Arfield and Gudmundsson
-
- Been Liked: 1 time
- Has Liked: 833 times
Arfield and Gudmundsson
Will their injuries today encourage us to get some deals over the line a bit earlier? Easier said than done, I know.
-
- Posts: 5086
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 11:15 am
- Been Liked: 1180 times
- Has Liked: 637 times
- Location: Tibet
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
Wait and see , lets not get too upset just yet please .
-
- Posts: 9308
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:48 pm
- Been Liked: 4097 times
- Has Liked: 6573 times
- Location: Burnley
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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?
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?
-
- 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
3m for Snodgrass is in keeping with a bid we would have put in
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
Neither injuries sounded too good
-
- Posts: 15478
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:40 pm
- Been Liked: 3548 times
- Has Liked: 5594 times
- Location: Oxfordshire
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
£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
-
- Posts: 9308
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:48 pm
- Been Liked: 4097 times
- Has Liked: 6573 times
- Location: Burnley
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
I would imagine it is.NRC wrote:3m for Snodgrass is in keeping with a bid we would have put in
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.
-
- Posts: 2601
- Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 7:29 pm
- Been Liked: 858 times
- Has Liked: 265 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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.
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
From Chris Boden's twitter:
"SD hopes Gudmundsson and Arfield are "minor" hamstrings. Flanagan (knee) and Boyd slight niggle. Bamford ill"
"SD hopes Gudmundsson and Arfield are "minor" hamstrings. Flanagan (knee) and Boyd slight niggle. Bamford ill"
-
- Posts: 15234
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3156 times
- Has Liked: 6743 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
Bamford ill??Spijed wrote:From Chris Boden's twitter:
"SD hopes Gudmundsson and Arfield are "minor" hamstrings. Flanagan (knee) and Boyd slight niggle. 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.
-
- Posts: 6902
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
- Been Liked: 2758 times
- Has Liked: 4325 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
Bamford has a touch of thirtygrandaweekfordoingnothingitis apparently. Can be quite debilitating long term.
This user liked this post: Cubanclaret
-
- Posts: 5724
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
- Been Liked: 2829 times
- Has Liked: 141 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
Gudmundsson's hamstring is becoming a cause for concern. Twice now.
-
- Posts: 9905
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
- Been Liked: 2350 times
- Has Liked: 3178 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
Haven't West Ham followed this approach with their bids for Defoe?Sidney1st wrote:£3million would be the first of half a dozen bids from us, resulting in our final bid of £3.5million.
Sean will sort it.
UTC
-
- Posts: 6507
- Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:06 pm
- Been Liked: 977 times
- Has Liked: 204 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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
-
- Posts: 9905
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
- Been Liked: 2350 times
- Has Liked: 3178 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
Bamford's illness is "cuptiedavoidance" I'm guessing.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.
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
-
- Posts: 7339
- Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 8:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2218 times
- Has Liked: 2207 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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.
Will he go back? Who knows? I suppose it depends on whether we have other striker targets or not.
-
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:08 pm
- Been Liked: 28 times
- Has Liked: 103 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
The issue is he is crap and a waste of a loan.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.
-
- Posts: 7339
- Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 8:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2218 times
- Has Liked: 2207 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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?Big_Ears_BFC wrote:The issue is he is crap and a waste of a loan.
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.
-
- Posts: 15234
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3156 times
- Has Liked: 6743 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
It would be hard to prove that he's crap, Big Ears, where's the evidence?Big_Ears_BFC wrote:The issue is he is crap and a waste of a loan.
-
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:08 pm
- Been Liked: 28 times
- Has Liked: 103 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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.
-
- Posts: 6642
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
- Been Liked: 2004 times
- Has Liked: 3339 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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.
-
- Posts: 3221
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:23 pm
- Been Liked: 746 times
- Has Liked: 927 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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.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.
-
- Posts: 3484
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:50 pm
- Been Liked: 660 times
- Has Liked: 205 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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?
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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.
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 8:31 am
- Been Liked: 1141 times
- Has Liked: 1618 times
- Location: Worsthorne
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
Ability or attitude ? One of them will give you the reason
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
I don't think we can just send him back, Chelsea would have to re-call him.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.
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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.
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
So you ignore what he has done for the last two seasons at other clubs , complete waste of a loan .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.
-
- Posts: 3221
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:23 pm
- Been Liked: 746 times
- Has Liked: 927 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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.
-
- Posts: 5789
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
- Been Liked: 1882 times
- Has Liked: 840 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
Has he really proven himself to be a 'top level championship player'?HiroshimaClaret wrote:
Dickish is wrong but find it hard to disagree with the rest.
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
-
- Posts: 3221
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:23 pm
- Been Liked: 746 times
- Has Liked: 927 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
One season is the nature of the beast in football. Didn`t Ings do the same (not comparing the two AT ALL)?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.
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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.
-
- 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
Stanislas was offered contract to stay with us for last premiership season!
Junior chose to leave (probably) to ensure increased game time
Junior chose to leave (probably) to ensure increased game time
-
- Posts: 5789
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
- Been Liked: 1882 times
- Has Liked: 840 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
[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.
As above he offered Stanislas a new deal which would suggest he did actually rate him.
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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.
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
Any news on their injuries?
-
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 11:20 pm
- Been Liked: 104 times
- Has Liked: 67 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
in fairness Ings did well in a relegated side in 14/15 and was playing well for Liverpool before his injuryHiroshimaClaret wrote:One season is the nature of the beast in football. Didn`t Ings do the same (not comparing the two AT ALL)?
-
- Posts: 3221
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:23 pm
- Been Liked: 746 times
- Has Liked: 927 times
Re: Arfield and Gudmundsson
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.HendricksHair wrote:in fairness Ings did well in a relegated side in 14/15 and was playing well for Liverpool before his injury