Scott Sinclair

[Harry]

Very good piece of business if true IMO.

[Butterfingers]

Both Grealish and NZogbia are "wide" players. Both have played the "number 10" role recently

 

I fail to see why Sinclair couldn't be given a run out there.

[Keyblade]

He's not as technically gifted to play the #10 role as those 2 are.

[briny_ear]

That's an odd sort of statement from Sherwood, isn't it? Sounds like (a) he didn't know we were committed to buy Sinclair; (b ) he's a bit lukewarm about it. If I was Sinclair I'd be wanting a discussion about my future in the squad.

Edited May 19, 2015 by briny_ear

[Czechlad]

I am confused by the wide player comment....

 

Grealish and N'Zogbia have been playing wide in the last few matches. I'd like to see us go back to the 4-3-1-2 with Grealish in the hole now that we have Gabby back, but that comment doesn't make sense. 

[BG_Villa_Fan]

Sherwood sounds as surprised as us about it. 

[Kingman]

It sounds as like its more of a first refusal option type clause rather than anything else.

[dudevillaisnice]

Doubt it's first refusal otherwise it would say that. My guess is it's a bit like Negredo deal to Valencia; he is on loan at the moment but Valencia have to purchase him at the end of the season no matter what. It's a risky way of doing business, would make a good squad player but you feel if the clause wasn't there he perhaps would've gone back to City.

[Stevo985]

I'm not really surprised.

 

I think it's been obvious for a while that there was something more concrete about this deal than just a normal loan move.

 

FWIW I think it's a good signing. £2.5m is peanuts these days and he has the potential to be a good player for us.

Hope his wages are reasonable.

[omariqy]

Happy with that deal for that price, as long as his wages are heavily reduced from City days.  I've been impressed when he has played.

[villa89]

It is a strange clause because what happens if we now can't agree wages or a contract duration?

 

I imagine that was all agreed when he joined in January, hence the ease at signing a contract as soon as we are confirmed as staying up.

[SikhInTrinity]

Glad he's signed and for 2.5million, we really won't get anyone better than him. Considering the prices mentioned for Luongo who has never played at Championship level is 4Million.

[Demitri_C]

^{I am happy if he has signed, he knows where the back of the net is and isn't afriad to get forward. Am suprised that N Zogbia is starting ahead of him to be honest. Hopefully starts with GIl vs Burnley}

[Richard]

some of the risks we have had to take with 2.5M in the last few seasons for me this is good business and less of a risk.  He has already contributed mire than Bennett

[Gillz]

Decent Singing. Looked very good when we first got him in (Under Sherwood) and knows where the back of the net is.

 

Slightly surprised by some of Tim's comments but wouldn't be surprised to if N'Zog is off this summer an Sincalir is a natural replacement and £7m cheaper than he was!

 

Either way, he's a great option to have if we do start using wide players again or just as an impact sub!

 

You won't find much better for £2.5m!

[Richard]

If we have to replace Benteke then having SInclair gives Sherwood more options to consider as a replacement, ie in terms of the way the team is set up we have sinclair who can provide service from one route or others providing service through another route,  means he can look at different striker options

[HeyAnty]

From reading that i dont think Sherwood is fussed on having him.  Basically said he doesnt fit into the teams style of of play as we dont play wingers.

[Zatman]

I dont think Sinclair is a wide man that provides service though

[jackbauer24]

The Sherwood quotes are 'troubling' to some degree - it almost sounds like he doesn't really want him and has been lumbered with him. That's his prerogative but it's a waste of our likely small budget if we agreed the deal in January only to sack Lambert in February! Not good planning.

 

Personally I'd prefer to see him in N'Zogbia's role. I think he offers more energy, more pace and morethreat attacking threat. I think he might be being heavily punished for being incredibly selfish against former team Swansea as he was putting his glory above they teams. However he offered a lot before that game so a 'chat' would be a lot better than removing him from the picture entirely.

[Nabby]

Looks like we were contractually obligated to complete the move once we stayed up so Sherwood really had no say in it.He has done ok but like Gil not sure how much he is likely to feature under TS.