Page 1 of 2

Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:30 pm
by Dejavu
Gray was awesome in the Championship but for me has been found lacking in the Prem.
Here are some facts.
He only scored in 6 games.
Only "important" goal was the winner against Middlesborough. (Not counting Sunderland as we would have beat them anyway)
We can replace him with much better for less. E.g. Wilfred Bony is available @£13m and is still only 28.
Good luck to him but we have literally robbed Watford of £18.5m.
His first touch has got even worse than when we signed him!!
He doesn't score enough to build a team around. Vokes scored more and contributes far more to the team. Barnes also.

UTC.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:33 pm
by Sidney1st
Considering the promotion he helped fire us too, we got an excellent return for our initial investment.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:35 pm
by Newcastleclaret93
A country mile our best striker.
His game was not all about goals. All season we looked a much better attacking threat when he played.
Plus the service he got was worse than laughable at times

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:36 pm
by kentonclaret
Makes you wonder why BFC offered Gray a substantially improved new contract when he cannot control a ball and is such a poor finisher.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:41 pm
by CaptJohn
I'm sad to see him go. He was not the finished article for sure but I just hoped he would stay a bit longer and perhaps become the 20 goal Prem striker that he may become, with the Clarets.
Such is life.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:42 pm
by bfccrazy
Bony at 13 mil would be a brilliant bit of business - even at higher wages it would equate to a swap of Gray for Bony.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:44 pm
by Dejavu
Newcastleclaret93 wrote:A country mile our best striker.
His game was not all about goals. All season we looked a much better attacking threat when he played.
Plus the service he got was worse than laughable at times
His game was all about goals.
If he could hold the ball up and create I would think differently.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:45 pm
by Touchline
He's a big loss and we would have much preferred to keep him. But he wanted to go for whatever reason. And there are probably a few good reasons for him. We're changing our style and we will adapt. Players will be coming in.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:45 pm
by Touchline
He's a big loss and we would have much preferred to keep him. But he wanted to go for whatever reason. And there are probably a few good reasons for him. We're changing our style and we will adapt. Players will be coming in.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:59 pm
by Diesel
Abcder

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:02 pm
by Saxoman
Bony is not available for 13m. Where do you get this garbage?

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:03 pm
by ablueclaret
Gray is a big loss, Walters is going to have to be a revelation.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:05 pm
by Dejavu
Saxoman wrote:Bony is not available for 13m. Where do you get this garbage?
All over the news. Swansea offered £10m and told to pay another £3m.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:05 pm
by kentonclaret
Bony is available for £17.5 million according to Pep on Talksport.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:06 pm
by Saxoman
Dejavu wrote:All over the news. Swansea offered £10m and told to pay another £3m.
Twitter news? I look on BBC, I see nothing.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:06 pm
by Walnutwillie
Will be a huge loss to us next season
But Dyche will have known that a departure was inevitable. And surely has others in mind
Keep the faith

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:06 pm
by KRBFC
Barnes contributes more :lol: are you fkn stupid? He scored 9 goals in a hoofball defensive side, how many penalties? I know Vokes scored 1 at Soton. His Sunderland hattrick wasn't important because we "would've beat them anyway" Lmaoooooooo

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:07 pm
by Top Claret
Watford have got a bargain with Gray. 18 million is jack **** in this market. Has I have said before Gray is wip and he will play at the very highest level.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:07 pm
by Funkydrummer
He's that good, he's gone to Watford for crying out loud.

Not much of a step up, if any. More money probably and nearer the bright lights of London.

Will be interesting to see how he performs over the season, but I think we have robbed Watford
blind on this deal - well done the board. I don't think he really wanted to be here in the first
instance TBH.

Just my opinion mind.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:07 pm
by taio
Widely reported that City want £13m for Bony. Not that we could meet his wage demands mind.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:08 pm
by KRBFC
Bony is better? Based on what? Did he even score for Stoke last year?

