Author Topic: Players who don't play  (Read 1060 times)

Offline MikeW

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 637
Players who don't play
« on: May 19, 2017, 08:55:44 AM »
At the season end we had 7 players out on loan, 5 of whom I'm guessing the club may not retain.

We also had a further three - Petsos, Cyriac and Jozabed who I understand we paid money for and whom I'm assuming are on decent money (I know Jozabed is also on loan). Yet they have hardly featured.

My point is the club (I hesitate to say the manager) made a conscious decision to sign these three and yet seemingly they are short of the standard we require.  So why sign them?  Is it back to the stats man or a hunch that hasn't worked?
"If you're sat in row Z and the ball hits your head, that's ........."

Offline westcliff white

  • Global Moderator
  • Mr Fayed
  • *
  • Posts: 10545
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2017, 09:03:18 AM »
At the season end we had 7 players out on loan, 5 of whom I'm guessing the club may not retain.

We also had a further three - Petsos, Cyriac and Jozabed who I understand we paid money for and whom I'm assuming are on decent money (I know Jozabed is also on loan). Yet they have hardly featured.

My point is the club (I hesitate to say the manager) made a conscious decision to sign these three and yet seemingly they are short of the standard we require.  So why sign them?  Is it back to the stats man or a hunch that hasn't worked?
Petsos and Cyriac we small loan fees, Cyriac is also ona small salary by english comparisons.

You did forget Martin  though
Every day is a Fulham day

Offline dannyboi-ffc

  • Global Moderator
  • Gentleman Jim
  • *
  • Posts: 8680
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #2 on: May 19, 2017, 10:01:42 AM »
Every season we seem to sign these pointless random ones. Looking at it from a business perspective it could be a tactic to raise potential funds as I explain below (attempt to anyway)

It seems silly that LVC and Woodrow were allowed to go on loan when they look better options than the likes of Petsos and Cyriac. Yet the intentions for the latter pair has been clear, they were cheap options who were never going to be used unless we were forced to.

Why couldn't LVC and Woodrow do that then? Because neither have a future under Joka regardless and it made sense to send them out to a good little club like Burton to get some games under their belt and make their stock rise. Now we have potential buyers for the pair which will help with funding FFP.

Had LVC and Woodrow stayed we would have gained nothing long term, at least now by signing pointless petsos and Cyriac we've lost nothing but gained the opportunity to make money.

But the Petsos signing goes down in history along with the likes of Tavares and Fazlic as one of the most pointless ever made.

Runstrom anyone?
« Last Edit: May 19, 2017, 02:43:44 PM by dannyboi-ffc »
Give us a follow @dannyboi_ffc        

Email- dannyboiffc@gmail.com

Supporting Fulham isn't about winning, it's about belonging


Offline copthornemike

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 719
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #3 on: May 19, 2017, 11:33:35 AM »
Another way to look at it is that they were our insurance policy for this and next season.

SJ ended up with a pretty settled squad in the second half of the season with fortunately no major long term injuries.

There were always going to be under utilised players - a couple of serious long term injuries and they could have been crucial.

Take our midfield for example. We were very fortunate that Cairney, Johannsen and MacDonald, with the occasional introduction of Parker were able to play throughout the season. If one of them had been out for any significant time the likes of Petsos might have been crucual.

As for the loans for the start of the new season LVC, Woodrow, Jozabed & Grimmer start having had regular playing team under their belts and will be all the better for it and will be potential options (insurance if you like) if we lose any of this season's regulars due to transfers or injuries.

Offline Supermitch

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 973
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #4 on: May 19, 2017, 11:36:17 AM »
Every season we seem to sign these pointless random ones. Looking at it from a business perspective it could be a tactic to raise potential funds as I explain below (attempt to anyway)

It seems silly that LVC and Woodrow were allowed to go on loan when they look better options than the likes of Petsos and Cyriac. Yet the intentions for the latter pair has been clear, they were cheap options who were never going to be used unless we were forced to.

