Parkinson plans more Syers talks at Bradford City (From Bradford Telegraph and Argus)

"there’s absolutely no problem between us. "

Thats why he's left him on the bench a man whos a dead cert for a start

Yeah Deadbeat you aint pulling the wool over our eyes

He has been really out of form since returning from injury and suspension and I really don't feel based on his recent performances that he currently deserves to start games. He needs to make it count when he comes off the bench and impress the management team but he can't seem to make it happen this season - he's even missed a few sitters late in games.

Hopefully next season (if he signs the new contract) after a full pre season and no disruption we will see him back to his best.

Why does Branno seem to get the blame for the 3rd goal.
He's been excellent over the last 6 games , win as a team lose as a team.

Sadly I think syers will not sign and that's his right.

The club brought the lad into pro-football and looked after him when he got injured.

Maybe this is a case of an agent causing mischief ?.

Syers hasn't been the same player after his injury. He has had a few chances and hasn't shown the form of last season. If he chooses to leave he may struggle to get another club. I think he should re-sign for City and get himself back into form before thinking of mOving On

so they are NOW going to sit down and tallk. Not sure what they are going to talk about as Pp and the fat controller have already said there is no more money on offer (apparently).

So from that stringent position what are they going to talk about if money cannot be discussed.?

Parhaps PP is going to offer him vice captaincy etc:BIG DEAL!!

I am one of Syers biggest fans like Jones I would like him to re-sign however since his injury I dont feel he is back to his best and like Flynn and Ramsden were after their injuries they were/are never the same player.

Mr Parkinson never mind, "my door is open to David" , virtually every City supporter hopes and prays that David's door is still open to you! Mr. P. you say you picked the best mid field since January to enable us to stay up, I believe that our squad had the capacity to be knocking on the door of the play offs, never mind that crawling over the finishing line that we had to suffer. The only thing that stopped us being a lot further up the table, was entirely down to Mr. P's tactics. Virtually every time Syers was brought onto the field of play, the tempo of the game rose and we became a threat. The One of the problems this season has been that when Mr. P. has finally decided to bring Syers on we have usually been chasing the game and David has usually only been given 15 mins to get into the match. I have kept my postings as positive as I possibly could, through this season in support of the team, although I have not understood many many footballing decisions that our manager has made. I have been hoping that the manager will have learned from mistakes made this season making him a better one in 2012 2013. However all this re the hanling of David Syers has left me wondering, if Mr. P. would truely reckognise a good player if he saw one. David Syers is better than any player that we could afford or hope to attract from division 2 or even div. . 1 If David is let go without any sign of fight to keep him from the powers that be at City then I'm afraid it is showing to all us loyal supporters the club's lack of real ambition for the future!

abou wrote:
"there’s absolutely no problem between us. " Thats why he's left him on the bench a man whos a dead cert for a start Yeah Deadbeat you aint pulling the wool over our eyes

For God's sake; PP (or whoever is City manager) gets criticised for a) tinkering b) not tinkering c) picking Syers over Jones d) picking Jones over Syers e) not sticking to by a winning team f) sticking by a winning team.

With the general intelligence level of posters on this site being at about Evostik Division One level (and that is being kind to some of you); perhaps supporting one of the Ossett teams would be more appropriate...

total90 wrote:
Mr Parkinson never mind, "my door is open to David" , virtually every City supporter hopes and prays that David's door is still open to you! Mr. P. you say you picked the best mid field since January to enable us to stay up, I believe that our squad had the capacity to be knocking on the door of the play offs, never mind that crawling over the finishing line that we had to suffer. The only thing that stopped us being a lot further up the table, was entirely down to Mr. P's tactics. Virtually every time Syers was brought onto the field of play, the tempo of the game rose and we became a threat. The One of the problems this season has been that when Mr. P. has finally decided to bring Syers on we have usually been chasing the game and David has usually only been given 15 mins to get into the match. I have kept my postings as positive as I possibly could, through this season in support of the team, although I have not understood many many footballing decisions that our manager has made. I have been hoping that the manager will have learned from mistakes made this season making him a better one in 2012 2013. However all this re the hanling of David Syers has left me wondering, if Mr. P. would truely reckognise a good player if he saw one. David Syers is better than any player that we could afford or hope to attract from division 2 or even div. . 1 If David is let go without any sign of fight to keep him from the powers that be at City then I'm afraid it is showing to all us loyal supporters the club's lack of real ambition for the future!

