Page 2 of 10
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 09:48
by royalgull
I find it amazing that Knill doesn't feel Lathrope is capable of doing everything that Harding brought to the table, for maybe a few games at the most until he's back and as such has got a loan in, we also have Natahn Zidane-Messi waiting in the wings to tear this division a new one. We lose Downes for 6 weeks (minimum) and still have serious concerns over Pearce and yet he thinks Tom Cruise is a viable centre half for the next 6 weeks.
Truly astounding and you wonder why I have zero faith in this bloke running our team?
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 09:51
by ferrarilover
We have O'Connor and Pearce at CB, what are you on about?
Matt.
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 10:18
by gullintwoplaces
Well I'll say it anyway. WELCOME TO JAK McCOURT!
I can hardly bear to look at the forum at the moment, with the whinging and whining. Some people have clearly had their knives sharpened for Knill from day one. Absolutely fecking pathetic. I lived in Oxford a long time ago, and I always thought that their fans were the most miserable bunch of moaning feckers that I had ever heard. But now I think we are worse. The moaning that I have heard from some of the miserable old gits on the popside makes me think that their trip to Plainmoor is therapy for their deep seated psychiatric disorders, and we have some folk on here with similar disorders. Get treatment you miserable sods!
Welcome Jak, I hope you do really well tomorrow.
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 10:23
by Plymouth Gull
You aren't alone, GITP. I try to refrain from logging in these days just because it annoys me seeing all the negativity.
To whoever it was asking about updating the transfers in/out thread (PhilGull?), I will update it when it's on the OS.
Welcome Jak.
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 10:29
by PlainmoorRoar
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 11:16
by Scott Brehaut
ferrarilover wrote:We have O'Connor and Pearce at CB, what are you on about?
Matt.
Not for tomorrow we don't.
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 11:31
by Yellow4life
http://www.torquayunited.com/news/artic ... 09719.aspx
Confirmed. 1 month youth loan.
Pearce will start tomorrow.
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 11:37
by Richinns
Scott Brehaut wrote:
Not for tomorrow we don't.
It a balancing act though. We have the budget for 1 additional loan and we have O'Connor out for 1 game and Harding for 3-4.
With the positive news about Pearce and Downes I see this as the correct addition if he brings extra quality than what we already have in reserve.
Time will tell but at the moment I am positive about this.
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 11:42
by Scott Brehaut
I know nothing about the guy, so certainly not going to slate him before he has kicked a ball.
It just seems strange to use a loan up for an area where we have two players warming the bench every week. They can't be that crap that they are unable to play for a month to cover an injury can they?
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 11:46
by Richinns
Scott Brehaut wrote:I know nothing about the guy, so certainly not going to slate him before he has kicked a ball.
It just seems strange to use a loan up for an area where we have two players warming the bench every week. They can't be that crap that they are unable to play for a month to cover an injury can they?
It seems clear Knill does not rate either Lathrope nor Craig in a two man midfield currently so if he wants to play 4-4-2 then he has added someone who could perhaps provide that?
I do feel a bit for Craig and Damon but both were players Knill inherited and clearly does not fancy in the formation he likes to play.
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 12:03
by CP Gull
Like I said in an earlier post, it's clear that Knill doesn't feel comfortable with either Craig or Lathrope in a centre mid position in a 4-4-2.
To be honest, you could also have said the same under Martin Ling as we shouldn't forget that Damon played his best football for us as a holding midfielder in a central midfield made up of him, Manse and Eunan. Likewise, Nathan was never really tested in a midfield two as he was usually out wide left in a 4-5-1 formation ... tellingly even Lingy never really fancied him in (his favoured) central midfield role.
Unfortunately, for both of them, Knill is pretty much a set in stone 4-4-2 man ... although he did try something different at Newport the other week, and so neither Damon or Nathan are deemed to have all the qualities needed to play in a central TWO. Like I say, how many times under Martin Ling's leadership did we see either play in a central two, not many I would suggest.
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 12:04
by usagullmichigan
So why don' we pay them up and say see ya! no point being here if Knill won't use them when we are desperate.
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 12:16
by CP Gull
usagullmichigan wrote:So why don' we pay them up and say see ya! no point being here if Knill won't use them when we are desperate.
Unfortunately that would cost us money (that events of this week have surely proved!) that we don't have. I would imagine both players would, quite rightly, demand that their contracts are paid up in full i.e until July 2014, so we could be talking anything between £ 30-50k maybe even more, I would guess .... money we simply don't have.
Not only that but the players (daft as it may sound) might prefer to ride it out in the hope that they can somehow prove the Manager wrong or that the Manager moves on before their contract(s) run out and they can try again with a new one. The events of this summer has proved that once you are released by a club like ours the future is pretty bleak ... you only need to look at the ones we let go ... Stevens (unemployed?), Easton(unemployed?), Macklin(Farnborough), Leadbitter (Hereford) Oastler (Aldershot), Halpin(Bideford) ... to realise that almost certainly the only way is DOWN, if not OUT! So, who knows, this COULD be the last chance either of them have at earning a full time living from football, so it's not a decision either of them would take lightly even if the carrot of a nice lump sum was dangled in front of them. Certainly in the case of Damon, you also have the added problem of a partner living and working down here to consider too.
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 12:22
by ferrarilover
The rules here are a little unclear, but as far as I understand it, if a player asks for a transfer, then the 'paying-up' rule (I don't think it's a rule, as such, but for simplicity, that's the word I'm using) doesn't apply.
Were I Craig, I'd be begging Knill for a loan to somewhere, anywhere, even the Dog and Duck, just to get a chance of being noticed.
Matt.
I think Easton is working with Exeter, perhaps their kids, but this might be old news.
Re: Jak McCourt
Posted: 11 Oct 2013, 12:23
by ferrarilover
No Scotty, we don't have O'Connor tomorrow, but we can't sign a loanee to cover a loanee for one game that would be an absolute farce and you (among others and quite rightly) would have a right go at Knill if he did so.
Matt.