Konoplyanka

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
I havent seen much of Konoplyanka, but if he tends to play on the left wing and performs like he did against us, then I'm all for him joining. We are desperate for a winger like him as our left hand side is a shambles at the moment.

I agree with HBIC. If were selling Chadli and Sig to fund it, it's great business. Not only is he an improvement (so it seems), but it helps us to cut down the volume of players we have in midfield.

Then, finally, we might actually see Eriksen in his proper position!

Although I'm not townsend's biggest admirer, he's quite versatile and can play left or right, so he'll be decent enough back up.

In order to trim the squad and strengthen elsewhere, the players I currently wouldn't miss at the club are:

Rose (presuming another LB is brought in. I don't think he'd want to play second fiddle anymore. plus there's fryers, who is more likely to settle for a back up role at present)
Sig ( done very little since joining)
Chadli ( don't want to see such a recent signing leave, but he hasn't had many positives since joining and we would be fine without him)
Kane (don't see him ever breaking through and securing a regular spot. Mid table striker at best)
Naughton - not good enough despite having a number of games for a couple of seasons now - replace him)

Replacements: LB, a striker (to replace defoe, such as remy for example. Also, we never know how long Ade will perform for) and a CB

although, many would say we still need a deeper play maker, which would mean that the futures of other central midfielders would have to be considered.

Then there's the goalkeepers - Friedel is likely to retire, and gomes is out of contract... so we'll need another.

Bloody hell, this could be like last summer.... again!
 
Roo said:
I havent seen much of Konoplyanka, but if he tends to play on the left wing and performs like he did against us, then I'm all for him joining. We are desperate for a winger like him as our left hand side is a shambles at the moment.

I agree with HBIC. If were selling Chadli and Sig to fund it, it's great business. Not only is he an improvement (so it seems), but it helps us to cut down the volume of players we have in midfield.

Then, finally, we might actually see Eriksen in his proper position!

Although I'm not townsend's biggest admirer, he's quite versatile and can play left or right, so he'll be decent enough back up.

In order to trim the squad and strengthen elsewhere, the players I currently wouldn't miss at the club are:

Rose (presuming another LB is brought in. I don't think he'd want to play second fiddle anymore. plus there's fryers, who is more likely to settle for a back up role at present)
Sig ( done very little since joining)
Chadli ( don't want to see such a recent signing leave, but he hasn't had many positives since joining and we would be fine without him)
Kane (don't see him ever breaking through and securing a regular spot. Mid table striker at best)
Naughton - not good enough despite having a number of games for a couple of seasons now - replace him)

Replacements: LB, a striker (to replace defoe, such as remy for example. Also, we never know how long Ade will perform for) and a CB

although, many would say we still need a deeper play maker, which would mean that the futures of other central midfielders would have to be considered.

Then there's the goalkeepers - Friedel is likely to retire, and gomes is out of contract... so we'll need another.

Bloody hell, this could be like last summer.... again!
Click to expand...

get the Cardiff keeper in,then it won't matter if Lloris wants to go
 
totsfan said:
get the Cardiff keeper in,then it won't matter if Lloris wants to go
Click to expand...

we have to keep everyone who's at least half decent, Tots.

certain players are going to have to be moved on, if we're looking to buy players like Kono and a LB etc.
Therefore, there'll be enough ins and outs already. If we let the likes of Vertonghen and Lloris go, next season could be an even worse transition period that this season

for me, it's about bringing in 2 or 3 first team additions, and letting some of the "not much of a future at spurs" players go, to

a) trim the squad
B) fund the positions we need
 
We have a long and established history of stepping in and taking deals off 'Pool. I don't expect that to change any time soon.
 
Roo said:
we have to keep everyone who's at least half decent, Tots.

certain players are going to have to be moved on, if we're looking to buy players like Kono and a LB etc.
Therefore, there'll be enough ins and outs already. If we let the likes of Vertonghen and Lloris go, next season could be an even worse transition period that this season

for me, it's about bringing in 2 or 3 first team additions, and letting some of the "not much of a future at spurs" players go, to

a) trim the squad
B) fund the positions we need
Click to expand...

I understand that,but isn't Lloris making noises about going,like Verts is?
 