Total90; you have indeed been positive when the club needed it most. It is sad that the club seems to be so poor at PR but the nature of football these days is that it is discussed on social media networks 24 hours a day and too many people are demanding instant answers to everything. The club should learn not to discuss anything until it is worth discussing i.e. Flynn and Fagan are leaving - this needs reporting. Syers position is not yet confirmed so it would make sense to make no comment. The games that are being played by clubs, players and agents are just that; games. The player wants the best deal possible for him and the club wants the same. The club will offer Syers the deal that they think is worthwhile and Syers will choose whether to accept it or not. The club must operate in a financially viable way but should also try and keep players of the calibre of Syers. However, if they don't come to a mutually agreeable deal then PP will be looking elsewhere for players. Please don't confuse not paying more than is viable for a lack of ambition; there is a short supply of cash and the club has to look beyond one player; even if the fans do want him to stay.

Morning Knightmccall. I am with you on the genneral line of your posting. I do appreciate that the coffers are finite and that is why I am urging the club to do their best to keep Syers. In letting him go, if that eventually happens, I feel it is sending out entirely the wrong message. I really do think it has the capacity to affect season ticket sale and thus further negatively affecting our capacity to attract quality players for next season. Syers is a relatively young player and other posters earlier comparing his situation to other players coming back from injury such as Flynn and Ramsden is not comparing like with like. It is the fact that Syers represents all that is positive for the club, re recruiting, getting him for next to nothing and proving to be an undoubted talent , a man that could become part of the back bone of the team we are trying to build. . As a supporter I want to witness such an evolution. I don't want to have another season of 40 odd players wearing the Claret and Amber. Maybe I am old fashioned but I hate this modern arrangement which leaves you always asking through out a season , "is that player one of ours or is he on loan?". Thanks for responding by the way.

Well, at least nowadays the club doesn't have to worry about arranging benefits to long serving players, even 4th grade players need an agent to negotiate a pair of laces for them(at a price). an accountant and a love of a well paid sport should justify staying at a club, that and the ability to ask the boss for a pay-rise not demand through a third party.

The coffers may well be low but the continuing policy of bringing in loanees to cover positions we are already paying wages for hasn't helped the state of finances. I know some of the loanees have portions of their wages paid by parent clubs but it still means we have to pay our players, Rowe AND Atkinson as example of a player for a position we can cover with employee but use a loanee.

Plus this policy has helped us maintain a poor finishing position. Overhaul and rethink of that policy is a must.

I do find this article amusing yet misleading. As the report suggests, “The midfielder (Syers) has started only three games since January, when he rejected the offer of a new two-year deal. He came off the bench again at Cheltenham on Saturday for the last 15 minutes.”

Justification for the decision to bench a player, “Parkinson said: “I’ve just been picking the best team I can to stay in the division (had a choice of some 40 players). The midfield duo of Jones and Ravenhill have done very well together (because they have been given games).

Another statement, “We offered him a contract and he decided not to go ahead with it. That’s the player’s prerogative.” This suggests a reasonable contract? ML made comment, this was made when he was injured and he had some concerns?

First point - Players need games to get match fit, they need to build on their confidence, and coming on late in a game does not help. This situation is controlled by the manager PP.

Second point – A good manager gets the best out of is players/team a poor person blames his tools (Branston third goal). This season PP has shown contempt for those signed by others while favouring his selections. The manager can easily freeze players out of a squad. He also can make them look good by playing them in their natural position, or he can make them look less than average playing them out of position or by giving them a game plan to track another player?

Third point – Why would any person accept a contract which may be less than expected base on someone’s concerns at a time of injury, in this case ML? The lad hasn’t been given adequate chance to establish himself and prove is worth.

Let’s not forget the decision not to sign Benson based on ‘concerns’, he’s obviously crocked and unable to score goals.

This pattern immerged with Compton, wouldn’t sign a contract (reasonable offer), then PP spent all season trying to replace him, unsuccessfully.

Only thing to be certain of at City is the own goals scored by our illustrious leaders and the poor judgment of our manager. Why does he rest players at the start of a game, (above comment ‘I’ve just been picking the best team) and then bring them on to chase a result? Doesn’t this place additional pressure on that person who may try too hard and make mistakes? Why not start with your ‘best team’ then bring players off when they tire? Just a thought.

