or to join or start a new Discussion

Articles/all comments
These 36 comments are related to an article called:

New left back

Page 1 of 2

posted on 4/1/16

I'm just glad it isn't Dean Moxey

posted on 4/1/16

Bamfords available also after his "terrible" time at Palace

posted on 4/1/16

Bojan strengths
http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/01/03/five-facts-about-imminent-nottingham-forest-signing-bojan-jokic/

Crossing. Tackling. Winning ariel duels. Concentration

posted on 4/1/16

DF has moved us from being a team which lost too many games to one that is now difficult to beat. Can he make the next step up and make us into one that wins when they are expected to?

Having filled the gap at left back, can he now bring in a goalscorer (Bamford would be brilliant, but unlikely) and a creative midfielder (Williams didn't quite make it) or Gardner to allow Lansbury to move further upfield.

It should be an interesting couple of weeks.

posted on 4/1/16

If he can succeed in bringing two competitive Left Full Backs to the ground he will deserve a Knighthood!

posted on 4/1/16

Jokic is in Nottingham today according to Paul Taylor (NEP), so I expect he'll be signed by Thursday, if he agrees to come that is.

comment by sph (U11456)

posted on 4/1/16

According to PT(at the NEP)


"1 min ago - View on Twitter

Had it confirmed by #nffc ... Jokic can play this weekend in FA Cup... as long as all paperwork, inc int clearance, is filed by 12pm Friday."

So that's potentially good news!

comment by sph (U11456)

posted on 4/1/16

If he does sign, I think it would be a good game for him to play in. Competitive, without being massively important (unless your name is Will and your are desperate for a long overdue run in the cup!)

posted on 4/1/16

Very good news if he's available for the FA cup game. Don't know anything about him, but I'd never heard of Danny Pinillos before July and that was a great signing, and in all fairness to Freedman, he's made some good signings in difficult circumstances.

posted on 4/1/16

Wouldn't be first time a deal has been this close and then collapsed. Bloody hope this one doesn't. As it looks like Gardner deal is off, are there any other rumours going?

comment by sph (U11456)

posted on 4/1/16

Not seen anything to say there was a deal with Gardner in the first place, for it to be off. You know any better?

comment by (U18331)

posted on 4/1/16

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by (U18331)

posted on 4/1/16

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

posted on 4/1/16

Sph, doubt a deal was on but rumours are that we can't afford Villa's demands. Probably rubbish though

comment by sph (U11456)

posted on 4/1/16

So, it's not off, because it wasn't on, then?

And, it's nothing to do with what we can afford. I am sure we can afford whatever Villa have asked, but the hurdle will be the FFP restrictions.

posted on 4/1/16

What we can afford within the restrictions obviously. But if it was on then now it's off.

comment by sph (U11456)

posted on 4/1/16

It's neither 'on' or 'off' at the moment, as far as I'm aware. Still every chance or something happening (or not) within this window.

posted on 4/1/16

Yes that's why it's called a rumour. You're in a pedantic mood this evening.

comment by sph (U11456)

posted on 4/1/16

Not being pedantic, just wondering why someone is saying something that was never on, is now off!!

posted on 4/1/16



What I meant was that according to a "man in the know", the deal is off due to finances. Hopefully this isn't true because I think he'll improve us a lot. But this person does seem to know what's he's on about.

comment by sph (U11456)

posted on 4/1/16

There you go again....

posted on 4/1/16

I can tell you're a facts man. I like rumours even if I think they're probably not true.

posted on 5/1/16

It has been suggested that we have had a go at getting Gardner but Villa aren't really happy to let him go with the wages we can offer plus a loan fee of zero. I don't know how true that is but wouldn't surprise me. This is where the embargo becomes a problem as we really start scratching around and struggle to borrow decent players at times. You have to remember that both us and Villa have had change of management teams since he last came.

It's also been suggested by the same source (I'm guessing), that Blackburn got out of the embargo by converting some of their annual loss into equity. Although I didn't think you could under the rules maybe they are being more flexible considering QPR and talk of a reduced fine. IF that is the same, you have to wonder why Fawaz hasn't done it to give us a bit more flexibility. The debt to them will be WAY over what they could get back so I can't see them actually losing anything from it. Maybe the restrictions are something they don't mind hiding behind and interest in the club is eroding

comment by sph (U11456)

posted on 5/1/16

I am sure we have enquired about Gardner, Ray, and it would seem that Villa are holding out for more than we are allowed to pay. The player himself would appear keen on a return (just judging by his various comments on twitter, etc).

The 'good' thing about FFP is that our position regarding bids and wages is pretty clear. Means that we are less likely be held to ransom etc, like we were over the Hobbs transfer. Of course, the bad thing is that is draws things out and increases the uncertainty of actually getting anyone!

Villa are quite within their rights to hold out for an improved offer from another club - but that is a bit of a gamble for them. This will only get resolved (one way or another) close to the end of the loan window.

My point to caniggia, is that nothing is 'on' or 'off' at this stage.

We'll see where it goes...

comment by sph (U11456)

posted on 5/1/16

And I think you are probably right about Fawaz potentially hiding behind the FFP restrictions, to an extent, whilst he draws breath and works out how to explain that he's blown about £70M of the family fortune!!

Page 1 of 2

Sign in if you want to comment