I would let Vertonghen go and try anything to keep Lloris.

Konoplyanka did look the best player on the field when we played Dnipro, so I can see the logic--though whether there's anything to this rumour hasn't been established. Townsend would be much better if he tried to cut the ball back the way Lennon does. Chadli has looked like a good player to me, though his agent really ticked me off, so I wouldn't mind seeing him go. We've hardly used Gylfi, who frankly seems like he should be a midtable #10, as he was before. I'd let him go as well. So Lennon, Townsend, Konopylanka and Lamela might make sense--unless Lamela wants to go, in which case we should let him, and maybe keep Chadli. If we could then get a deep lying playmaker who is a good long passer but is more mobile than Huddlestone, I think we might have something.
 
LB is the position we really need to strengthen. Rose is just a disaster waiting to happen every game in my opinion, he had a very good start to the season but 4 or 5 good games doesn't make up for about 15-20 bad ones. He hasn't really improved since he first switched to LB and for me that's quite worrying.

I don't see the harm in keeping Naughton here to be honest, he's not that bad of a right back and most of the stick he gets is from when he's played on the left. I thought he was one of our best players against Arsenal, worked really hard both defensively and in an attacking sense and I think sometimes people's prejudice against him can sometimes influence their opinion on his recent performance(s). As a backup option (competing with Fredericks next season), he's really not that bad of a player to have.

Kane I've tried to back for a very long time but his lack of game time means that when he does get a chance, he looks very rusty more often than not. He's still only 20 years old so I'd love to see him sent on loan to a Prem side to gain some match time and see how he does before making a real judgement.

Sig is a great professional, for a guy who's been out the team more than in it, I've never heard a peep. He's a very good player but just doesn't seem to really fit in here, we have a number of better options currently as well. If he goes I'd wish him all the best and I have no doubt that whoever he joins will reap the benefits.

Chadli, I'd give one more season, it's clear the guy has some awesome talent and similar to Naughton has copped some unfair flack, I think settling into a new country added with injuries has been a bit hard for him.

Lloris I thought was Barca-bound but I recently read that ter-Stegen of Gladbach has agreed to join a foreign club understood to be Barca. That doesn't mean he may not be off though as Monaco have been linked and no doubt there'll be a good few CL sides that'd love Hugo. Replacements for him should he go could be Kasper Schmeichel, Begovic, Marshall (if this season is anything to go by), Krul.

I have a feeling Vertonghen will be here next season too, for most of this season I thought he also was Barca-bound but with his recent injuries and dip in form coupled with the superb form of Koscielny who's also been linked with Barca, I'd be surprised if the Frenchman wasn't top of their list.

We'll have to get a back up GK option too, unless the club feels Archer is ready (which I'd doubt). There's thousands of decent keepers out there we could find, from either a Prem vet to a young up and comer.

Oh God, Spurf you've jinxed this now! It really is turning into a transfer thread <laugh>
 
I actually rate Rose, but would at least think about a different LB because he seems very injury prone. I've always like Gylfi and think he's a good player, but he's not quite good enough to be Spurs #10. He's got a great shot, occasionally can pick out a great pass, and is a model pro, as SOS says. But he's slow and one-footed, and too easy for a good defense to close down--except for his long range shot. Both Eiriksen and Holtby already look like better options, and are still both very young. Played on the left Gylfi's not bad, but, again, not quite good enough. Works hard, can create occasionally, but wrong-footed and too slow. I think Naughton is a good RB and would keep him. I can't see Kane breaking into the side and would sell him.
 
luvgonzo said:
I know, great way of saving money don't have scouts use other clubs scouts. :biggrin:
Click to expand...

Our scouting network has been ****e since Redknapp left. We let our chief scout leave and have only recently replaced him... with the same bloke. <doh>
 
humanbeingincroydon said:
US foreign policy in a nutshell:
Russia expanding their borders into the Crimea is BAD
Israel expanding their borders into Egypt, Syria, Palestine, Jordan and Lebanon is GOOD
Click to expand...