As for the Syers fluffed chances, at Crewe he was offside had he scored the goal wouldn’t have
counted.

I thought that City were building a team, rather than restarting each season?

Apologies in advance if this doesn’t come anywhere near the intellectual level expected by some posters.

Prisoner Cell Block A wrote:
The coffers may well be low but the continuing policy of bringing in loanees to cover positions we are already paying wages for hasn't helped the state of finances. I know some of the loanees have portions of their wages paid by parent clubs but it still means we have to pay our players, Rowe AND Atkinson as example of a player for a position we can cover with employee but use a loanee. Plus this policy has helped us maintain a poor finishing position. Overhaul and rethink of that policy is a must.

PCBA; I would love to know the ins and outs of the costs of loan players but totally agree that this is not a good long-term plan. Sometimes, the loan market can be used to secure players that are totally out of our wage range (i.e. Davies) and I am sure that it can also be a way of getting players for very little cost for a short-term period. However, it doesn't build any long-term value (i.e. no sell on fees). Would like to see the loan market used only when absolutely necessary or to secure a special player. Perhaps with a full pre-season at this disposal; PP will seek to build a team that we own and not need quite so many loanees.

PP hasn't offered Syers a contract, the board have.

The club have given him his chance in pro football, he had a great first season and we carried him the second.

None of us know the details of the new deal but I'd bet it was fair enough.

Blaming PP for not playing him when firstly he's been unavailable the majority of the time and lacking form and fitness for the remainder, hardly seems fair and then to finger point at PP because Syers hasn't signed the boards offer of a deal again seems ludicrous.

If the lad is holding out for bigger and better things, then don't blame the manager or chairmen - I'd question his loyalty or his agents' before I did that and if he's not too determined to stay, then we're probably better off without him.

I'm a big fan of Syers but if he doesn't want to stay there fair enough.
.
We don't need players who don't want to be at the club. I just hope his FIRST and ONLY suceessful season hasn't gone to his head. At the end of the day he still has lots to prove. I did hear a rumour 12 months ago that he had agreed to sign for Rangers this summer.....I wonder if their misfortunes/possible transfer embargo have caused problems????

Do you think we could swap deadbeat for Pep Guardiola?

tyker2 wrote:
so they are NOW going to sit down and tallk. Not sure what they are going to talk about as Pp and the fat controller have already said there is no more money on offer (apparently).

So from that stringent position what are they going to talk about if money cannot be discussed.?

Parhaps PP is going to offer him vice captaincy etc:BIG DEAL!!

I've heard that PP is thinking of doing a Classics degree and needs some advice on his application.Either that or maybe discussing Dave's options and encouraging him to stay and build a footy career.

What is the point of playin Davies on Saturday?

We can't afford him ; if Stoke dont want him he will be in Champ or Div 1, certainly not Div2.

We are preparing for 2012-13 now, play staff who might / will be here against Swindon.....
not Davies who will not be.

He may be good, but he is also a liability - 11 games missed out of being available for around 35. We cant risk a defender who is unavailable a third of the season for discipline reasons.

Question! Why all the slagging off of posters who are posting their opinions? (Not upto the required intellectual standards for some on here) Everyone has a right to post their opinions no matter what. Forget about what's printed in the T&A. That's just simple simon printing what he is told to print.

Village Bantam wrote:
PP hasn't offered Syers a contract, the board have.

The club have given him his chance in pro football, he had a great first season and we carried him the second.

None of us know the details of the new deal but I'd bet it was fair enough.

Blaming PP for not playing him when firstly he's been unavailable the majority of the time and lacking form and fitness for the remainder, hardly seems fair and then to finger point at PP because Syers hasn't signed the boards offer of a deal again seems ludicrous.

If the lad is holding out for bigger and better things, then don't blame the manager or chairmen - I'd question his loyalty or his agents' before I did that and if he's not too determined to stay, then we're probably better off without him.

You only 'know' he has been injured with a mystery back problem beause the club have said so. As wer know if a player is dropped it is 'bad form' for him to make any noise as to why, if a player had a back problem would you have him on the bench in near freezing conditions, January onwards,. getting stiffer and stiffer, if you have had back issues you will know this to be true, unlike the reports we get out of VP which we rarely 'know' are true and usually find at a later date that the actual 'facts' we were told are actually not facts at all but a game of smoke and mirrors to disguise real reasons.