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:11 pm
by Saxoman
Can't see you signing bony, as 1 his wages, 2 his age, no resale value and 3, he wouldn't sign for you IMO.

If he doesn't sign for swans, my feeling is he'll return to France.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:13 pm
by Wile E Coyote
Dejavu wrote:Gray was awesome in the Championship but for me has been found lacking in the Prem.
Here are some facts.
He only scored in 6 games.
Only "important" goal was the winner against Middlesborough. (Not counting Sunderland as we would have beat them anyway)
We can replace him with much better for less. E.g. Wilfred Bony is available @£13m and is still only 28.
Good luck to him but we have literally robbed Watford of £18.5m.
His first touch has got even worse than when we signed him!!
He doesn't score enough to build a team around. Vokes scored more and contributes far more to the team. Barnes also.

UTC.
he is a big loss when the other available strikers are at best average, not exactly prolific to say the least.
Bit of a mystery why so many jump aboard this "first touch " nonsense , it just isnt the case.
With better support, who knows what he might have been capable of.
Burnley won once away, the meagre points tally was down to us being strugglers. Not much chance of matching Harry Kane if you play for a bottom end side.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:14 pm
by Top Claret
Bony is not fit to lace Andras boots. He is overrated and over paid. One good season at Swansea and that his lot. All these Gray bashers would not recognise quality if it was swinging from their bell end

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:15 pm
by taio
Gray will be missed but his first touch certainly has plenty of room for improvement. Anybody who watches regularly could surely see that.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:18 pm
by joey13
Bony who's on 100k a week , FFS

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:20 pm
by claretspice
Gray is a big loss. The very premise of the thread is nonsense.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:21 pm
by Dejavu
joey13 wrote:Bony who's on 100k a week , FFS
If Swansea can afford him so can we. Anyway, I was only using him as an example of what is available.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:22 pm
by Jimscho
Gray seems to be getting better and better as the night goes on and more and more of the moaners join the game.Dont remember him scoring many high scores on player ratings last year.Perhaps against Sunderland when he scored a third of his goals.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:24 pm
by Jimscho
claretspice wrote:Gray is a big loss. The very premise of the thread is nonsense.
He is only a big loss if not replaced.Lets wait and see.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:29 pm
by claretspice
Jimscho wrote:He is only a big loss if not replaced.Lets wait and see.
He's a big loss as it stands because he hasn't been replaced. He shouldn't have been allowed to leave until his replacement was in the building - or at least, until Dyche had strengthened the squad in other areas so that we were no weaker without Gray than we were at the beginning of the summer. That's not the case.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:29 pm
by claretspice
Jimscho wrote:He is only a big loss if not replaced.Lets wait and see.
He's a big loss as it stands because he hasn't been replaced. He shouldn't have been allowed to leave until his replacement was in the building - or at least, until Dyche had strengthened the squad in other areas so that we were no weaker without Gray than we were at the beginning of the summer. That's not the case.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:33 pm
by levraiclaret
Top Claret wrote:Bony is not fit to lace Andras boots. He is overrated and over paid. One good season at Swansea and that his lot. All these Gray bashers would not recognise quality if it was swinging from their bell end
Even if what you say is true, it is irrelevant as Andre didn't want to stay at Burnley . I am not interested in us signing Bony, we need someone that is quick hungry skilful and wants to play for us/make a name for himself.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:34 pm
by Jimscho
claretspice wrote:He's a big loss as it stands because he hasn't been replaced. He shouldn't have been allowed to leave until his replacement was in the building - or at least, until Dyche had strengthened the squad in other areas so that we were no weaker without Gray than we were at the beginning of the summer. That's not the case.
How do you know the replacement isn't there.BFCcrazy seems to indicate something is happening and his track record is pretty good.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:35 pm
by claretspice
Jimscho wrote:How do you know the replacement isn't there.BFCcrazy seems to indicate something is happening and his track record is pretty good.
Well he's not been announced, has he?

