Jump to content

Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons


Recommended Posts

I guess the 6 months is because of his injury record / history. Protects us I guess if he gets another early on. 

Wonder if that puts paid our efforts to get Furlong back ? Ketts did say we had and are trying so is that not going to happen now. Or is Pape back up to Furlong ? Edit to add - just as Gianfranco says above !

Edited by welldaft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, welldaft said:

I guess the 6 months is because of his injury record / history. Protects us I guess if he gets another early on. 

Wonder if that puts paid our efforts to get Furlong back ? Ketts did say we had and are trying so is that not going to happen now. Or is Pape back up to Furlong ? Edit to add - just as Gianfranco says above !

I think Furlong was a non-starter due to loan rules. Clubs are limited on how many players they can loan internationally and Brighton won't ties their hands in settling Furlong if they are still making their own plans in the trransfer market.

Pape might be backing up Ewan Wilson. Hard to go into the season with just a young guy as your only true left back. Signing an old head to have cover should things go spectacularly wrong seems like a safe strategy.

Although if the plan was to start Wilson could we have muddled through with McGinley, Blaney or O'Donnell covering at left wing back? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Jim McLean's Ghost said:

I think Furlong was a non-starter due to loan rules. Clubs are limited on how many players they can loan internationally and Brighton won't ties their hands in settling Furlong if they are still making their own plans in the trransfer market.

Pape might be backing up Ewan Wilson. Hard to go into the season with just a young guy as your only true left back. Signing an old head to have cover should things go spectacularly wrong seems like a safe strategy.

Although if the plan was to start Wilson could we have muddled through with McGinley, Blaney or O'Donnell covering at left wing back? 

Going by his recent comments on the press conf of having 2 players for every position, this probably leaves it as (need a @capt_oats graphic here)

LWB: Wilson/Soare/McGinley

CB: Casey/Blaney/Butcher/Lamie/Bev/Campbell

RWB: SOD/McGinn

..with a number of them able to move about for some flex. With Campbell out on loan. Maybe he sees a future for McGinley somewhere floating about as a last resort if needed.

Edited by eliphas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, welldaft said:

If you had to choose Tony Watt, Steven Fletcher or Louis Moult ? 

Moult only if it was a pay as you play or are available to play contract. Too much of a gamble otherwise. I do get the impression Kettlewell will not take undue risks with a very restricted budget. 

Regardless of who was my first and second choice. Louis Moult would be 5th, I'd pick the other two twice before I chose a broken player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, eliphas said:

Going by his recent comments on the press conf of having 2 players for every position, this probably leaves it as (need a @capt_oats graphic here)

LWB: Wilson/Soare/McGinley

CB: Casey/Blaney/Butcher/Lamie/Bev/Campbell

RWB: SOD/McGinn

..with a number of them able to move about for some flex. With Campbell out on loan. Maybe he sees a future for McGinley somewhere floating about as a last resort if needed.

I think it was @wellboy1991 who had mentioned that McGinley had been covering left of the 3.

Shields seems to be on his way to India so presumably that spot will become vacant as it stands though, this is probably how it looks:

lineup.png.fd602abd34d67af9c52dc5d5897b8057.png

As @Jim McLean's Ghost says on the other page though, Souaré could easily be back-up for Wilson. It could just be a turn of phrase but I notice Kettlewell says; “It’s no secret that we need cover in the wide areas, so when the opportunity arose to get Pape on board, we jumped at it.” in the bit of spiel on the announcement story.

Edited by capt_oats
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, thisGRAEME said:

There's no chance that "pay as you play" deals actually exist is there?

It's like folk wanting "bidding wars" for players. Doesny happen, does it?

Yes and no.  It's more the fact a basic wage will be rather small while an appearance bonus will make up a larger wage.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...