Carry on unquestioning if you like, I prefer to stop and think about what I'm told before I swallow it whole.

If, as stated by Mr Lawn that the club have offered David Syers a new contract and he has turned it down and there is no new money to discuss, why are they having talks ???

parader no1 wrote:
If, as stated by Mr Lawn that the club have offered David Syers a new contract and he has turned it down and there is no new money to discuss, why are they having talks ???

parader, Lawn has invited them out for a beer so he can tell them all about what he had for lunch - as you well know, that's a lot to talk about.

parader no1 wrote:
If, as stated by Mr Lawn that the club have offered David Syers a new contract and he has turned it down and there is no new money to discuss, why are they having talks ???

Becasue sometimes it comes down to more important things then money.
.
How do we know what has been said between player and manager. Have PP and Sayers had a chat about the future plans? How he sees Syers fitting into his tactics? What he sees has Syers future? How the club can help him reach his potential? All sorts of things need to be discussed. If at the end of these talks they disagree then Syers goes his own way and tries to make it elsewhere. I think we are the perfect club for him at this time. Of course he needs to fight for his shirt becasue Ravenhill & Jones are quality players.....if he thinks he's above them because of one season then see ya later.

gspot01 wrote:

parader no1 wrote:
If, as stated by Mr Lawn that the club have offered David Syers a new contract and he has turned it down and there is no new money to discuss, why are they having talks ???

Becasue sometimes it comes down to more important things then money.
.
How do we know what has been said between player and manager. Have PP and Sayers had a chat about the future plans? How he sees Syers fitting into his tactics? What he sees has Syers future? How the club can help him reach his potential? All sorts of things need to be discussed. If at the end of these talks they disagree then Syers goes his own way and tries to make it elsewhere. I think we are the perfect club for him at this time. Of course he needs to fight for his shirt becasue Ravenhill & Jones are quality players.....if he thinks he's above them because of one season then see ya later.

A thinker. I agree gspot.

I like Syers but if he thinks he's bigger and better than City, that's his choice. Also, why would he be picked ahead of Jones and Ravenhill? Both have been excellent and should be the spine of the team to build around for next season. Rather than blame the club and PP why is no-one blaming the greedy, avaricious agents who are blighting this sport and crippling clubs with their demands for more money? It happened with Compton, it's happening with Syers. It happened with Colbeck and OB. For what? The sake of a few extra pounds? Clubs need to agree in unison that they will not negotiate with any player who has one. Surely as a union, the PFA should be negotiating on behalf of its members instead of these capitalist scum agents?

huggy b wrote:
I like Syers but if he thinks he's bigger and better than City, that's his choice. Also, why would he be picked ahead of Jones and Ravenhill? Both have been excellent and should be the spine of the team to build around for next season. Rather than blame the club and PP why is no-one blaming the greedy, avaricious agents who are blighting this sport and crippling clubs with their demands for more money? It happened with Compton, it's happening with Syers. It happened with Colbeck and OB. For what? The sake of a few extra pounds? Clubs need to agree in unison that they will not negotiate with any player who has one. Surely as a union, the PFA should be negotiating on behalf of its members instead of these capitalist scum agents?

I don't think Syers necessarily thinks he's bigger than the club. Nobody knows what he's been offered. It could even be less than he's on now.

Like you, I'm a fan of Syers but agree it would have been difficult to drop Jones or Ravenhill, given their partnership. I am a big fan of Jones, who looks a class act to me.

I very much agree with your comment re agents in general and the greed they've created in football. Sadly, we'll never get clubs to agree with anything in unison.

Pablo wrote:

huggy b wrote:
I like Syers but if he thinks he's bigger and better than City, that's his choice. Also, why would he be picked ahead of Jones and Ravenhill? Both have been excellent and should be the spine of the team to build around for next season. Rather than blame the club and PP why is no-one blaming the greedy, avaricious agents who are blighting this sport and crippling clubs with their demands for more money? It happened with Compton, it's happening with Syers. It happened with Colbeck and OB. For what? The sake of a few extra pounds? Clubs need to agree in unison that they will not negotiate with any player who has one. Surely as a union, the PFA should be negotiating on behalf of its members instead of these capitalist scum agents?

I don't think Syers necessarily thinks he's bigger than the club. Nobody knows what he's been offered. It could even be less than he's on now.

