Bullshit man

LoveCurryPies · Post by **LoveCurryPies** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:16 am

We no doubt spent huge amounts of time chasing several other signings but you can't force players to come to Burnley nor their Clubs to sell. Seriously some people need to get a reality grip! We are in a great position and I for one am very happy!

Maybe Christmas will bring another signing or two. Bring on the next matches!

CnBtruntru · Post by **CnBtruntru** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:16 am

I thought this was a music thread, didn't realise it was about whingers

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:20 am

claretspice wrote:If Garlick really did mean that we'd spend more than ever but only if you didn't net off the huge fees received, he was being seriously disingenuous.

The squad is in some respects stronger. But there are glaring omissions in the squad and no club that has established itself at this level (as we did last season) should need to take that chance - especially when its youth set up is not yet strong enough to provide last resort cover. As it is, instead of really strengthening the squad, we're stockpiling vast cash reserves. It doesn't yet feel aa though the club believes it can emulate the likes if Swansea in stopping up for a period of years.

If we go down this season due to the lack of a fourth centre half, then make no mistake, we'll have underachieved and squandered a golden opportunity to build a real dynasty at Burnley which leaves a legacy for the next 40 years - not in terms of training facilities, but in terms of refreshing the supporter base so that we have the strength to sustain the club at the sort of level weve been at for the last 17 years.

Disingenuous? You're looking for meaning that isn't there. He said we'd have a bigger budget than ever which is pretty much proved by the fact we spent more than ever. It was an interview with a local rag and all he was trying to get across was that there's mote money available than ever. At the time he was probably hoping we didn't sell anyone.

ashtonlongsider · Post by **ashtonlongsider** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:20 am

I've been reassured by the Chairman and Board of Directors that the club is very much in 'safe hands'. It's all very easy to get carried away when most of those around you are losing their heads. I think we have been disciplined and prudent and I believe we are stronger than 12 months ago.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:20 am

Why would we be spending on a 4the choice centre back, rather than someone to challenge to be a starting player?

Because that is what he would be when he first comes in.

Assuming Shawcross/Dawson were credible links, then yeah, they are not fourth choice centre halves.

But when they fell through (and lets be honest, they were the only ones mentioned more than just fleetingly) then the other choices (again, presuming a lot here) would have been young, hungry players prepared to wait for their chance. We couldn't get one, or find one, or whatever.

End of the day, this is the managers decision and he must have reasons to back that up that we don't know.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:21 am

We're not stronger, because we've only got one central defender who's actually played in the Premier League for more than a handful of fleeting appearances.

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:24 am

UpTheBeehole wrote:We're not stronger, because we've only got one central defender who's actually played in the Premier League for more than a handful of fleeting appearances.

We are stronger, because there's more to a first team squad than just central defenders.

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:30 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Because that is what he would be when he first comes in.

Assuming Shawcross/Dawson were credible links, then yeah, they are not fourth choice centre halves.

But when they fell through (and lets be honest, they were the only ones mentioned more than just fleetingly) then the other choices (again, presuming a lot here) would have been young, hungry players prepared to wait for their chance. We couldn't get one, or find one, or whatever.

End of the day, this is the managers decision and he must have reasons to back that up that we don't know.

I'd argue that its the failure to bring in someone who is a serious alternative to Tarkowski as first choice that is the issue here, not the fact that having got ourselves into an unnecessary pickle we failed to bring in any old body as back up.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:30 am

Why did Everton buy keane then?

They were signing Rooney and Sigurdsson, why would they buy Keane?

Who needs central defenders?

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:31 am

martin_p wrote:Disingenuous? You're looking for meaning that isn't there. He said we'd have a bigger budget than ever which is pretty much proved by the fact we spent more than ever. It was an interview with a local rag and all he was trying to get across was that there's mote money available than ever. At the time he was probably hoping we didn't sell anyone.

He said we'd have a bigger budget thsn anyone else at the same time he said we didn't need to sell anyone. So that bigger budget appeared to be the cash available BEFORE we brought in funds for players we'd then expect to replace.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:35 am

claretspice wrote:He said we'd have a bigger budget thsn anyone else at the same time he said we didn't need to sell anyone. So that bigger budget appeared to be the cash available BEFORE we brought in funds for players we'd then expect to replace.

