Rosenior's been released
- Thread starter originallambrettaman
- Start date
-
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
-
They don't call you, Top Tiger, for nothing!
This is spot on and is exactly why this decision is simply stunning. If he has refused a contract then so-be-it, but not to be offered one ...Forget the personality and love, think tactics and round pegs in rounds holes; it makes no sense at all, as Rosie will be hard to replace.
So are we going with one right sided player for the season? Best hope Elmo doesn't get injured, just like we hoped our only decent striker wouldn't get injured at the start of this season.
Yes he could increase the debt and give Steve Bruce more money to spend. As you say interesting times, we'll know by the end of the summer.
They don't call you, Top Tiger, for nothing!
Forget the personality and love, think tactics and round pegs in rounds holes; it makes no sense at all, as Rosie will be hard to replace.
Why the hell did we sign Maguire and Dawson, then keep all these centre halfs, and push Davies nose outta place. Its obvious Dawson has played with everyone bar Davies. Bruce admitted himself Robertson was not signed to start, so that leaves us with Figueroa and Rosenior, interesting. Then we sign all these players for 'Europe' then play a 2nd team and get knocked out. Nothing has made any sense this year.
I have just had the thought that maybe Connor Townsend is being considered as Rosie's replacement. I know, left back replacing right back but bear with me.
Townsend came back from Dundee U having done well in the first half of the season, and he seemed to be involved with a lot of their goals whenever I read match reports so he could be useful as a wingback. We don't know if them choosing to sign their old player back again was because they preferred him as an option, or because when he became available they thought he'd be a good second choice as a permanent signing, came to us to ask if they could sign Townsend, and were told no so signed the other guy whilst they could.
When we first had Brady on loan he was a player that we'd put on either wing to equal effect. Maybe Bruce is thinking that we can get by with 3 established wingbacks and Townsend as cover. Start with Elmo on the right and Brady on the left (as they finished like that this season). If Elmo gets injured then Brady swaps sides and Robertson comes in. Townsend is then the 4th choice wing back. When you consider how few games Elmo has missed in recent years it would make more sense to try to run the wage bill with 3 first teamers and a young player than 4 first teamers. Also, if that is the plan, with our luck it'll be even money for Elmo or Brady to get a season ending injury in the first game next season so Lenihan has to step into the first team reckoning on a more regular basis than planned.
Townsend came back from Dundee U having done well in the first half of the season, and he seemed to be involved with a lot of their goals whenever I read match reports so he could be useful as a wingback. We don't know if them choosing to sign their old player back again was because they preferred him as an option, or because when he became available they thought he'd be a good second choice as a permanent signing, came to us to ask if they could sign Townsend, and were told no so signed the other guy whilst they could.
When we first had Brady on loan he was a player that we'd put on either wing to equal effect. Maybe Bruce is thinking that we can get by with 3 established wingbacks and Townsend as cover. Start with Elmo on the right and Brady on the left (as they finished like that this season). If Elmo gets injured then Brady swaps sides and Robertson comes in. Townsend is then the 4th choice wing back. When you consider how few games Elmo has missed in recent years it would make more sense to try to run the wage bill with 3 first teamers and a young player than 4 first teamers. Also, if that is the plan, with our luck it'll be even money for Elmo or Brady to get a season ending injury in the first game next season so Lenihan has to step into the first team reckoning on a more regular basis than planned.
When its Elmo, yes!!
Thats ****ing jinxed him hasnt it.
We cant offer deals to out of contract players and increase our wage bill. Rosey hasnt played all season he's 31 soon. Lifes tough, he knows the score.
Sell that f**k wit Hernandez for a start!
Are you going to take me up on my bet then - so far no- one thinks he's good enough
We are a mid table prem team who have been unlucky according to Ehab, so why not get rid of the dead wood as well as the want away players and re balance the squad by bringing some quality in key positions. You wouldn't have to increase the debt by too much.
One season, all or nothing.
Will Mr Allam have the bottle for it or will he start crying like a baby again complaining how much it hurts his wallet providing football for the irrelevant.
TWT
One season, all or nothing.
Will Mr Allam have the bottle for it or will he start crying like a baby again complaining how much it hurts his wallet providing football for the irrelevant.
TWT
Obi, your logic is sound if all that must be considered is finance, but I would have thought there would be an ambition for promotion (Mooney said so) and to do that we need a team capable of it. I have seen it argued that Bruce is the obvious manager as he has that experience of promotion battles; but what of his team? Surely we need a core of experience and if we have that in our current squad, playing a position or which he is acclaimed, then surely the finance imperative needs to be softened by a bit of good old football common-sense. I don't know about you but I doubt Rosie would have been looking for a King's Ransom, but what price promotion? We have been told that good prudent management will half (ish) the wage bill, that foresight has us in a good place, so why this indecent haste?
Your theory on how it will evolve seems to leave the manager out of the loop; it certainly leaves pragmatic team management out of it - I am hoping it is an intentional omission. It does latch on to a bit of luck and we have that in abundance, don't we?
What's the price of success?
Ehab was not telling the truth. We were an unbalanced side that couldn't score. What our team will look like in August will depend on who we get rid off. Who we get in will depend on our scouting system and how much cash is available. At least we should have first dibs on the Manchester United youth academy. Just like last time.
Ehab will back his opinion by signing cheques, you will back yours by posting on message boards telling everyone HULL CITY are on the verge of being skint again.
That would be assuming he had the cold hard cash to put in. He's got to be pretty close to tapped out now, everything he's got left will be tied up in the assets of his family and businesses rather than being cash sat in the bank somewhere.
Last season (we stayed up and got to a FA cup Final) he appeared in 37 games, 29 in the PL and contributed one goal; this season he appeared in 18 games, 13 in the PL and we are relegated. I constantly read folk complaining of too much 5-5-2 (I don't totally agree), so isn't he our bolt-on, economical alternative in defence? But to say he played no part in our defence is stretching the truth, isn't it?