Like you, I'm a fan of Syers but agree it would have been difficult to drop Jones or Ravenhill, given their partnership. I am a big fan of Jones, who looks a class act to me.

I very much agree with your comment re agents in general and the greed they've created in football. Sadly, we'll never get clubs to agree with anything in unison.

True, and Syers may yet sign for the club so unfair for me to prejudge. The agent was subtly mentioned this week by Lawn and PP so I think Syers is probably being influenced. I think the agents have a damaging influence to players at this level. For what can only be a few extra quid. Colbeck, for example, refused to sign a contract and went on a week to week then went to Oldham. It didn't work and he's now facing relegation from league football with Hereford. Although I was never a big fan of Colbeck, he would have been better off staying at City where he would have still got games rather than listen to a greedy agent who was thinking of his 10% and not the lads' future. He stagnated at Oldham and has looked nothing like the player he was (and that wasn't brilliant!) when he has played against us in the last couple of years. I hope the same doesn't happen to Syers.

Meat Pie wrote:
Do you think we could swap deadbeat for Pep Guardiola?

And how long would you give Guardiola before you started slagging him off?

huggy b wrote:

Pablo wrote:

huggy b wrote: I like Syers but if he thinks he's bigger and better than City, that's his choice. Also, why would he be picked ahead of Jones and Ravenhill? Both have been excellent and should be the spine of the team to build around for next season. Rather than blame the club and PP why is no-one blaming the greedy, avaricious agents who are blighting this sport and crippling clubs with their demands for more money? It happened with Compton, it's happening with Syers. It happened with Colbeck and OB. For what? The sake of a few extra pounds? Clubs need to agree in unison that they will not negotiate with any player who has one. Surely as a union, the PFA should be negotiating on behalf of its members instead of these capitalist scum agents?

I don't think Syers necessarily thinks he's bigger than the club. Nobody knows what he's been offered. It could even be less than he's on now. Like you, I'm a fan of Syers but agree it would have been difficult to drop Jones or Ravenhill, given their partnership. I am a big fan of Jones, who looks a class act to me. I very much agree with your comment re agents in general and the greed they've created in football. Sadly, we'll never get clubs to agree with anything in unison.

True, and Syers may yet sign for the club so unfair for me to prejudge. The agent was subtly mentioned this week by Lawn and PP so I think Syers is probably being influenced. I think the agents have a damaging influence to players at this level. For what can only be a few extra quid. Colbeck, for example, refused to sign a contract and went on a week to week then went to Oldham. It didn't work and he's now facing relegation from league football with Hereford. Although I was never a big fan of Colbeck, he would have been better off staying at City where he would have still got games rather than listen to a greedy agent who was thinking of his 10% and not the lads' future. He stagnated at Oldham and has looked nothing like the player he was (and that wasn't brilliant!) when he has played against us in the last couple of years. I hope the same doesn't happen to Syers.

I think Syers is intelligent enough to know what is best for him. I also don't think he has any of the mental frailty that Colbeck showed (although Syers seems to be widely supported by the fans whereas Colbeck had to endure his own fans barracking him).

prince35 wrote:
Why does Branno seem to get the blame for the 3rd goal. He's been excellent over the last 6 games , win as a team lose as a team. Sadly I think syers will not sign and that's his right. The club brought the lad into pro-football and looked after him when he got injured. Maybe this is a case of an agent causing mischief ?.

Dear Mr Syers, I believe you are a gifted footballer, i enjoy watching you, you have giftings that others in your team dont have, yet your manager believes you are not up to "scratch". Please think before you sign your contract offer: Will U be a "bit player" or will U be (as U should be) part of the key to the future success. I dont think your manager can bring success to this club, and i have said so, so think-if U are not regularly going to be in the starting 11, then why sign, U are too good to be on the bench.....Mr Lawn, i dont need your advice, i do think before i write, perhaps U could explain to me what SUCCESS U have brought to this club so far?...thought so!!!

KnightMcCall wrote:

huggy b wrote:

Pablo wrote:

huggy b wrote: I like Syers but if he thinks he's bigger and better than City, that's his choice. Also, why would he be picked ahead of Jones and Ravenhill? Both have been excellent and should be the spine of the team to build around for next season. Rather than blame the club and PP why is no-one blaming the greedy, avaricious agents who are blighting this sport and crippling clubs with their demands for more money? It happened with Compton, it's happening with Syers. It happened with Colbeck and OB. For what? The sake of a few extra pounds? Clubs need to agree in unison that they will not negotiate with any player who has one. Surely as a union, the PFA should be negotiating on behalf of its members instead of these capitalist scum agents?