Not to mention our spying/terrorist policy: wasting tens of billions illegally spying on everyone all the time is GOOD
Actually spending twelve cents to call somebody up when someone's dad walks into your embassy and says his kid's gonna commit a terrorist act is BAD (because, and this is priceless, according to government officials, we don't have the money to go and chase down every possible lead. So the tens of billions to spy on everyone all the time has prevented zero terrorist acts. If we'd spent the twelve cents when people have contacted our embassy with credible information, we would have prevented two. So in the unlikely event our spy-on-everyone-all-the-time policy actually turns up a real, bonafide terrorist act about to happen, it still will be wasted money because we won't actually do anything about it--because we don't have the money. It's apparently expensive to sit a thousand people in bunkers nominally looking for terrorists and actually watching internet porn.)

However, as regards Israel: while I think establishing the state of Israel in Palestine was just about the biggest mistake the world has made in the last 66 years or so (establishing it in Bavaria might have been an excellent idea, on the other hand), the UK did more than anyone else (except, perhaps, the Zionists) to get that ball rolling.
 
During Roman Imperialism, it was a crime, punishable with death, to declare that Rome's expansion and occupation of all the known world was a crime against indigenous peoples. The belief was that the rest of the world was comprised of savages and that Rome was doing the work of the gods by imposing on it the standards and morals of Rome.

I see absolutely no difference between the despots of Ancient Rome and the so-called peace-keepers of America. They both killed/kill in the name of their respective "dream" regardless of the fact that those they tyrannized/tyrannize dream a different dream.
 
luvgonzo said:
:biggrin: Good work I'm just glad you started chasing our targets after we bought Suarez.
Click to expand...

I know it's a tongue-in-cheek comment but it's something that gets levelled at clubs all the time. A bit like how every club's fans tend to think they get more injuries than most clubs, it's actually to do with being more aware of news surrounding your own club than others. Soldado's transfer pretty much typified this. I remember seeing Liverpool fans at the time claiming that he was one of your targets that we nicked when infact we'd had bids rejected for him the previous summer and had likely been on our radar for longer. Same story with Willian, although admittedly it does look like your bid prompted us to make our move earlier than we were planning to.

Apart from Suarez, it actually seems like the best idea when we realise we're both in for a player is to both not bid. Sigurdsson, Soldado, Carroll, Joe Cole, it's hardly a list of players that set the league alight <laugh>
 
Hoddle Is A God said:
During Roman Imperialism, it was a crime, punishable with death, to declare that Rome's expansion and occupation of all the known world was a crime against indigenous peoples. The belief was that the rest of the world was comprised of savages and that Rome was doing the work of the gods by imposing on it the standards and morals of Rome.

I see absolutely no difference between the despots of Ancient Rome and the so-called peace-keepers of America. They both killed/kill in the name of their respective "dream" regardless of the fact that those they tyrannized/tyrannize dream a different dream.
Click to expand...

I'm as appalled by the hemispheric genocide of indigenous peoples by the US and other powers as most. I'm as appalled by US policies as most. I do sometimes wonder why non-Americans often enough excoriate the US without mentioning the various evils performed by their own countries.
 
Hoddle Is A God said:
During Roman Imperialism, it was a crime, punishable with death, to declare that Rome's expansion and occupation of all the known world was a crime against indigenous peoples. The belief was that the rest of the world was comprised of savages and that Rome was doing the work of the gods by imposing on it the standards and morals of Rome.

I see absolutely no difference between the despots of Ancient Rome and the so-called peace-keepers of America. They both killed/kill in the name of their respective "dream" regardless of the fact that those they tyrannized/tyrannize dream a different dream.
Click to expand...

I thought that this post was going to be about Spurs buying players that Liverpool have been linked with, at first.
We'll buy them if we want to, you bloody savages! <grr>
 
Speaking of Crimea (poor old Crimea), Florence Nightingale is described as "the founder of modern nursing". I really can't believe a woman who is celebrated on Britisn bank notes left dehydrated patients in their beds in their own urine, did she? Or was she not that "modern"?
 
littleDinosaurLuke said:
Speaking of Crimea (poor old Crimea), Florence Nightingale is described as "the founder of modern nursing". I really can't believe a woman who is celebrated on Britisn bank notes left dehydrated patients in their beds in their own urine, did she? Or was she not that "modern"?
Click to expand...

Better hope there aren't too many Mary Seacole supporters reading that...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back