Wesley Fofana - He is no more - finished - forgotten.

[moore_94]

 

[turtmcfly]

33 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

I wasn't talking about Fofana , he was expensive and if you pay big money the success rate is higher though by no means guaranteed as Chelsea and Man Utd keep illustrating. I have said ,I think , that Fofana is a £60 million pound player , no more. That represents a significant mark up after two years. In the market at the moment , you win one ,you lose a lot more. Our overriding problem is age. When Vardy and Evans are gone we will be very, very unlikely to replace them. Fofana and Daka were our supposed replacements but that idea seems to be fading. Now it seems a proven striker and centre back are going to be unaffordable. We have not brought through anybody in those positions from our academy for as long as I can remember. Let us hope we get lucky somehow.

 

This strikes me as untrue, unless by success you don't mean 'relative to the price paid'. Of course the more you spend the likelier a player is to be 'better', but a £30 million player who plays like one to me is no more or less a 'success' than a £15 million player who plays like one. 

 

As for a proven striker and centre back being unaffordable... apart from Evans when was the last time we bought a proven anything? Even a high ticket (for us) player like Fofana is clearly seen as a work in progress, and I suggest that instead of 'proven' I would use the phrase 'unappreciated cast off' to describe our other purchases, which is what I think we tried to get with Vestergaard and Bertrand

 

I guess I'm bemused by everyone reacting in a surprised way to the stated model of the club (buy low on potential, sell high, try to repeat) looking like it might happen in Fofana's case. What did anyone think was going to happen when we signed him (and that's without factoriing in the way he behaved when we wanted him)? What I don't see is a realistic alternative option put forward. Yes we might buy some duffers, but it seems perverse and purposely miserable to act as though that's a given in this thread in particular.

 

Likewise the persistent annoyance that a big club is buying him. Again - when we buy a player that's the realistic best outcome, and it's not like that's something that's been a recent development. I'm not expecting anyone to celebrate (although I find it more exciting than depressing), but why actively complain about the best outcome being realised? It smacks of a weird pashun display. 

 

 

(oh, and if you're not talking about Fofana in a Fofana thread you might want to add some context up front)

 

[st albans fox]

2 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

 

Which we pretty much knew as no one on SM claimed they had 

the word was they would bid later this week …… next week is made more tricky in that we play there next Saturday! 

[Frank Large's Black Book]

1 hour ago, Fear Of The Fox said:

Transfer window must close the night before the first official PL game of the season. Or they should decide to start the season in September and play until early June. You can't have players with contracts linked to other teams even when they're on the pitch playing. It's a farce. 

 

Such as Chilwell having a mare against Chelsea in an end of season CL decider for instance.  Even though it wasn't official then.

[ts_1010]

I think our best bet here is to refuse to sell this window. Do an arrangement to sell in Jan. Let both Chelsea and Fof know we won't stand in the way of a Jan move as long as it's kept secret.

 

Then do our own tapping up of the next guys with that money. The prices will be lower as they think we are cash poor. We will also have our head of recruitment in the door with 4 months to plan and a decent budget to actually work with.

[LFox99]

2 minutes ago, ts_1010 said:

Let both Chelsea and Fof know we won't stand in the way of a Jan move as long as it's kept secret.

Good luck with that, he's a French player

the second there's a hint of anything going on it'll be in the press

[dannythefox]

Getting sick of all the shite now also sick of selling players to Chelsea ffs 

[An Sionnach]

45 minutes ago, turtmcfly said:

oh, and if you're not talking about Fofana in a Fofana thread you might want to add some context up front)

I own up to that one , apologies.

[WigstonWanderer]

5 hours ago, Le Renard said:

I hate to be pedantic(no I don't), but it is "mange tout" (eat all).

Yes I know, but I’m not sure Del Boy does

[Dames]

Its a bit quiet today. Hopefully Fofana has his head down and is focused ahead of the game on Saturday.

 

Its either going to kick off massively tomorrow as Chelsea won't want him playing or pick back up next week. I'd even argue that if the transfer doesn't pick up tomorrow that he'll be part of the squad for the rest of the season, I don't think Chelsea are going to want to keep risking him in games given our record with injuries and Fofana's own. 

Edited 18 August 2022 by Dames

[dannythefox]

2 hours ago, Fear Of The Fox said:

Transfer window must close the night before the first official PL game of the season. Or they should decide to start the season in September and play until early June. You can't have players with contracts linked to other teams even when they're on the pitch playing. It's a farce. 

Completely agree. They love though don’t they cause as much shite as possible for some clubs adds massive pressure to some smaller clubs (even us in this case) and it’s massive entertainment for everyone. It won’t change will it sky love it.

[st albans fox]

when did the window become a thing - before that you had this sh1t going on for most of the season until easter ??

 

 

 

[foxile5]

1 hour ago, moore_94 said:

 

If z Brendan Rodgers told him that he had a winning lottery ticket in his backside OPA would dig his way up there. 

 

No way does Rodgers say anything at all that shows the inside of the club. OPA is just in thrall to be talking to the manager. 

[LFox99]

12 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

If z Brendan Rodgers told him that he had a winning lottery ticket in his backside OPA would dig his way up there. 

 

No way does Rodgers say anything at all that shows the inside of the club. OPA is just in thrall to be talking to the manager. 

Did Owynn shag your missus or why the attitude?

In general I've seen quite a few posts on here in the last days slating Owynn and really can't understand where people are coming from. 

