Arfield and Gudmundsson

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Post Reply
IndigoLake
Been Liked: 1 time
Has Liked: 833 times

Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by IndigoLake » Sat Jan 07, 2017 4:29 pm

Will their injuries today encourage us to get some deals over the line a bit earlier? Easier said than done, I know.

Tribesmen
Posts: 5086
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 11:15 am
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 637 times
Location: Tibet

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by Tribesmen » Sat Jan 07, 2017 4:30 pm

Wait and see , lets not get too upset just yet please .

bobinho
Posts: 9308
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:48 pm
Been Liked: 4097 times
Has Liked: 6573 times
Location: Burnley

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by bobinho » Sat Jan 07, 2017 4:33 pm

Can't see anyone getting upset.

West Ham being reported as having a £3m bid in for snoddy. I know we can't see the likes of West Ham off in a bidding war, but aren't we all being told that the £10m we paid for hendrick is the going rate for that type of midfielder?

NRC
Posts: 4288
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:58 pm
Been Liked: 908 times
Has Liked: 107 times
Location: Containment Area for Relocated Yankees, NC

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by NRC » Sat Jan 07, 2017 4:52 pm

3m for Snodgrass is in keeping with a bid we would have put in

mkmel
Posts: 5763
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 11:37 pm
Been Liked: 1270 times
Has Liked: 2247 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by mkmel » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:01 pm

Neither injuries sounded too good

Sidney1st
Posts: 15478
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:40 pm
Been Liked: 3548 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: Oxfordshire

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by Sidney1st » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:01 pm

£3million would be the first of half a dozen bids from us, resulting in our final bid of £3.5million.
This user liked this post: bobinho

bobinho
Posts: 9308
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:48 pm
Been Liked: 4097 times
Has Liked: 6573 times
Location: Burnley

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by bobinho » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:04 pm

NRC wrote:3m for Snodgrass is in keeping with a bid we would have put in
I would imagine it is.

Hypothetically, would you swap hendrick for snodgrass?

I suppose the point im making is there doesn't really seem to be any parity in players values/players quality.

scouseclaret
Posts: 2602
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 7:29 pm
Been Liked: 858 times
Has Liked: 265 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by scouseclaret » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:13 pm

I'd trade Hendrick for snodgrass all day long, but (without knowing his contract situation) if West Ham get him for £3m I'll show my arse in Burton's window.

Spijed
Posts: 17122
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2895 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by Spijed » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:18 pm

From Chris Boden's twitter:

"SD hopes Gudmundsson and Arfield are "minor" hamstrings. Flanagan (knee) and Boyd slight niggle. Bamford ill"

boatshed bill
Posts: 15236
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3156 times
Has Liked: 6744 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by boatshed bill » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:22 pm

Spijed wrote:From Chris Boden's twitter:

"SD hopes Gudmundsson and Arfield are "minor" hamstrings. Flanagan (knee) and Boyd slight niggle. Bamford ill"
Bamford ill??
Are we really going to keep him for the season? Waste of a squad place, though not much he can do about it himself.

randomclaret2
Posts: 6902
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
Been Liked: 2758 times
Has Liked: 4325 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by randomclaret2 » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:25 pm

Bamford has a touch of thirtygrandaweekfordoingnothingitis apparently. Can be quite debilitating long term.
This user liked this post: Cubanclaret

claretspice
Posts: 5724
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
Been Liked: 2829 times
Has Liked: 141 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by claretspice » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:28 pm

Gudmundsson's hamstring is becoming a cause for concern. Twice now.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9905
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2350 times
Has Liked: 3178 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by Paul Waine » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:31 pm

Sidney1st wrote:£3million would be the first of half a dozen bids from us, resulting in our final bid of £3.5million.
Haven't West Ham followed this approach with their bids for Defoe?

Sean will sort it.

UTC

kentonclaret
Posts: 6507
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:06 pm
Been Liked: 977 times
Has Liked: 204 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by kentonclaret » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:33 pm

Cannot for the life of me understand why we took Bamford on loan in the first place. Failed to get any real game time at Crystal Palace and the loan arrangement was terminated early and he returned to Chelsea complaining that the experience had been "terrible" just sitting on the bench and never being asked to play. Failed to make any impression whilst on loan at Norwich and was described by the Daily Telegraph as a "lame duck" and not up to PL standard. Experience at Burnley will be similar to what the player went through at Palace.
This user liked this post: joey13

Paul Waine
Posts: 9905
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2350 times
Has Liked: 3178 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by Paul Waine » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:34 pm

boatshed bill wrote:Bamford ill??
Are we really going to keep him for the season? Waste of a squad place, though not much he can do about it himself.
Bamford's illness is "cuptiedavoidance" I'm guessing.

Aren't the papers saying that Bamford will be recalled by Chelsea then moved to Boro?

If so, we have space for a new loanee.

