Not sure we were ever due to say Caulker's played a 'Caulker' but hopefully we can say Ream has played 'Ream' ...I know, I'll get UTR's coat
GAYLE THINKING ABOUT CITY MOVE Bristol City manager Steve Cotterill says Dwight Gayle has asked for time to think about a proposed move to the club. Crystal Palace accepted a bid of £6m for the striker but City are now waiting for a decision from the player. “We've had a couple of conversations - not face to face,” Cotterill said in his press conference today. “We'll have a timescale and we won't stay on it for ever. It's getting to a crunch time. "He wants to think about it. That can only go for so long. There's only a limited period of time we can wait."
Apologies if this has been aired before but I'm intrigued by the fact that Phillips played on Tuesday night. To me that makes it a bit less likely that he's on his way. He's not going to one of the big boys. So that leaves the also-rans such as West Brom, Stoke, or Palace. Clubs like that know that their best chance of some silver to show for the season is the League Cup. They would not want him cup-tied which of course, he now is. Add to that the fact that he did not leave Blackpool immediately after they went down and the fact that he has been given his first proper chance by Ramsey. Clearly, the decision to sell may be down to the Board more than the manager but I am a little surprised that there seem to be no more suitors for him.
Ream is reported to earn 20k a year (have to believe that as much as you believe the reports about any other players wages). Can’t see him taking much of a pay cut. Certainly not 50% Avoiding other complexities of whether that’s true and how loan deal affects things lets look at this year alone then. We could have just not sold Caulker and not bought Ream and this years accounts would have been 400k worse off. From what I know Ream’s a bit lightweight and we can expect to be exposed when up against tall and/or physical strikers. And also from set pieces. Personally I would have kept Caulker. Still need another centre back. Decision then would be can we afford Ream
He won't be going anywhere if his two performances to date are anything to go by. Austin will have to start scoring too if he wants to impress potential suitors
I meant to post about this too, but forgot.... When explaining about team selection, I am sure Chris Ramsey said "that as well as resting players...that he didn't want to play players that will move on, and be cup-tied, as it would reduce their value) ...meaning Austin (there could have sense to give Austin a short run out, especially when 3 up to be honest). So yes I was really surprised that Matty played. So Ramsey wants expects Charlie, Fer and Sandro to move on but wants to keep Matty Phillips.....he is the one I would keep too (sorry Col)
I think he's on a bit more than 20k a year as you put it, no one knows too much about him all ifs, let's wait see if he signs first before judging him damage, think you over complicate your threads.
I know you're brain is damaged Brain Damage BUT write this down on a piece of paper, with a crayon if need be, WE HAVE NOT SOLD CAULKER.
Don't be so pedantic you silly ****. Sold \let go. As I said anyway. Looking at this season Read in standard on tube back. It's 1.75m so allowing for costs it's a break even deal at best money wise
Sold is the past tense of the verb, 'sell', which can be defined as, "to give or hand over (something) in exchange for money' So get over it you petty ****
That's a bit of a step down from the words you were using two weeks ago. Face it Kia, you've been outmanoeuvred by Ramsinand and your latest golden boy is out the door, hopefully never to come back. Now put that in your pipe and smoke it
Damaged, you really have to learn a little English. Did your mother ever have you tested when you were smaller?
The word you are looking for is 'rent'/'rented' - "to temporarily/for a fixed term hand over something in exchange for money/other goods" I'm sure it's in the DED (Damaged English Dictionary - strap line "Never Admit Error"). Or perhaps 'loan' would suffice.
Well actually sb, there is two reasons that you are wrong there. First point to make is that the English language has many other variations of saying exactly the same thing. You may have personally used a different word or phrasing and as I proved in my previous post, it's grammatically correct. So it's not wrong. I am happy to dumb it down for people unable to pick up these subtlety's in the English language so the second reason you are wrong is on a previous thread: Sold- past tense of sell- Sell- "To transfer (goods or property) or render (services) in exchange for money" So when Mrs Durbar or Mummy Durbar render's her services for massaging or whatever else it may be. Those services are sold but they are not permanently given. Same as Caulker's service's have been sold but not permanently given. Hopefully now you understand, happy ending?
Just as I wasn't about to start throwing toys about after one game, I'm certainly not going to judge any player, let alone the only two who came out with any real credit from last season, on two games. Austin has only played one game so far and unless I was watching a different game to you, nobody scored on Saturday.
Ream in team? https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/esp-football-ream-complete-qpr-switch-113835335--sow.html
In the words of the the late, great George Cole (Arfur Daly)......................"Oh my good gawd"!!
