die hard doonhamer Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Why is that ridiculous? Thomas will get game time for 3 months with us which will benefit his parent club in the long term. If Stirling is to stay with us then it makes far more sense in my mind to give him game time now. The difference between a permanent move and a loan is that I'd have no issue developing a player if we were getting the benefit for longer than 3 months. So Thomas playing here will benefit Killie, but Stirling playing at Dumbarton won't benefit us?At least be consistent with your logic. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sloop John B Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Some players are just better suited to playing at a part time club, it could just be a mentality that doesn't translate to full time, a lack of physicality, lifestyle or just wanting to enjoy playing football. But Stirling has tried it before at full time and it hasn't worked and again here it's not panned out so far. That's not to say he's a bad player but if it's not the right environment for him then it's better for everyone involved. Provided he doesn't Lewis Vaughan us of course. As long as he isn't injured, contracts can be ripped up if it suits both parties. As for Thomas, playing on loan at us has been on of the few good decisions he's made in his young career. He's quicker, younger, more skillful and more of a threat than Stirling and hopefully we can hopefully have a shot of keeping him in the summer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 So Thomas playing here will benefit Killie, but Stirling playing at Dumbarton won't benefit us?At least be consistent with your logic. That's not the point I'm making though. My point is it'd be more beneficial giving Stirling a run for us given he's supposed to be here another year. Surely it makes more sense letting him play for us and getting used to Naysmith's bizarre tactics than it is loaning him out? If Stirling was away at the end of the season I wouldn't have any issues with this at all. I just find it incredible he's been given a 2 year deal, dropped and isolated from the starting team then loaned out. Things like this are probably why we rarely offer 2 year deals. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distant Doonhamer Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 1 minute ago, 19QOS19 said: That's not the point I'm making though. My point is it'd be more beneficial giving Stirling a run for us given he's supposed to be here another year. Surely it makes more sense letting him play for us and getting used to Naysmith's bizarre tactics than it is loaning him out? If Stirling was away at the end of the season I wouldn't have any issues with this at all. I just find it incredible he's been given a 2 year deal, dropped and isolated from the starting team then loaned out. Things like this are probably why we rarely offer 2 year deals. Thomas is on a 3 year deal at Kilmarnock so presumably the same logic applies to that too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steeplechat Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Could not agree more .Surely just give Stirling game time and he will show what a good player he is .Loan a player out to get a loan player in the same position seems mad to me . Is Thomas a better player than Stirling ? Stirling has been a major disappointment. Great piece of business by Queens ...... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steeplechat Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Thomas >>>> Stirling. Great business. Absolutely 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Thomas is on a 3 year deal at Kilmarnock so presumably the same logic applies to that too. Is he? I didn't know that. The Killie fan on here said he may well be gone at the end of the season but unless he and Killie come to an amicable financial agreement I doubt we'll pay a fee for him. It'll be interesting to see if he is even played on the left. I didn't actually mind him at RM but given our problems at LM I hope he's played there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C4mmy31 Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Thomas is on a 3 year deal at Kilmarnock so presumably the same logic applies to that too.He was a McCulloch signing tbf, I get the impression Steve Clarke doesn't fancy him much given the amount of game time he's got since Clarke arrived.... I have a sneaky suspicion Thomas won't be at Rugby Park by the start of next season, unless he sets the Championship on fire of course. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coo shedder Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 1 hour ago, Northfield 53 said: Could not agree more .Surely just give Stirling game time and he will show what a good player he is .Loan a player out to get a loan player in the same position seems mad to me . Is Thomas a better player than Stirling ? YES 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer doon south Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 1 hour ago, 19QOS19 said: Even if Thomas does come back on loan, unless he will be signed for a season next year this whole situation is pretty ridiculous. Stirling is signed for next season as well and rather than give him game time we would rather bring in a loanee and develop him for another club? Absolutely ridiculous. I don't think Stirling is some kind of wonder player but why the hell sign a player for 2 years and then give him just a handful of starts? And we're expecting the board to release funds for this man to bring in more players?! Promotion playoff push. Must see Dom Thomas as the better man for the job 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MONKMAN Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Are people seriously suggesting that sending Stirling out on loan and replacing him with a better player in Thomas, is not a good move? 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Are people seriously suggesting that sending Stirling out on loan and replacing him with a better player in Thomas, is not a good move? Thomas coming in is irrelevant to me. It softens the blow but I find Stirling being loaned out in the first place baffling. He's not been great but he's had minimal game time to do much. I should really calm down and accept he'll be gone by the end of the season anyway. If the board are tight with funds for the rest of GN's time though I could understand why. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MONKMAN Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 5 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said: Thomas coming in is irrelevant to me. It softens the blow but I find Stirling being loaned out in the first place baffling. He's not been great but he's had minimal game time to do much. I should really calm down and accept he'll be gone by the end of the season anyway. If the board are tight with funds for the rest of GN's time though I could understand why. A simple yes would have done. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Grimm Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Well done to Naysmith on this move, bravo. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 A simple yes would have done. If you don't want detailed answers it might be a suggestion not to ask questions you know the answer to 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogs Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Good bit of business by GN however Stirling hasn't had a proper chance and when he has played has been dropped the following week for no apparent reason yet others in his position who underperform week in week out still start baffling.However that said welcome back dom thought he was really impressive last season so hopefully can kick on again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northfield 53 Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Think that will be it for us would like us to get another forward in but with our budget not much chance of that 5 out but only 4 in suppose we can still get a emergency loan in 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Grimm Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 16 minutes ago, Northfield 53 said: Think that will be it for us would like us to get another forward in but with our budget not much chance of that 5 out but only 4 in suppose we can still get a emergency loan in One coming in tomororw. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 One coming in tomororw. When?! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 When the Lyle stuff broke a few weeks ago I said to someone it wouldn’t be a surprise if you signed John Sutton. Out of favour with us and that’s before we sign another striker, which may happen tomorrow.Getting Sutton out on loan to another Championship side would be great for us as he could score against our rivals but not against St Mirren.I have no inside info on this, just an educated guess. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.