefully there’s a loan fee as well
I never ever forget that it's what happens on the pitch that matters. Why would you think that I think that what happens on the pitch doesn't matter? Why would you assume I haven't read Heidi? I have, in fact, as a kid, but dont remember the detail. In any case your analogy confuses me. Maybe Heidi took the money back to gramps because she knew he was skint and that the wonger would have been more useful to him in the long run than the short term gain of filling his belly full of strawberries.
I presume the thinking must be that if he performs well again in the Championship, we might be able to sell him for the price the board was seeking. I would rather we kept him. He is a talented player, and we are rather short of talented players.