UTC
This user liked this post: jedi_master

fidelcastro
Posts: 7340
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 8:45 pm
Been Liked: 2218 times
Has Liked: 2207 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by fidelcastro » Sat Jan 07, 2017 8:43 pm

I don't know what the big issue is. Bamford was only signed as cover for Gray's suspension in any case.

Will he go back? Who knows? I suppose it depends on whether we have other striker targets or not.

Big_Ears_BFC
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:08 pm
Been Liked: 28 times
Has Liked: 103 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by Big_Ears_BFC » Sat Jan 07, 2017 8:51 pm

fidelcastro wrote:I don't know what the big issue is. Bamford was only signed as cover for Gray's suspension in any case.

Will he go back? Who knows? I suppose it depends on whether we have other striker targets or not.
The issue is he is crap and a waste of a loan.

fidelcastro
Posts: 7340
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 8:45 pm
Been Liked: 2218 times
Has Liked: 2207 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by fidelcastro » Sat Jan 07, 2017 8:56 pm

Big_Ears_BFC wrote:The issue is he is crap and a waste of a loan.
Not sure how you know that he's crap when he's hardly featured, unless you think the reason why he's hardly featured is because he's crap?

I doubt you saw many of our strikers in the old division four days if you really do think he's crap! :(

What's the best word for worse than crap, if Bamford is crap? ;)
Last edited by fidelcastro on Sat Jan 07, 2017 8:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

boatshed bill
Posts: 15236
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3156 times
Has Liked: 6744 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by boatshed bill » Sat Jan 07, 2017 8:57 pm

Big_Ears_BFC wrote:The issue is he is crap and a waste of a loan.
It would be hard to prove that he's crap, Big Ears, where's the evidence?

Big_Ears_BFC
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:08 pm
Been Liked: 28 times
Has Liked: 103 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by Big_Ears_BFC » Sat Jan 07, 2017 9:06 pm

You prove to me and show me the evidence that he is worth a place in our squad. He has done sod all apart from his loan at boro.

Dark Cloud
Posts: 6642
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
Been Liked: 2004 times
Has Liked: 3339 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by Dark Cloud » Sat Jan 07, 2017 9:10 pm

I would suggest none of us in in a position to say Bamford is crap given how little we've seen of him. I for one wish we'd seen rather more of him so that we could actually form a proper opinion, but what we can say is that SD is probably the best judge about his abilities and he really doesn't seem to rate him enough to give him much time on the field. What I would also say is a shame is that assuming his illness is genuine AND that Chelsea had no issue with him playing, it's probably robbed him of a starting place today which would have been good for us and for him.

HiroshimaClaret
Posts: 3221
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:23 pm
Been Liked: 746 times
Has Liked: 927 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by HiroshimaClaret » Sun Jan 08, 2017 2:40 am

kentonclaret wrote:Cannot for the life of me understand why we took Bamford on loan in the first place. Failed to get any real game time at Crystal Palace and the loan arrangement was terminated early and he returned to Chelsea complaining that the experience had been "terrible" just sitting on the bench and never being asked to play. Failed to make any impression whilst on loan at Norwich and was described by the Daily Telegraph as a "lame duck" and not up to PL standard. Experience at Burnley will be similar to what the player went through at Palace.
Could NOT agree more. It smacked utterly of simply making up the numbers. Never a Dyche type player in a million years. Apart from being paid handsomely, I feel sorry for Bamford...utter waste of time for him. He was NEVER going to get game time.

dermotdermot
Posts: 3484
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 660 times
Has Liked: 205 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by dermotdermot » Sun Jan 08, 2017 2:59 am

A thread about injuries turns into a tirade on Bamford who has hardly been given a chance to do anything. How many minutes of injury time has he been given?

dsr
Posts: 15225
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4576 times
Has Liked: 2264 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by dsr » Sun Jan 08, 2017 3:05 am

I can't imagine anyone would say we didn't need to sign another forward when Vokes was the only one available. The only problem is that Bamford evidently isn't good enough in the managerr's opinion.

Claret Till I Die
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 8:31 am
Been Liked: 1141 times
Has Liked: 1618 times
Location: Worsthorne

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by Claret Till I Die » Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:03 am

Ability or attitude ? One of them will give you the reason

KRBFC
Posts: 18104
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3800 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by KRBFC » Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:37 am

fidelcastro wrote:I don't know what the big issue is. Bamford was only signed as cover for Gray's suspension in any case.

Will he go back? Who knows? I suppose it depends on whether we have other striker targets or not.
I don't think we can just send him back, Chelsea would have to re-call him.

