Transfer rumours !

Boggersbelief wrote:Can we just have a moments silence and remember those plonkers that slated Ken and Co and branded them the anti Christ when they first arrived.

Perhaps we should wait a bit until it's clear what they have actually done?

wanderlust wrote: and Parky has seen Woolery live a thousand times more than Nat has so his judgement should be spot on if you accept that criterion.

So you don't think it's more likely that Wigan offered to double Woolery's wages and the player couldn't wait to leave?

wanderlust wrote:
Perhaps we should wait a bit until it's clear what they have actually done?

More negativity.

So you don't accept that we're in a better place now than we were before they took over?

wanderlust wrote:

Boggersbelief wrote:Can we just have a moments silence and remember those plonkers that slated Ken and Co and branded them the anti Christ when they first arrived.

Perhaps we should wait a bit until it's clear what they have actually done?

They've retained our key players, added quantity and quality to the squad, hired a manager who knows what he's doing, put plans in place to improve the training centre.

 Not to mention saving the club from extinction not very long ago.

Boggersbelief wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Boggersbelief wrote:Can we just have a moments silence and remember those plonkers that slated Ken and Co and branded them the anti Christ when they first arrived.

Perhaps we should wait a bit until it's clear what they have actually done?

They've retained our key players, added quantity and quality to the squad, hired a manager who knows what he's doing, put plans in place to improve the training centre.

 Not to mention saving the club from extinction not very long ago.

Yes but other than that what have the Romans ever done for us - some people prefer to look at the negatives so leave them to it.
The position we were in there had to be sacrifices, let's not forget the good work in getting wilkinson and walker out to mean we only had to sacrifice 1 player and Woolery was it.
If the business we did was offered to us at the start of the day we'd have snatched their hands off, but once it's done the negheads will find somethings to moan about.
I'm looking forward to Saturday.

why is being annoyed at losing a decent young player being negative? I am happy with all the other business just didn't want to lose Woolery that's all

Norpig wrote:why is being annoyed at losing a decent young player being negative? I am happy with all the other business just didn't want to lose Woolery that's all

I seem to remember you being annoyed about losing Andy Kellett and Sanmi Odelusi, both to Wigan coincidentally. 

Look how they turned out

Norpig wrote:why is being annoyed at losing a decent young player being negative? I am happy with all the other business just didn't want to lose Woolery that's all

Wasn't necessarily referring to you, I would much prefer to have kept him but the position were in means there needed to be a tough choice made and IMO PP has earned the right to expect us to trust him to make the right one.

Boggersbelief wrote:

Norpig wrote:why is being annoyed at losing a decent young player being negative? I am happy with all the other business just didn't want to lose Woolery that's all

I seem to remember you being annoyed about losing Andy Kellett and Sanmi Odelusi, both to Wigan coincidentally. 

Look how they turned out

I think they're all surrogates for the fact ALF has gone there, he's just projecting.

Boggersbelief wrote:

Norpig wrote:why is being annoyed at losing a decent young player being negative? I am happy with all the other business just didn't want to lose Woolery that's all

I seem to remember you being annoyed about losing Andy Kellett and Sanmi Odelusi, both to Wigan coincidentally. 

Look how they turned out

i wasn't that bothered about those two, i was more annoyed with losing Maher and Threlkeld before the manager had even had a chance to look at them

whatsgoingon wrote:

Boggersbelief wrote:

Norpig wrote:why is being annoyed at losing a decent young player being negative? I am happy with all the other business just didn't want to lose Woolery that's all

I seem to remember you being annoyed about losing Andy Kellett and Sanmi Odelusi, both to Wigan coincidentally. 

Look how they turned out

I think they're all surrogates for the fact ALF has gone there, he's just projecting.

stop saying his name, it will make me cry again 

whatsgoingon wrote:
Wasn't necessarily referring to you, I would much prefer to have kept him but the position were in means there needed to be a tough choice made and IMO PP has earned the right to expect us to trust him to make the right one.

Ha ha, after 5 games?

I'm pretty sure Freedman had a good start, as did Lennon.

The only logical reason for Woolery being sold is because the player wanted to go.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

whatsgoingon wrote:
Wasn't necessarily referring to you, I would much prefer to have kept him but the position were in means there needed to be a tough choice made and IMO PP has earned the right to expect us to trust him to make the right one.

Ha ha, after 5 games?

I'm pretty sure Freedman had a good start, as did Lennon.

The only logical reason for Woolery being sold is because the player wanted to go.

Either that or the asset stripping cowboys

Natasha Whittam wrote:

whatsgoingon wrote:
Wasn't necessarily referring to you, I would much prefer to have kept him but the position were in means there needed to be a tough choice made and IMO PP has earned the right to expect us to trust him to make the right one.

The only logical reason for Woolery being sold is because the player wanted to go.

No the only logical reason he was sold is there was no interest in anyone else,

whatsgoingon wrote:
No the only logical reason he was sold is there was no interest in anyone else,

I don't think you understand what logical means.

You're sat on the bench every week and a club from a higher division comes along and offers to pay you more money to sit on their bench.

Of course Woolery is going to jump at the chance. And we all know, once a player has had his head turned, he might as well be sold.

Woolery was the only pace we had, I would be amazed if Parkinson wanted to get rid.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

whatsgoingon wrote:
No the only logical reason he was sold is there was no interest in anyone else,

I don't think you understand what logical means

Logical also means that you have identified your targets and they've all agreed to come but you need 1 player to leave and the only player anybody has expressed an interest in is Woolery, so do I lose 1 of the players I wanted or 1 who will generate cash. 
You're almost certainly right in the fact he prefer to have kept him but it was an either or option.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

wanderlust wrote:
Perhaps we should wait a bit until it's clear what they have actually done?

More negativity.

So you don't accept that we're in a better place now than we were before they took over?

  
Being cautious until we learn more is not the same as being negative.
Being negative is slagging off just about every player we've ever had like you do despite having no idea what talent is. Being negative is banging on about how useless Holding is like you did. Being negative is slagging off these signings before you've even seen them play as a team.
You know the drill - you're the most negative person on the forum.

TBH I don't know what KA has done so far as regards financing the club, what he's done with the assets, who he's doing business with and what our current debt levels and commitments etc are. Are you suggesting that you know - because obviously you'd have to have a good understanding of these things before you could actually decide where we're at. If so, share it with us so we can all judge how it's actually going for ourselves.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

wanderlust wrote: and Parky has seen Woolery live a thousand times more than Nat has so his judgement should be spot on if you accept that criterion.

So you don't think it's more likely that Wigan offered to double Woolery's wages and the player couldn't wait to leave?

It's a possibility but until we know more it's just speculation. He could have left for any number of reasons including Parky wanting rid so he could get Anderson in.

Interesting comments by Ken Anderson in the news section which all seem really positive, he's talking about the fact that now the Windows shut he is looking to develop the U23s and the development squad.
I understand a certain amount of scepticism but I also think he's now earned a level of appreciation too.
He talked about the embargo and working hard with the FL, I would have liked something stronger about getting rid completely.

whatsgoingon wrote:Interesting comments by Ken Anderson in the news section which all seem really positive, he's talking about the fact that now the Windows shut he is looking to develop the U23s and the development squad.
I understand a certain amount of scepticism but I also think he's now earned a level of appreciation too.
He talked about the embargo and working hard with the FL, I would have liked something stronger about getting rid completely.

Prior to reading that news article I had thought that KA was downsizing the Academy and de-emphasising youth development because of the number of decent young players that have been let go, but it looks as if the likes of Maher and Woolery etc were thought not to be good enough.
Not sure how they'll attract better quality kids though.