stanthemanisgod

But that's the nature of his job, our wage bill is restricted w could sit here and argue why or whether it should be all day long but it won't change the way in which our business will need to be conducted. It's all relative, yes selling Dunne buying a cheaper CB and still having money for Defoe would be the ideal solution, but I would still argue Dunne for Defoe is a positive move, albeit one that comes with a high degree of risk. But it's Lambert's job to manage risk. The flip side of the coin is that we also need to give our young players a chance, lots of people happy to moan about the club selling Cahill without giving him a chance. Your issue is clearly the finance side of things and that's fine but where do you go from there? It's not going to change if you ask me, and if we want to continue to have players like Bent on their wages then the rest of the budget has to be managed.

Would you take out a second mortgage and buy your next house before having an offer on your current one? Also you're making an assumption as to why the Vlaar deal stalled, could equally be something else, any restriction on transfers is likely to be wage related rather than fee related in my opinion, with any business being dependent on that.

The need for wages to fall within a certain % of income isn't apparent it's absolute, and undoubtedly that is making transfer dealings more difficult. But people are claiming the club is doing nothing, that Lambert and Lener are doing nothing and using that as a reason to get very negative. If you believe the club is not doing everything possible to sell the players we want sold and buy the players Lmabert want bought that's up to you but I think it's ridiculous. But do I think Lambert will have the opportunity to sin all of the players he want's in this window? No, I dont, but I'm not about to start blaming him for that or throwing abuse at Lerner. As a club we are where we are, we have the wage budget we have, and dependent on UEFA that's not likely to change regardless of who owns the club. So as a supporter of the club I'm happy to contructively criticise things that are not owrking but would prefer to look for positives than bleat on about perceived negatives.

Lambert's had a look at the squad and it's his call, his job on the line if it goes wrong. It would, however, be interesting to see if Dunne would have gotten anywhere the squad on Saturday if fit, or he'd have been outcast like Warnock and Hutton.

Big John, I think there's a difference between stating as I did that the wage bill needs to be jigged around, and stating that the club's a bag of shit and Lerner hasn't got a clue etc etc (as some have on other threads) because the wage bill needs to be jigged about. whilst being a valid opinion, not one I agree with, it adds little to the debate and is often argued to the extreme ignoring all reasonable counter points. There have been a few people jumping onto this thread claiming Lambo hasn't got a clue etc because we'd be left with Vlaar and some kids. They have a point in that we'd be lacking cover but again the point is taken to the extreme. If you put a poll on here asking who you'd rather have in the squad Dunne or Defoe I bet I could guess which way it would swing. Lambert clearly has some tough decisions to make, some will have negative implications some will have positive, but that's the nature of his job.

Think he was talking about spurs?

Agreed. He might just think Dunne is shit and we're better off without him. But despite us being on the outside I think it's clear to most that there is pressure on the wage bill, I think it's therefore fair to speculate that the sale of Dunne could be to free up a rather large chunk of the wage bill for other areas, be it defence, midfield or another striker. Personally I'd see a Defoe for Dunne exchange as a positive despite being worried about the cover in defence

Don't think you're wrong but I do think he'd still talk to us, down to Lambo to sell the dream. But yes a big ask to drag him and the wag out of London for the bright lights of Brum.

The Times claims Lambo has asked Faulkner for the funds to buy Defoe, could he need to ship out Dunne in order to free up the wages for Defoe?

But then again the club probably aren't doing anything or talking to any players or anything because the window may as well be closed already :winkold:

Just read in The Times that Lambo has asked Faulkner for the funds to buy Defoe. Made it sound like it was dependant on the wages being approved, and also waiting on Spurs signing another striker before they'll let him go.

I'm bored of reading about people who are bored of waiting for Stephen Ireland to turn up, but that's not adding much to the debate either! Obviously the manager has seen something in him that warrants a place in the side, so a few of us have debated what formation and combination of player would suit his natural game. Perhaps stating who you would play instead and in what formation, or perhaps countering some of the points already raised my help alieviate some fo your boredom?

Whether you think it's Lerner being a tight arse, Lerner sulking after MoN, Lerner being sensible, or the club wanting to adhere to the UEFA rules should we ever get close to qualifying for a UEFA comp, our wage structure is restrained by our income. Do I want to see us exposed at the back with only 1 'experienced' CB? No. Can we afford to have average at best players on wages that are reported to be around £40-50k a week? No. In fact we can't realistically afford to continue paying the likes of Bent £60-80k (lots of figures banded around) so something needs to be done. If Lambert believes we'll be ok then that's his decision he'll be the one that answers with his job if we're not.