Noone- no-one - has suggested a replacement is 100% done and complete. And until it is complete, we haven't replaced him. Deals can - and often do - fall over at the very last minute.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:48 pm
by Tribesmen
ablueclaret wrote:Gray is a big loss, Walters is going to have to be a revelation.
He is as Walters is a winner .

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:20 pm
by KRBFC
Jimscho wrote:He is only a big loss if not replaced.Lets wait and see.
Agreed, depending on the replacement will determine how big a loss he is.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:23 pm
by Lancasterclaret
I agree with KRBFC

Gosh!

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:27 pm
by DCWat
Butterworth better be earning his corn

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:28 pm
by Winstonswhite
I can't be bothered going through all the threads but the one and only thing that bothers me is that we've got a hundred million (?) in the bank and we've let Gray go BEFORE getting a replacement in. Why?

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:29 pm
by Gnulty
Danny on his way back home...

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:30 pm
by Jimscho
claretspice wrote:Well he's not been announced, has he?

Noone- no-one - has suggested a replacement is 100% done and complete. And until it is complete, we haven't replaced him. Deals can - and often do - fall over at the very last minute.
As I said to you on the other thread.If we had played silly buggers with Watford, the Gray deal could have fallen over and then we would have had a disgruntled player.Some deals may just have to be done when the opportunity arises.I don't know what happens in these transfer dealings and neither does any one else on here.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:37 pm
by Jimscho
Winstonswhite wrote:I can't be bothered going through all the threads but the one and only thing that bothers me is that we've got a hundred million (?) in the bank and we've let Gray go BEFORE getting a replacement in. Why?
Why have we got a hundred million in the bank.Have we not been paying players wages?Have we not been paying any bills?Have Sky decided to pay us this years money in advance?Grays fee and Keanes fee will probably be paid over the next 5 years(the length of their contracts),so not received that yet.Perhaps the Gray deal was to good to risk losing by messing Watford around.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:39 pm
by strayclaret
Get Ade in :)

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:41 pm
by Devils_Advocate
Poor first touch, crap movement off the ball, no vision or awareness of players around him, lacking in composure and needs it laid on a plate as per our own fans admission through their defence of his lack of service.

That is why.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:43 pm
by Winstonswhite
Jimscho wrote:Why have we got a hundred million in the bank.Have we not been paying players wages?Have we not been paying any bills?Have Sky decided to pay us this years money in advance?Grays fee and Keanes fee will probably be paid over the next 5 years(the length of their contracts),so not received that yet.Perhaps the Gray deal was to good to risk losing by messing Watford around.
I can't be arsed going into it and yes it's a slight exaggeration but please tell me the benefit of selling Gray before finding a replacement. I'm all ears.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:25 pm
by 3putt
Devils_Advocate wrote:Poor first touch, crap movement off the ball, no vision or awareness of players around him, lacking in composure and needs it laid on a plate as per our own fans admission through their defence of his lack of service.

That is why.
What a load of rubbish :roll:

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:49 pm
by JohnMcGreal
Dejavu wrote:Gray was awesome in the Championship but for me has been found lacking in the Prem.
If you think Gray was found lacking last season, I'd love to hear your opinion of the rest of our players, because he was better than most of them.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:15 am
by Wile E Coyote
they havent a clue, all these critics ! poor first touch clowns, once its been said, that becomes the mantra for the idiots on here, cue bin on't turf and his dull thick mates to say otherwise, blah blah etc.

Re: Why Gray isn't a big loss.

Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:28 am
by Dejavu
JohnMcGreal wrote:If you think Gray was found lacking last season, I'd love to hear your opinion of the rest of our players, because he was better than most of them.
Not according to fellow posters he wasn't. He came =10th in the Clarets Mad Player of the Season league.
Anyone who thinks he has a good first touch needs to have a word with themselves. I can't think of a Prem striker who has a worse one and it got worse last year not better.
He simply doesn't have the skill set to be a top class striker.