Why couldn't LVC and Woodrow do that then? Because neither have a future under Joka regardless and it made sense to send them out to a good little club like Burton to get some games under their belt and make their stock rise. Now we have potential buyers for the pair which will help with funding FFP.

Had LVC and Woodrow stayed we would have gained nothing long term, at least now by signing pointless petsos and Cyriac we've lost nothing but gained the opportunity to make money.

But the Petsos signing goes does in history along with the likes of Tavares and Fazlic as one of the most pointless ever made.

Runstrom anyone?

Tavares - who was he?  I suppose "it only takes a minute".  Sorry, I'll get my coat.

Offline Southcoastffc

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1402
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #5 on: May 19, 2017, 12:03:29 PM »
Copthornemike is absolutely correct re Petsos

Take our midfield for example. We were very fortunate that Cairney, Johannsen and MacDonald, with the occasional introduction of Parker were able to play throughout the season. If one of them had been out for any significant time the likes of Petsos might have been crucial.


Bang on
Ær ic wisdom funde, ær wearð ic eald.
Before I found wisdom, I became old.


Offline AlexW132

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1225
  • FFC since 2013
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #6 on: May 19, 2017, 12:17:47 PM »
I will be really annoyed if LVC leaves, the potential is there to see. He was class 2 seasons ago and in the chances he got this season.
Twitter: @AlexWFFC

Offline dannyboi-ffc

  • Global Moderator
  • Gentleman Jim
  • *
  • Posts: 8680
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #7 on: May 19, 2017, 02:42:30 PM »
Every season we seem to sign these pointless random ones. Looking at it from a business perspective it could be a tactic to raise potential funds as I explain below (attempt to anyway)

It seems silly that LVC and Woodrow were allowed to go on loan when they look better options than the likes of Petsos and Cyriac. Yet the intentions for the latter pair has been clear, they were cheap options who were never going to be used unless we were forced to.

Why couldn't LVC and Woodrow do that then? Because neither have a future under Joka regardless and it made sense to send them out to a good little club like Burton to get some games under their belt and make their stock rise. Now we have potential buyers for the pair which will help with funding FFP.

Had LVC and Woodrow stayed we would have gained nothing long term, at least now by signing pointless petsos and Cyriac we've lost nothing but gained the opportunity to make money.

But the Petsos signing goes down in history along with the likes of Tavares and Fazlic as one of the most pointless ever made.

Runstrom anyone?

Tavares - who was he?  I suppose "it only takes a minute".  Sorry, I'll get my coat.

Before you get your coat please explain the joke lol.
Give us a follow @dannyboi_ffc        

Email- dannyboiffc@gmail.com

Supporting Fulham isn't about winning, it's about belonging

Offline Carborundum

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 918
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #8 on: May 19, 2017, 03:09:52 PM »
I will be really annoyed if LVC leaves, the potential is there to see. He was class 2 seasons ago and in the chances he got this season.
+1.  Produced the goods for Burton.  Put him alongside more talented teamates and he should thrive.  Why spend here when other areas require it more?


Offline nose

  • Gentleman Jim
  • ***
  • Posts: 5460
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #9 on: May 19, 2017, 03:31:48 PM »
 i think every team signs a few players that turn out to be not what was required.
Even I understand only a percentage of players will work out. It is only when they arrive and start training/playing you get a proper understanding of their work ethic and consistent capability.
I am sure joca will attempt to keep the best and dispose of what is surplus to requirment.

The other thing about the loans is whether getting players proper game time was seen as a good thing in terms of player development and maybe the returnees will be better placed to make a proper contribution to our first team.
Earl, Barrett and Conway: Tony Gale and Ivor: Saha, Hayles and Boa. Who's next?

Online cmg

  • Gentleman Jim
  • ***
  • Posts: 5392
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #10 on: May 19, 2017, 03:34:29 PM »
No manager or organization in the history of the game has had a 100% success rate in the transfer market. Our recruitment has been pretty good over the last 12 months.

Even with such a small squad as we have used this season, half a dozen players will not get in the match day group. If you buy better players then some of those who are at present 'first team choices' will find themselves out in the cold. It doesn't mean they are useless players or bad purchases. There will be a hierarchy of talent at every level of the game.