Well of course it was, we hadn't sold anyone when he gave the interview and we didn't need to. So how was he ever going to be talking about anything else other than the budget he knew we had available at the time of the interview?

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:38 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Because that is what he would be when he first comes in.

Assuming Shawcross/Dawson were credible links, then yeah, they are not fourth choice centre halves.

But when they fell through (and lets be honest, they were the only ones mentioned more than just fleetingly) then the other choices (again, presuming a lot here) would have been young, hungry players prepared to wait for their chance. We couldn't get one, or find one, or whatever.

End of the day, this is the managers decision and he must have reasons to back that up that we don't know.

And I think the fact that there were so few links to centre halves is very telling. It clearly wasn't a priority. And given those linked to us haven't moved anyway and have been playing for their respective clubs (Shawcross even signing a new four year contract) I'd suggest they were never that serious anyway.

Zesty · Post by **Zesty** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:40 am

I'm sick of seeing all this nonsense about what garlics done in the past or how far we have come. The pure fact is we haven't replaced Keane, we have made a profit in this transfer window. We have 3 centre backs, we don't have great cover for a winger. Poor window for me they had all month to find players and failed. How long have we known Keane was leaving for ?

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:42 am

Read my original post Martin. I said IF he was referring to net spend, he was being disingenuous.

For the reasons you suggest its unlikely he did mean that, but that is in itself a reason why its so disappointing that our net spend is several tens of millions short of the levels Garlick led us to believe would be spent in that interview.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:43 am

I'd argue that its the failure to bring in someone who is a serious alternative to Tarkowski as first choice that is the issue here, not the fact that having got ourselves into an unnecessary pickle we failed to bring in any old body as back up.

But that is Long.

We might not agree with that, but he got given a new deal this summer and plays for the ROI.

SD first choice is Tarks/Mee (and it was always going to be once Keane left)

If Mee/Tarks don't perform, then I guess he'll reassess in Jan, but that is where we are at the moment.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:52 am

claretspice wrote:Read my original post Martin. I said IF he was referring to net spend, he was being disingenuous.

For the reasons you suggest its unlikely he did mean that, but that is in itself a reason why its so disappointing that our net spend is several tens of millions short of the levels Garlick led us to believe would be spent in that interview.

Well actually you said if he wasn't referring to net spending he was being disingenuous. If he had been referring to net spending then the claims of 'bullsh1t' would be well justified! But anyway, I'm not arguing about it, it was clear what he said and clear that it was true and has been backed up. The lack of any new CB is probably down to Dyche rather than Garlick anyway, it looks like he's decided he's happy with what we've got.

ExistentialWanderer · Post by **ExistentialWanderer** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 10:03 am

Colburn_Claret wrote:
When you judge our transfer business on how much we've spent, rather than what we've actually brought in, you're not living on this planet.

This! Spending £30 million a player doesn't guarantee he's any good. Stoke broke their transfer record on a player last season, his name escapes me but has been loaned out because he can't get a game at Stoke! Sensible, well chosen additions within our budget with experience or talent have been acquired.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 10:04 am

Except in central defence, where we've not made any additions, only made a loss

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 11:46 am

Pearcey wrote:Buying back the ground and we now have a fantastic training ground. Add to that an improved academy. He's failed miserably hasn't he. Maybe you should've sat down and had a cup of tea before you posted this thread.

Oh for the Teasdale out years.....be careful what you wish for.UTC!

ExistentialWanderer · Post by **ExistentialWanderer** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 11:49 am

tim_noone wrote:Oh for the Teasdale out years.....be careful what you wish for.UTC!

Don't mention the 80's on here. Some don't like you reminding them of when we only got 2,000 crowds and got beat at home off the likes of Hereford United.

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 11:53 am

ExistentialWanderer wrote:Don't mention the 80's on here. Some don't like you reminding them of when we only got 2,000 crowds and got beat at home off the likes of Hereford United.

That's guilt.cos they were probably watching man utd!