[Dames]

1 minute ago, LFox99 said:

Did Owynn shag your missus or why the attitude?

In general I've seen quite a few posts on here in the last days slating Owynn and really can't understand where people are coming from. 

Most people slate him because he's a young lad thats still learning his trade.

 

The reality is after the RL blackout under Pearson I imagine that the bosses are very reluctant to rock the boat again to lose access which Owynn will be restricted by.

 

Doesn't matter anyway because Jason Bourne seems to have snapped and is asking some challenging questions at the minute. 

[foxile5]

4 minutes ago, LFox99 said:

Did Owynn shag your missus or why the attitude?

In general I've seen quite a few posts on here in the last days slating Owynn and really can't understand where people are coming from. 

I'm not a teenage girl. I don't have an attitude. 

 

OPA is a) a disciple of Stringer. He's trying to insert himself in club business like Stringer did. He's a reporter. He shouldn't be making stupid posts about the legalities of tapping up and casting aspersions on behalf of the club. It was piss poor journalistic integrity when Stringer did it and its piss poor now. 

 

And b) he's so in thrall of city players and the manager that the coverage verges on tedious. The questions he asks are couched in such a way that he's clearly trying to impress those in front of him. He does differ from Stringer on this as at least Stringer had some bollocks to ask big questions rather than Haha omg Madders mate! And Pipes!

 

To summarise - the reporting is poor and he's trying to insert himself into club business which has worked incredibly poorly for BBC RL in the past. 

 

 

[LFox99]

Just now, foxile5 said:

I'm not a teenage girl. I don't have an attitude. 

 

OPA is a) a disciple of Stringer. He's trying to insert himself in club business like Stringer did. He's a reporter. He shouldn't be making stupid posts about the legalities of tapping up and casting aspersions on behalf of the club. It was piss poor journalistic integrity when Stringer did it and its piss poor now. 

 

And b) he's so in thrall of city players and the manager that the coverage verges on tedious. The questions he asks are couched in such a way that he's clearly trying to impress those in front of him. He does differ from Stringer on this as at least Stringer had some bollocks to ask big questions rather than Haha omg Madders mate! And Pipes!

 

To summarise - the reporting is poor and he's trying to insert himself into club business which has worked incredibly poorly for BBC RL in the past. 

 

 

You're free to block/ mute him on Twitter

[foxile5]

4 minutes ago, Dames said:

Most people slate him because he's a young lad thats still learning his trade.

 

The reality is after the RL blackout under Pearson I imagine that the bosses are very reluctant to rock the boat again to lose access which Owynn will be restricted by.

 

Doesn't matter anyway because Jason Bourne seems to have snapped and is asking some challenging questions at the minute. 

Nothing to do with him being a 'young lad that's learning his trade'. That's a ****ing moronic suggestion - why on earth would anyone want to slate anyone for that? Absolutely stupid suggestion.

 

He's getting criticised because he's in a position whereby his reporting has an end consumer and I don't think it's a very good product. Being a license fee payer I'm entitled to criticise and its nothing to do with your odd suggestions. Clown. 

[foxile5]

1 minute ago, LFox99 said:

You're free to block/ mute him on Twitter

And you're free to ask him out for a beer and tell him you love him.

[Dames]

Just now, foxile5 said:

Nothing to do with him being a 'young lad that's learning his trade'. That's a ****ing moronic suggestion - why on earth would anyone want to slate anyone for that? Absolutely stupid suggestion.

 

He's getting criticised because he's in a position whereby his reporting has an end consumer and I don't think it's a very good product. Being a license fee payer I'm entitled to criticise and its nothing to do with your odd suggestions. Clown. 

I mean if you want to be calling people clowns you wanna look in the mirror first since you're getting very worked up about what a young lad reports what his editors tell him too on the radio. 

 

Either way the point is he is a young lad learning his trade so he doesn't quite know where and when to push the boundaries yet and will stick very tightly to the editorial line. 

[foxile5]

3 minutes ago, Dames said:

I mean if you want to be calling people clowns you wanna look in the mirror first since you're getting very worked up about what a young lad reports what his editors tell him too on the radio. 

I'm not getting worked up about that. You suggested that he was getting a slating because 'he's a young lad that's learning his trade'. This is clear and obvious stupidity. 

 

I outlined the measured reasons he is copping since criticism. Not one of them is because he's 'a young lad that's learning his trade'.  

 

That's a stupid reason to criticise anybody and if you think that's a genuine reason that makes you a bit of a clown. As I said. 

[LFox99]

7 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

And you're free to ask him out for a beer and tell him you love him.

 

11 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

I'm not a teenage girl. I don't have an attitude. 

Are you sure?

[foxile5]

Just now, LFox99 said:

 

Are you sure?

[wignalll2007]

What actually did happen to Stringer? 

[Dames]

2 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

I'm not getting worked up about that. You suggested that he was getting a slating because 'he's a young lad that's learning his trade'. This is clear and obvious stupidity. 

 

I outlined the measured reasons he is copping since criticism. Not one of them is because he's 'a young lad that's learning his trade'.  

 

That's a stupid reason to criticise anybody and if you think that's a genuine reason that makes you a bit of a clown. As I said. 

You have literally ignored every other point of the post.

 

He is new in his job and new to his profession and no doubt at all he is following editorial line due very strictly due to the fact that for several seasons RL had very restricted access. He isn't experienced enough yet to know what he can and can't push to get away with.

 

So yes, he is getting slating because of that and its unfair. If in another season or two its still the same then fair play.