| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Who's not keen on parting with moneyOriginally Posted by NYCBlue
we aren't going to be spending £7 million on anyone.
we aren't going up whether we spent 1 million or 50 million this season so it isn't the right time to be pumping money in.
plus we have to be pretty close to the FFP limits already so it isn't going to happen
Hasn't he spent around a quarter of his net wealth on Cardiff City? His net worth is currently around 800000 dollars and given the devaluation of his businesses I doubt very much whether he has much, if any, free equity to invest in the Cardiff City money pit.
I doubt even the most ardent Cardiff City fan has spent a quarter of their worth on the club. Would anyone here really re mortgage their house to give to the club to invest in players? I certainly wouldn't.
We also need a club that's run more efficiently so the days of spending millions on players are over for now and it won't be just Cardiff City either
All that makes it sound like a good time for him to call it a day and maybe pass the reins to someone else who does want to invest money because without it neither the club not Tan will be in good shape.
That's absolutely true Stan so that means a properly organized board setup with Financial, Management and Football experience and expertise. No more allowing maverick managers to run the meagre club coffers.
Eight hundred thousand dollars? That means he’s nowhere near a dollar millionaire let alone a sterling one. There’s fans in the stands with a lot more equity than that. Google says he’s worth 800 million dollars.
From what i heard Tan has received offers which were not good enough.
That bad smell Hammam who took us to the brink and is still scavenging for money was involved in another offer and luckily he won't be near our club anytime soon.
I honestly believe that Tan will be going down the route of getting other asia based investors onboard.
Have those at the club finally clicked on and what we are seeing is a clear out stage ready to rebuild properly?
I live in hope bur won't hold my breathe
It's clearly disappointing that Giles is recalled but hardly unexpected. This is why I don't like loan players unless there's a clause to buy. They're sticking plasters as they're not investments in the club and, in my view, should be cover not starting. I know that's not a popular view but it's what I think. We have no cover at wing-back but we're insisting on sticking with this formation. If Morison wants to stick with it then we need cover anyway. He wanted the job, time to step up and earn his keep because he knew the score when he took it on.
I don't get the love affair with Giles anyway. He's OK. Nothing special in the grand scheme of things but is clearly special to us which is not difficult considering our situation. With WBA a player short yesterday we should have used him as our main attack but we didn't seem to have a strategy.
I don't share our manager's optimism that we won't go down. We could go down. The table doesn't lie. He needs to get these players firing. It's all very well saying we're rebuilding, which we are, but we're surviving too. We're not safe and we need to get a couple of wins soon.
And also, why are 20+year-old players regularly referred to as kids? Kids would be 16-17-year-olds. Just a personal gripe that's all.
Last edited by Citizen's Nephew; 03-01-22 at 21:45. Reason: Grammar
My preference would be for Tan to get out of the way. But if that's not to happen then more Asian investment could be a positive. However I think for that to benefit us it would have to be on the basis that Tan is a minority shareholder and is removed from plenary decision-making.
If that happens we might have a chance of a more professional and constructive management regime which would look to develop the club long term. Of course we would have to rely upon the integrity and ability of those taking charge. Dalman and Choo should walk.
Bit of a story doing the twitter rounds that Giles may return to City.
Tan isn't interested in being a minority shareholder.
Agreed. It's fairly obvious the centre backs aren't comfortable in a 3 and we're sliced open easily. Our remaining wing backs are really full backs and this system leaves us with very few attackers, with us shoehorning players like Colwill in
I wouldn't say we are shoehorning colwill in.
behind the striker in a 3-4-1-2 or a 3-4-2-1 is surely his best position?
how else would you use him?
Let's hope he has a stinker against Sheff Utd on Saturday and Wolves get knocked out of the cup.. every chance he will be back before the end of the window.
I'd doubt Wolves would want him playing for a struggling team. They'd hope for a team pushing for play-offs at least.
I think it's more that he's not keen on breaching FFP
he's getting good game time here, in the position they want him to play and has made 9 assists, the joint highest in the league. I think they would be happy with the loan.
if he does play for them in the cup then he could ONLY play for us or them until the end of the season
Its a big loss. 9 assists in a struggling team is no mean feat.
I deplore three at the back but with no senior wingers, two full backs and a truck load of centre backs & centre mids I fear we are stuck with it. Given how poor our defensive record is and how little pace there is on the side I feel like we have to get on the front foot more and look after the ball better.
With that in mind I'd personally I'd favour deploying the formation Coleman used with Wales. Bring Harris more central to play alongside Moore / Collins and play Colwill as a number 10. Takes the pressure off the wing backs to get forward (and let's be honest Bagan and Ng are more full backs than wing backs) and we can build the side around the one creative talent that we have.
Have read a tweet which says that he could come back to us at the end of January if Wolves injury/absence situation improves. Maybe a little hope.
Yes, that's how I understand it. Therein lies our problem.
I'm not so sure on that one Phil. That can be used as a convenient excuse and I'm sure the board aren't above using it.
Good post, I hate the 3 at the back too. You're right in that the squad lacks flexibility and is overloaded in certain areas.
I'm hoping Wintle can add a bit more stability at defensive CM and I would like to see us use a back 4. I still think NG and Bagan can be useful full backs in that formation; maybe less so NG but I think Bagan can develop well.
Ralls Wintle, Bowen and Colwill could develop into an effective midfield unit and I have belief that the Moore/Harris(or Davies) partnership could vastly improve with a better midfield behind them.
can we afford to not replace him now on the off chance we get him back?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote