Miller

As for who was available at a price we could afford, yes, totally agree. But I wouldn’t expect Butterfield and Clarke to be wholly cheap.

Gills brought in Ricky Holmes. Surely he won’t have been on much more than Clarke? And weren’t we offered Sammon on loan? Wouldn’t he be on less than we’re paying for Butterfield?

I suppose we’ll never know but I’d have rather we signed those two than the two we got. Not that I don’t rate the players signed; I just think Holmes/Sammon would have given us other options

 

@Fools Gold reckons we are paying a tiny amount of Butterfield's wage. So maybe why he joined

 

Didn’t he say we were paying around 5% of £30k? That’s still £1500 a week and I’d expect Clarke will be on nearly double that. That’s upwards of £4K a week between them. Not enough to secure Holmes and/or Sammon?

 

I don't know what wage Clarke is on. I expect given his commitment to City and his desire to live with his family he might well have been prepared to negotiate. I have no idea what Holmes and Sammon would want or get if they wanted to come to City.

 

young player of the month for December. well done George.

 

Then Hopkin decided to take him out of the starting line-up; that will teach him.

If the gaffa wants to win games he needs to get Doyle some company upfront.

 

We all thought that of mcburnie, look at the lad now. We struggle to spot talent from a young enough age to make a sizeable profit

 

I disagree - there's nothing inherently wrong with playing 1 striker, most clubs do it these days, its about creating good chances for him, and taking them.

 

Not sure about the award but some great comments from Miller about getting the job done about making sure that we avoid relegation.

The way in which the players talk about the club now is a world away from what it was earlier in the season.

 

According to Simon Parker, we were offered Sammon but turned down the opportunity. Isn’t he a centre forward that does his best work with his back to goal? Not saying he was the answer, but to suggest there were NO options available doesn’t ring true.

As for the comment about a winger, what does Scannell have to do with this? His injury record is there for all to see and he’s currently out with one of those long spells. Besides, as I keep saying, it doesn’t matter what we expected. Hopkin himself said he wanted a centre forward and a winger. Even if not available, why then sign 2 more attacking midfielders?

 

Just regarding the cost of having Butterfield on loan, Parker suggested we were paying a very small percentage of his wage, and I've heard as little as 5% mooted - on that basis, it's perfectly possible Sammon would cost more.

Can't confirm or validate any of those figures, mind, but even if Butterfield was on the top-end £30k a week assertions, if we were to be paying such a low percentage, we'd struggle to fund a first teamer for less.

 

The Gills brought in Ricky Holmes knowing he’s got a back injury and is likely to be out for another month. I don’t see how that signing would have gone down well here.

 

I'd have welcomed him with open arms. Fantastic player at this level. One more crock wouldn't have harmed for a guy with his talent. Scannell needs to be back sharpish so we can change shape if necessary. No wingers at the club is shocking. Don't know if there is anything left in the kitty but an out and out winger as an option would be nice. Obviously free agent as we have enough loans.

 

I’m not sure which is harder to grasp. Miller getting an award for being on the bench, or Butterfield being on 30k for being on the bench.
Boggles!