KRBFC
Posts: 18104
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3800 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by KRBFC » Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:45 am

Bit of a dickish move from Dyche by taking him on loan and not giving him a sniff at all, the young lad is trying to develop and could have gone elsewhere and got regular games, he came here and hasn't been given a sniff. He's certainly worthy of a chance too, he's proven himself to be a top level Championship player. Top level Championship players aren't always good enough for the PL but you never know until you actually give them more than 30 seconds at the end of a game. The lads career is being wasted playing for our development squad, either give him a chance or send him back, for his sake.

joey13
Posts: 7505
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 1767 times
Has Liked: 1230 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by joey13 » Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:21 am

Dark Cloud wrote:I would suggest none of us in in a position to say Bamford is crap given how little we've seen of him. I for one wish we'd seen rather more of him so that we could actually form a proper opinion, but what we can say is that SD is probably the best judge about his abilities and he really doesn't seem to rate him enough to give him much time on the field. What I would also say is a shame is that assuming his illness is genuine AND that Chelsea had no issue with him playing, it's probably robbed him of a starting place today which would have been good for us and for him.
So you ignore what he has done for the last two seasons at other clubs , complete waste of a loan .

HiroshimaClaret
Posts: 3221
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:23 pm
Been Liked: 746 times
Has Liked: 927 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by HiroshimaClaret » Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:21 am

KRBFC wrote:Bit of a dickish move from Dyche by taking him on loan and not giving him a sniff at all, the young lad is trying to develop and could have gone elsewhere and got regular games, he came here and hasn't been given a sniff. He's certainly worthy of a chance too, he's proven himself to be a top level Championship player. Top level Championship players aren't always good enough for the PL but you never know until you actually give them more than 30 seconds at the end of a game. The lads career is being wasted playing for our development squad, either give him a chance or send him back, for his sake.


Dickish is wrong but find it hard to disagree with the rest.

Steve-Harpers-perm
Posts: 5789
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
Been Liked: 1883 times
Has Liked: 840 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by Steve-Harpers-perm » Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:53 am

HiroshimaClaret wrote:

Dickish is wrong but find it hard to disagree with the rest.
Has he really proven himself to be a 'top level championship player'?

He's had one good season Michael Ricketts and Marvin Sordell managed that! I'd trust Dyche and the rest of the coaching staff who see him on a daily basis.
This user liked this post: Sonic

HiroshimaClaret
Posts: 3221
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:23 pm
Been Liked: 746 times
Has Liked: 927 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by HiroshimaClaret » Sun Jan 08, 2017 10:03 am

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote:Has he really proven himself to be a 'top level championship player'?

He's had one good season Michael Ricketts and Marvin Sordell managed that! I'd trust Dyche and the rest of the coaching staff who see him on a daily basis.
One season is the nature of the beast in football. Didn`t Ings do the same (not comparing the two AT ALL)?

jrgbfc
Posts: 8499
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:30 pm
Been Liked: 2106 times
Has Liked: 337 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by jrgbfc » Sun Jan 08, 2017 10:45 am

Just because Dyche doesn't rate him doesn't mean he not up to it. He didn't rate Stanislas either and he's gone on to prove himself a comfortable Premiership player.

claretblue
Posts: 6418
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:36 pm
Been Liked: 1835 times
Has Liked: 962 times
Location: cloud 9 since Dyche appointed

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by claretblue » Sun Jan 08, 2017 11:58 am

Stanislas was offered contract to stay with us for last premiership season!
Junior chose to leave (probably) to ensure increased game time

Steve-Harpers-perm
Posts: 5789
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
Been Liked: 1883 times
Has Liked: 840 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by Steve-Harpers-perm » Sun Jan 08, 2017 1:01 pm

[quote="jrgbfc"]Just because Dyche doesn't rate him doesn't mean he not up to it. He didn't rate Stanislas either and he's gone on to prove himself a comfortable Premiership player.[/quote

As above he offered Stanislas a new deal which would suggest he did actually rate him.

jrgbfc
Posts: 8499
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:30 pm
Been Liked: 2106 times
Has Liked: 337 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by jrgbfc » Sun Jan 08, 2017 2:08 pm

We offered him a new deal but it was blatantly obvious he wouldn't get much football. He only really played in the promotion season when Dyche didn't really have a choice.

Spijed
Posts: 17122
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2895 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by Spijed » Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:11 pm

Any news on their injuries?

HendricksHair
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 11:20 pm
Been Liked: 104 times
Has Liked: 67 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by HendricksHair » Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:01 pm

HiroshimaClaret wrote:One season is the nature of the beast in football. Didn`t Ings do the same (not comparing the two AT ALL)?
in fairness Ings did well in a relegated side in 14/15 and was playing well for Liverpool before his injury

HiroshimaClaret
Posts: 3221
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:23 pm
Been Liked: 746 times
Has Liked: 927 times

Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson

Post by HiroshimaClaret » Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:02 pm

HendricksHair wrote:in fairness Ings did well in a relegated side in 14/15 and was playing well for Liverpool before his injury
You`re right of course. Just threw Ings in there as an example. Not comparing the two - have seen nothing of Bamford for the clarets whilst Ings was magnificent for us.

Post Reply