ExistentialWanderer · Post by **ExistentialWanderer** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 11:58 am

tim_noone wrote:That's guilt.cos they were probably watching man utd!

It is quite remarkable even taking into consideration the birth/death ratio that our attendances have risen quite rapidly. Can't be coincidence that it aligns with our success in recent years surely?!

You do have to wonder where they were back then. Maybe we're just being overly cynical Tim.

Venkys4eva · Post by **Venkys4eva** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:09 pm

The way people are talking you think Jepson was on the bench due to lack of numbers!

Burnley FC have just bought the championship top scorer, beat chelsea, got a good point away at Spurs and got to laugh at first div rovers in the cup.

I still think im dreaming! What a journey and its not over yet, it beats halifax away on a cold tuesday night!

ExistentialWanderer · Post by **ExistentialWanderer** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:17 pm

Venkys4eva wrote:The way people are talking you think Jepson was on the bench due to lack of numbers!

Burnley FC have just bought the championship top scorer, beat chelsea, got a good point away at Spurs and got to laugh at first div rovers in the cup.

I still think im dreaming! What a journey and its not over yet, it beats halifax away on a cold tuesday night!

Or Halifax at home on a freezing cold evening in the Sherpa Van Tropy and it goes to extra time and penalties. God that night went on forever

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:22 pm

martin_p wrote:Well of course it was, we hadn't sold anyone when he gave the interview and we didn't need to. So how was he ever going to be talking about anything else other than the budget he knew we had available at the time of the interview?

So what happened to the massive transfer budget that was apparently available before we sold 2 of our best players because we haven't touched any of it and the fact our last two deals worked on were Wells and Lennon on loan suggests we ran out of budget.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:34 pm

KRBFC wrote:So what happened to the massive transfer budget that was apparently available before we sold 2 of our best players because we haven't touched any of it and the fact our last two deals worked on were Wells and Lennon on loan suggests we ran out of budget.

Was Wells free? Result!

We spent 30 odd million quid, that's fairly massive by our standards.

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:34 pm

I must admit I enjoyed my trips to Halifax good beer and banter...and proper fans!!

Venkys4eva · Post by **Venkys4eva** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:37 pm

tim_noone wrote:I must admit I enjoyed my trips to Halifax good beer and banter...and proper fans!!

Thinking back rochdale was def much worse

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:42 pm

martin_p wrote:Was Wells free? Result!

We spent 30 odd million quid, that's fairly massive by our standards.

You're completely ignoring the sales

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:47 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:But that is Long.

We might not agree with that, but he got given a new deal this summer and plays for the ROI.

SD first choice is Tarks/Mee (and it was always going to be once Keane left)

If Mee/Tarks don't perform, then I guess he'll reassess in Jan, but that is where we are at the moment.

Is ir Long? This being a player not considered good enough to be the back up.to Keane or Mee in the Championship 18 months ago such that we needed to go out and sign Tarkowski in the first place? He's improved that much in 18 months whilst barely playing?

This is the flaw in the "Long is good enough" argument. It requires us to believe a remarkable level of improvement in a player that has been passed over for promotion in the pecking order more times than he's played for us in the past 9 years.

Thats why my suspision is that this is driven by budget restrictions at some level or other.

Jimscho · Post by **Jimscho** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:48 pm

Zesty wrote:I'm sick of seeing all this nonsense about what garlics done in the past or how far we have come. The pure fact is we haven't replaced Keane, we have made a profit in this transfer window. We have 3 centre backs, we don't have great cover for a winger. Poor window for me they had all month to find players and failed. How long have we known Keane was leaving for ?

No we didn't make a profit this window.Were we a one man team when Keane was here?No we weren't and will survive.Did we not buy a single player this window?I thought we had must have been dreaming.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:51 pm

Is ir Long? This being a player not considered good enough to be the back up.to Keane or Mee in the Championship 18 months ago such that we needed to go out and sign Tarkowski in the first place? He's improved that much in 18 months whilst barely playing?

Tarks was signed as cover AND as a long term replacement for Keane. I know this, and you know this.

The manager thinks that KL is a good back up, or he wouldn't have given him a new contract.