I don't think Syers necessarily thinks he's bigger than the club. Nobody knows what he's been offered. It could even be less than he's on now. Like you, I'm a fan of Syers but agree it would have been difficult to drop Jones or Ravenhill, given their partnership. I am a big fan of Jones, who looks a class act to me. I very much agree with your comment re agents in general and the greed they've created in football. Sadly, we'll never get clubs to agree with anything in unison.

True, and Syers may yet sign for the club so unfair for me to prejudge. The agent was subtly mentioned this week by Lawn and PP so I think Syers is probably being influenced. I think the agents have a damaging influence to players at this level. For what can only be a few extra quid. Colbeck, for example, refused to sign a contract and went on a week to week then went to Oldham. It didn't work and he's now facing relegation from league football with Hereford. Although I was never a big fan of Colbeck, he would have been better off staying at City where he would have still got games rather than listen to a greedy agent who was thinking of his 10% and not the lads' future. He stagnated at Oldham and has looked nothing like the player he was (and that wasn't brilliant!) when he has played against us in the last couple of years. I hope the same doesn't happen to Syers.

I think Syers is intelligent enough to know what is best for him. I also don't think he has any of the mental frailty that Colbeck showed (although Syers seems to be widely supported by the fans whereas Colbeck had to endure his own fans barracking him).

i heard Colbeck was on peanuts at city.....someone told me 450 quid a week. (sounds alot to some but int compared to others) Like alot of rumours this maybe rubbish but he was definately not an high earner. Thus you can't blame him if he gets offered more elsewhere. Hindsight is wonderful too.....

As for Syers. he is at a stage of career that is vital for him. He was been talked about prior to his injury versus l**ds and had that not happened he may have been able to play at an higher division club on higher wages etc. You can very easily get stuck in the lower leagues even if you are good enough to play higher i believe. Clubs look at your history etc and may not take the 'punt'. You can't blame Syers for wanting whats best for him and family.

We also don't know the terms. Its okay to hear Lawn say they were good but compared to what? This is the same guy who promised entertainment last season and judged a side after 6 games etc only to find ourselves in the same position at the end of it. Simarlarly we don't know what Compton or any of the other guys were offered.

I hope this gets sorted, as well as a longer one for Wells. In the latters case if he carries on how he is currently then he could very likely be gone by Christmas as city will need to cash in before he goes on a free. What we need is a settled side.

Im also wondering how (IF) players who don't sign contracts sit on the bench whilst loans who are never going to sign e.g. Davies are played?

I actually agree that if there is a chance that Syers wasn't going to be here next year then we must play players that will be. But its double standards to play loans that aren't our players in the first place in many respects.

It all adds up to uncertainty and this is leading to a dramatic fall in season tickets, even greater perhaps than i have suggested in the past. Out of 5 regulars who attended this year with season tickets. Two (one been me) are renewing, one is opting for the flexi, another not yet decided and one definately not. If this sort of thing is replicated then it doesn't bode to well.

Instaed of goading the supporters lawn should be looking at where some of his decisions are losing these fans. Same with parky. They've had 11 years of little excitement and particularly the season past and Taylor will have tested everyones loyalty.

Sometimes been loyal is also been stupid......

How can PP make the comment that he has been picking the best sdie to stay in the division?

Wasn't Jones not even on the bench untill recently?

Wasn't that same player in and out of the side all season?

Wasn't Jones even forced to play wide-right so we could accomodate an inexperienced one month loanee in Reed?

And thats just Jones. Lets not forget how others have been treated. How our own players have been forced out to be replaced by loans and/or trialists.

Indeed the whole statement falls somewhat when your consider that over 40 players were used in this picking the "best side" possible to stay-up. Its rubbish and actually indicative of a manager not knowing his best side, not getting the "best" out of what we already have/had. If Kozluc and Atkinson are what we can expect next year then what they have offered thus far means another problematic season focused on no over-lapping, taking players on, crossing the ball but plenty of narrow,sitting deep, hopeful punts and non-creative fare.

Whilst i hope we can add to the squad and prevent this and lets be fair there are gonna be around 500 players (according to Lawn) without contracts and thus plenty of options available.