"They also serve who only stand and wait."

[Blimey. I think I've just agreed with what 'nose' has posted above. I'll have to go and have a lie down.]
« Last Edit: May 19, 2017, 03:36:49 PM by cmg »
Nothing was delivered

Offline Riversider

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1299
  • The Red Hand of Fulham
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #11 on: May 19, 2017, 03:44:22 PM »
You forgot to mention the most pointless salary in our entire squad, Ladies and Gentlemen I give you the one and thankfully only, Sean Kavanagh!!
So bad that even lower league clubs send him back to us and what's more he's got another year left on his contract !!!
Without doubt the luckiest player in English football, when we finally get shot of him he will head straight from The Championship to the likes of Woking or Dover or maybe even the league below,
Who the hell at our club thought it would be a good move to give him a 5 year contract .


Offline Luka

  • tjl
  • *
  • Posts: 180
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #12 on: May 19, 2017, 03:47:53 PM »
Every season we seem to sign these pointless random ones. Looking at it from a business perspective it could be a tactic to raise potential funds as I explain below (attempt to anyway)

It seems silly that LVC and Woodrow were allowed to go on loan when they look better options than the likes of Petsos and Cyriac. Yet the intentions for the latter pair has been clear, they were cheap options who were never going to be used unless we were forced to.

Why couldn't LVC and Woodrow do that then? Because neither have a future under Joka regardless and it made sense to send them out to a good little club like Burton to get some games under their belt and make their stock rise. Now we have potential buyers for the pair which will help with funding FFP.

Had LVC and Woodrow stayed we would have gained nothing long term, at least now by signing pointless petsos and Cyriac we've lost nothing but gained the opportunity to make money.

But the Petsos signing goes down in history along with the likes of Tavares and Fazlic as one of the most pointless ever made.

Runstrom anyone?

Tavares - who was he?  I suppose "it only takes a minute".  Sorry, I'll get my coat.

Before you get your coat please explain the joke lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7_9Bjzf-_s

Offline Supermitch

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 973
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #13 on: May 19, 2017, 04:34:00 PM »
Every season we seem to sign these pointless random ones. Looking at it from a business perspective it could be a tactic to raise potential funds as I explain below (attempt to anyway)

It seems silly that LVC and Woodrow were allowed to go on loan when they look better options than the likes of Petsos and Cyriac. Yet the intentions for the latter pair has been clear, they were cheap options who were never going to be used unless we were forced to.

Why couldn't LVC and Woodrow do that then? Because neither have a future under Joka regardless and it made sense to send them out to a good little club like Burton to get some games under their belt and make their stock rise. Now we have potential buyers for the pair which will help with funding FFP.

Had LVC and Woodrow stayed we would have gained nothing long term, at least now by signing pointless petsos and Cyriac we've lost nothing but gained the opportunity to make money.

But the Petsos signing goes down in history along with the likes of Tavares and Fazlic as one of the most pointless ever made.

Runstrom anyone?

Tavares - who was he?  I suppose "it only takes a minute".  Sorry, I'll get my coat.

Before you get your coat please explain the joke lol.

Tavares were an American R&B band and one of their most well known tracks was "It only takes a minute".    I'm not sure who the Fulham Tavares was

Online filham

  • Gentleman Jim
  • ***
  • Posts: 5480
Re: Players who don't play
« Reply #14 on: May 19, 2017, 06:49:53 PM »
The hard fact of Fulham life is that we do not have a high success rate with our signings, with or without Stats Boy. Over last season we brought in fourteen new signings and now it is hard to say that any of the following were good enough for a promotion chasing Championship team :-

Jozobed
Petsos
Cyriac
Sigurdsson
Martin

I, along with Nigel Clough at Burton would judge that Woodrow and LVC are better than any of those, but somehow the powers that be think otherwise.
I really hope that this summer we can hang on to our leading players , Cairney in particular, because it is odds on that replacements will not all come up to scratch.