I wanted 4 players for these two positions as much as everybody else did, but it wasn't considered a priority by the manager.

Which means he's happy with the options he's got there, or he's got very high hopes of some of the development squad, or something else.

Jimscho · Post by **Jimscho** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:53 pm

claretspice wrote:

Is ir Long? This being a player not considered good enough to be the back up.to Keane or Mee in the Championship 18 months ago such that we needed to go out and sign Tarkowski in the first place? He's improved that much in 18 months whilst barely playing?

This is the flaw in the "Long is good enough" argument. It requires us to believe a remarkable level of improvement in a player that has been passed over for promotion in the pecking order more times than he's played for us in the past 9 years.

Thats why my suspision is that this is driven by budget restrictions at some level or other.

You always give the impression that you know more than the Management team and coaching staff at Burnley.Could you perhaps tell us what coaching badges and qualifications you have.I know you are entitled to your opinion but you don't half go on about it as if you are some kind of professional coach.

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:03 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:But that is Long.

We might not agree with that, but he got given a new deal this summer and plays for the ROI.

SD first choice is Tarks/Mee (and it was always going to be once Keane left)

If Mee/Tarks don't perform, then I guess he'll reassess in Jan, but that is where we are at the moment.

Is ir Long? This being a player not considered good enough to be the back up.to Keane or Mee in the Championship 18 months ago such that we needed to go out and sign Tarkowski in the first place? He's improved that much in 18 months whilst barely playing?

This is the flaw in the "Long is good enough" argument. It requires us to believe a remarkable level of improvement in a player that has been passed over for promotion in the pecking order more times than he's played for us in the past 9 years.

Thats why my suspision is that this is driven by budget restrictions at some level or other.

Zesty · Post by **Zesty** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:04 pm

Jimscho wrote:No we didn't make a profit this window.Were we a one man team when Keane was here?No we weren't and will survive.Did we not buy a single player this window?I thought we had must have been dreaming.

No we wasn't a one man team when Keane was here, that's not the point though. We have downgraded with Tarky and not replaced Keane with another CB wether he is going to be on the bench or not, we're short. Where did I say we haven't signed anyone ??

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:06 pm

Sorry Spice, unless our wage bill has got silly, we have come out of this window £6 million up, plus the increased revenue from all the usual sources.

I think its as simple as the manager being happy enough with his options.

I mean, how quiet were all the rumours about centre halves, as opposed to everywhere else?

BFCmaj · Post by **BFCmaj** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:06 pm

Bullshit Man is my all time favourite superhero. Him and Dogpiss Girl.

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:08 pm

claretspice wrote:

Is ir Long? This being a player not considered good enough to be the back up.to Keane or Mee in the Championship 18 months ago such that we needed to go out and sign Tarkowski in the first place? He's improved that much in 18 months whilst barely playing?

This is the flaw in the "Long is good enough" argument. It requires us to believe a remarkable level of improvement in a player that has been passed over for promotion in the pecking order more times than he's played for us in the past 9 years.

Thats why my suspision is that this is driven by budget restrictions at some level or other.

Wasn't Long recovering from a pretty serious injury 18 months ago?

clive40golf · Post by **clive40golf** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:10 pm

I find it incredulous that some people can't see how we've not strengthened our squad this window. Watching us last season bringing on players who weren't up to the task ( although full of effort) was quite dismal. All the players we have lost this season really fought for the Clarets cause but some ( Keane and Gray apart) would make no impact on the match. The squad is so much stronger now and anyone coming of the bench could make a massive difference to the outcome. We have to remember who we are and where we're at in this division, stop slagging of new incoming players, the manager or the directors and just savour what we're doing at the moment. We've just paid 5 million for a impact sub, 12 months ago we were struggling to pay that for a regular first teamer.
Enjoy the ride people

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:19 pm

claretspice wrote:

Is ir Long? This being a player not considered good enough to be the back up.to Keane or Mee in the Championship 18 months ago such that we needed to go out and sign Tarkowski in the first place? He's improved that much in 18 months whilst barely playing?