I nearly forgot Bully playing up front with actual forwards sat on the bench as part of Parky's choosing " the best team" to stay-up ;-)......

KnightMcCall wrote:

Meat Pie wrote:
Do you think we could swap deadbeat for Pep Guardiola?

And how long would you give Guardiola before you started slagging him off?

Judging on previous years, it's normally about 3 games in when the self-styled sensible supporters start claiming that we need to give it 10 games, then see where we are.

prince35 wrote:
Why does Branno seem to get the blame for the 3rd goal.
He's been excellent over the last 6 games , win as a team lose as a team.

Sadly I think syers will not sign and that's his right.

The club brought the lad into pro-football and looked after him when he got injured.

Maybe this is a case of an agent causing mischief ?.

Because it was his fault....
He left it, just let it go over him. Doesnt matter whether we lose or if he has been on good form. A mistake is still a mistake.

As for Syers, has has been poor. Simple as.
He has had a lot of injuries and isnt going to be first choice. So they have offered him a deal they think is fitting of that.

Syers hasn't exactly been poor and especially if you stand his performance/time on the pitch up against the rest of the squad. He hasn't lived up to last season's promise but a knee injury in the 2nd/3rd match of the season really put paid to him having a flyer this year and it is well known that 2nd year pros usually struggle to hit the same heights as the first year, ask Jimmy.

On the subject of ask Jimmy, why was he given an extended and increased deal by the club when missing for much of his second season with a back injury? This all smacks of game playing again by those behind the scenes I'm afraid. Game playing which they have applied to Nahki's contract also and there is a good chance that the poor offer he has received will see him startingin someone else's coulours next season with us being happy at £25 and a couple of yo-yos if he scores half a dozen goals for his new club.

dannbradfc wrote:
How can PP make the comment that he has been picking the best sdie to stay in the division?

Wasn't Jones not even on the bench untill recently?

Wasn't that same player in and out of the side all season?

Wasn't Jones even forced to play wide-right so we could accomodate an inexperienced one month loanee in Reed?

And thats just Jones. Lets not forget how others have been treated. How our own players have been forced out to be replaced by loans and/or trialists.

Indeed the whole statement falls somewhat when your consider that over 40 players were used in this picking the "best side" possible to stay-up. Its rubbish and actually indicative of a manager not knowing his best side, not getting the "best" out of what we already have/had. If Kozluc and Atkinson are what we can expect next year then what they have offered thus far means another problematic season focused on no over-lapping, taking players on, crossing the ball but plenty of narrow,sitting deep, hopeful punts and non-creative fare.

Whilst i hope we can add to the squad and prevent this and lets be fair there are gonna be around 500 players (according to Lawn) without contracts and thus plenty of options available.

Dann, I have just read all the previous posts, which took some time, but finally got to one that hits the nail on the head. As I was reading, I was considering what to type myself, but your post said it before I got the chance.
.
Firstly, Syers joined City from non-league football after being awarded a lengthy trial. It was a 1 year deal with an option (for the club) to extend it. Now, ask yourselves this, do we really think he came to City on big bucks? We took the option last year to tie him down for another (on same terms), as we have just done with Wells. The difference being that with Wells, we have looked to improve his deal straight away, whereas with Syers we never.
.
Now, the club claim they have made a good deal to Syers, based on his struggles since injury. But what does that actually mean? Is it likely that he is still being offered low money and we expect him to just accept it? those that claim Syers is being greedy need to learn the facts before they shout their mouths off. Nobody actually knows what he has been offered and whether it is reasonable or not. We don't know this has anything to do with his agent.
.
As for Syers being 'poor' or not as good since injury, I provided some stats on this at the weekend. He came back from injury at the end of December. He hasn't had chance to play more than 2 consecutive games since.
.
Syers came back from his inital injury and won back his place straight away. He was then red carded but still started the next game. He then obviously missed 3 games through suspension, but was back before the end of January.
.
Then we had the contract offer and Syers has hardly started since. So, he was deemed 'good enough' and 'a key player' before turning down the contract but not anymore? What a pile of 5H1T Parkinson.
.
For the record, what is your best team then? Since Syers' return, you have partnered, Jones & Flynn, Jones & Ravenhill, Jones & Bully, Bully & Ravenhill, Flynn & Ravenhill. The only pairing I don't remember seeing Flynn with Bully of late. The main absenteeism from those midfield pairings is Syers......!