I like this kind of statement almost as much as the why didn't we 'go in for' so and so moan. Seriously what are people expecting a morning press release every day detailing the specifics of all ongoing player negotiations? We've already seen in the Vlaar signings how leaking information early can potentially **** up any deal being discussed.

Good points and I agree with a lot of what you say. I ask myself the question - would I play Ireland in midfield in a 4-4-2? And I'd answer no personally meaning I wouldn't like him in the position in your second line up. I think there's some mileage in this: ---------Bent---------- N'Zog---Ireland---Gabby ---Delph----El Ahmadi--- Provided Lambert is able to shove a rocket up both Charlie and Gabby's arses and get them playing the right way. Failing that I think we need a proper No 10 and some better wingers.

The Sigurdsson link is interesting, don't think many would have predicted that, and can't see why he'd make it up on such a public forum.

The way we set up on Sat could and should be just as effective as 2 wingers banging in crosses all day, in fact more effective as Bent isn't prolific in the air. But the tactics are still filtering through and it's not there just yet. I'm imagining a forward 3 of Gabby, Bent and N'zog with Ireland pulling the strings, and in theory that should work. Sat was step 1 - get used to keeping the ball we now need to instill the confidence to make the movements and passes that get the attacking players into the right positions and move the opposition defence out of position to give Bent the time and space to score.

A lot will depend on how Lambert wants us to set up. I think we're currently more suited to 4-3-3/4-2-1-3 type formation with Ireland in the middle and perhaps players like N'Zog, Bent and Gabby forming a front 3. If that's the case a LB and another striker are key with a good DM as a nice to have. Alternatively if it's going to look more like a traditional 4-4-2 then we need another winger or 2 because I dont think N'Zog is effective as an out and out winger and Albrighton isn't consistent enough for a whole season. We would also still need a LB and a second Striker and a DM would still be a nice to have. Personally I think it'll be the former with 2 or 3 players targetted rather than the latter with 4 or 5 players targetted. Which would possibly fit with the players we're being linked with and all the talk of the importance of Ireland, N'zog and Gabby from the manager. Thoughts?

I think we have the players who are at his level, they just havn't quite got to grips with the movement required is my point. In order to be effective anybody in that position needs the ball quickly with players busting a gut to get into a position to receive the ball. IMO Ireland should be looking up and seeing at least Bent and 2 other players either side of him in a position to receive the ball in an attacking position. This means the defence have to think about who to mark, where to position themselves and doesn't allow them to double up on any of our attacking options. That would be the same if we replaced Ireland with Robbie Keane, Sigurdsson, Michu or anybody you care to mention. The only significant difference being we might see more shots from deeper from another player, but that is an indication the movement is still not right. On sat the build up was too slow, yes we kept position, but in areas of the pitch the opposition were happy for us to have the ball in, it allowed the defence and midfield to get organised, and the lack of any real forward movement from midfield meant that when Ireland did get the ball his only option for an attacking pass was he heavily marked Bent. For me it's not about replacing the players that play around Ireland it's about them having the confidence to make the right runs, I think Gabby will help when he comes back, and could see us maybe employing a forward 3 of N'Zog, Bent and Gabby with Ireland just behind. It's early days but in my opinion I think this will be a big season for Ireland and hopefully he'll sar to win some of us over.

I cant answer that, I havn't seen the pre-season games and I dont watch every training session. But I think he was one of the better players in the team on sat, and in terms of talent and potential he is definatley amongst the top 5 players in our current squad.

Seriously? What lies has Randy told us, I'd expect you to have direct quotes and evidence proving them to be factually incorrect when quoted, hindsight doesn't do enough to prove you were lied to. Any actual quotes from the club regarding a sell to buy policy? I've counted 3 signings this transfer window, and a bosman with only 1 player sold. Cost of incoming players exceeding the cost of outgoing. Strange sell to buy policy that is! Please define what 'successful' is for a club with our income in light of the momey spent by the top 5 or 6 clubs and the UEFA financial Fairplay Regs coming into force.

And I would imagine that any chat regarding wage budget would have led the manager and to look at all the high earners and their value to the club, heck he might even be prepared o listen to offers but there's more to that the club taking a hit on the fee, Ireland would need to prepared to take another pay cut to move on and I dont see why he would while he's stil getting picked by Villa. And he's stil getting picked because the manager thinks he''s one of th best 11 players available.

I think the neagaive and positive have got confused. Look like 11/12 is the only year we can accuse Lerner of not spending any money, although even with that (negative) net spend the club still ran at a loss so he did spend some money anyway. So hardly years of negative net spend eh Big JC?