This is the flaw in the "Long is good enough" argument. It requires us to believe a remarkable level of improvement in a player that has been passed over for promotion in the pecking order more times than he's played for us in the past 9 years.

Thats why my suspision is that this is driven by budget restrictions at some level or other.

Show me a person that doesn't budget and they won't have a pot to p!ss in. Show me a club that doesn't budget ? I'll start with Leeds..Coventry..Pompey ..Blackburn ..Bolton the list is endless. Utc.

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:22 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Tarks was signed as cover AND as a long term replacement for Keane. I know this, and you know this.

The manager thinks that KL is a good back up, or he wouldn't have given him a new contract.

I wanted 4 players for these two positions as much as everybody else did, but it wasn't considered a priority by the manager.

Which means he's happy with the options he's got there, or he's got very high hopes of some of the development squad, or something else.

I think my point is that it feels as though the "something else" is favourite.

We didn't need a long term replacement for Keane 18 months ago any more thsn we need one for Tarks now.

We are where we are though, and we're both speculating.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:24 pm

We certainly are!

As always, just hope that we don't have to worry about it till Jan

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:27 pm

Jimscho wrote:You always give the impression that you know more than the Management team and coaching staff at Burnley.Could you perhaps tell us what coaching badges and qualifications you have.I know you are entitled to your opinion but you don't half go on about it as if you are some kind of professional coach.

Bore off, pal. Im entitled to my option. I certainly don't know more than our manager or his staff and i don't or pretend to. Its regrettable that you feel.a need to attack every opinion which is remotely critical of the club as though you believe any critic must lack the intelligence to see the bigger picture, or must believe they know more than the club staff.

You're entitled to your opinion, I'm entitled to mine. There we should leave it, respectfully.

ExistentialWanderer · Post by **ExistentialWanderer** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 2:04 pm

tim_noone wrote:I must admit I enjoyed my trips to Halifax good beer and banter...and proper fans!!

Wasn't Halifax the 'stadium' with the grass embankment used as a terrace? Always thought it'd be good to have a picnic while watching the game. Test Cricket style....

littleboroughclaret · Post by **littleboroughclaret** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 2:35 pm

Think we have to back Dyche on this one. This is a team. A bloody close knit one. I believe that if the right player was available at the right price then he'd of gone for it. Dyche obviously rates our current three CHs highly and that they have the attributes to do the job at this level. Come on everyone. Sean will have a whiteboard in his office with potential CHs and they ll be watched a lot in the next couple of months. Keep the faith. Utc.

Jimscho · Post by **Jimscho** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 2:53 pm

claretspice wrote:Bore off, pal. Im entitled to my option. I certainly don't know more than our manager or his staff and i don't or pretend to. Its regrettable that you feel.a need to attack every opinion which is remotely critical of the club as though you believe any critic must lack the intelligence to see the bigger picture, or must believe they know more than the club staff.

You're entitled to your opinion, I'm entitled to mine. There we should leave it, respectfully.

Nice to see I got to you.Not much respect in telling me to "bore off"

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:00 pm

His post is spot on though.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:04 pm

You should bore off though Jimscho

elwaclaret · Post by **elwaclaret** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:10 pm

While I like everyone would have liked to see an established Premier League Centre half arrive, some of the reactions and comments about our board and manager are outrageous and quite frankly embarrassing.

We have a board and manager here who have given this club a level of football we have only been able to dream of for forty years, and yet you'd be forgiven for thinking those in control are the most fraudulent set of leeches ever to grace the planet let alone the Turf. Its the easiest thing in the world to spend money that does not belong to you - any fool can spend money. The recruiting team has built a side that many (me included) believe will lead to progress to a point I hope we can challenge the top half of the table, even if it is the lower end of the top 10. Way beyond what I ever hoped I could dream for in any other period my approaching FORTY years watching the Clarets.
Should the worst happen we can address any issues in January - in the meantime unless we are hit by chronic bad luck we can give any club in the league a run for their money. I guess some folk will never ever be satisfied.

Jimscho · Post by **Jimscho** » Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:20 pm

UpTheBeehole wrote:You should bore off though Jimscho

And with respect you should **** off because you are boring the pants off everyone on here with your whinging.