Signs on loan

Paynter's Achilles must be ruling him out for a while then.

The Scott Fenwick fans will be going mad at this one.

Only scored 1 league goal for Fleetwood, hoping he's got a decent all round game for Bingham to feed off.

Was very highly rated when he first signed for sunderland.

Watched him a few times on the telly he looked a decent player.
Now is the time for ronnie to get the best team together for a few games before the salford game and get us into that 3rd round where who knows who might come out of the hat.
The new owners will know this opportunity can pay a lot of money so invest a little now for maybe big rewards.

How many loan signings does that make it that Ronnie has brought in this season? 7? 8? I know a couple of them have been youth players but overall it makes some of the chuntering about lack of support from the new owners look a bit daft.

Lack of support is John Hughes not being allowed to sign anybody when he was manager!!!

loan signings don't show support from owners as they can potentially be having their wages paid by parent club.

its about 8 loan signings already this season, well on way to breaking number we had last season (18), which surely is a worry when we seemingly rely on these short term fixes.

safe to say I don't think fenwick has much of a future as this gives off an indication paynter is out for a while so doesn't want to rely on him.

wish we would either sign long term loan, or start turning any loans which are decent into permanent signings

It's hardly support to be bringing in a few kids on loan costing peanuts, or probably costing nothing at all.

True support would have been signing more established players last summer and using this cup run and tv money this coming january.

What does it take to please people if we don't like a short term loan? I would much rather a months loan and if they are good in the month then snap them up for longer, but if they are a dud then you aren't committed to them! As a lot of people on here don't seem to be pleased with any player we bring in! Imagine if they were all long term!

No one on here has said they aren't pleased.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Guys like Mandron and Jackson in their early 20s are hardly 'kids.' Banton and Boyce are in their mid-20s. Magnus is pushing 30.

Your idea that these 8 loan players cost 'peanuts' or less is based on what exactly?

We should all be thankful that these owners are backing Ronnie to the hilt by replacing quality loans with more quality loans. What more do people want? Were going into a second round tie against a team in the evo with a forward line that has about 5 goals between them. A midfield that even on most haunted would struggle to track down and a defence Oscar pistorius on his stumps would outpace. I just cant understand why people aren't pleased at the moment.

But that's not a problem with signing for a month loan, but inevitably we struggle to keep players if they are good which leaves us needing to replace them.

The loan signing is a good market when used well, I don't think signing 8/9/10 loan players for a month here and there can be deemed good use of the loan market as there is never a balanced team. Harrison has been pure but I'd be amazed if it isn't linked to him having a different partner every single week.

An educated guess.

I'm happy we are signing players of course i am, would just prefer more long termism. Let's see what january brings now that we are rich.

Amen to that.

Stop talking sense chip, FFS

He smashed our first team into oblivion for Sunderland youths a couple of years back. Great signing.

How does anyone know its a good signing? He has to do it in a blue and white shirt before he can be classed a good signing. He might go bang in ten goals in ten games or he may have a disaster.

Just wrap it in now then eh? They're all shit until they can prove otherwise to football intelligentsia such as yourself.

Who said the lad from boro was shit? Nobody had seen the lad play. Guess your just jumping to conclusions because I'm not a sheep and agree with everything you say. So how do you know he is good then yloop? How many times have you seen him play? How many goals has he scored in the lower leagues? He might be a class signing how does anyone know till he plays for us especially with our midfield this season.

I have seen him play on a few occasions, the first time was when he came on with 30 minutes to go and tore us apart on our home ground, setting up all 3 goals and not giving the ball away once. Since then I've seen him play for Sunderland in the premier league twice and he also played for Fleetwood the season before last who you may have noticed got promoted from this league. He then joined Shrewsbury on loan last season who got promoted from this league.

Other than that I know nothing about him, tell me what you know now? (quick clue: it's nothing, nothing at all)

Chip your jumping to conclusions again. Can you point out once again who if anyone on this board has slated the lad from boro before he played or complained about signing mandron. I merely said how do we know he will be a good signing for us. He has played about 10 league games in a few years on loan.

so its you who is the football intelligista then? Maybe you should put your name forward to pools to be a scout.

Nah, quite happy just giving my opinion on messageboards like. Have a better paid job than Pools scouts.

Well judging by some of the layers we have brought in you may do a better job.

Players even

I would have stayed clear of Scott Fenwick for a start, but that's my opinion as well.

Well he came in and did a job for us last season. Shame it hasn't worked out this year.looks like he wont be here next season the way things are going.

First of all chip I'm not arguing with you. Its a difference of opinions. After all that is what a message board is for. If I dont agree with you I will say I'm not in a clique that agrees with everything you or certain others say otherwise be a pretty boring board. Yes I believe the boro thing was a cheapo option last year and possibly this year too though we do seem as though our owners are being a lot more pro active now, which can only be a good thing with some big games coming up. If saying how do we know players are going to be good before they have played is a negative so be it. I'm negative. If it wasn't for our keeper last week and some sitters being missed we could have conceded 3 or 4 so lets not get too carried away with a clean sheet just yet. Hopefully the team improves further this week and mandron tortures orient. Anyway work to be done before I get sacked. Three points Sunday and things be a hell of a lot more rosier.

If it wasn't for our keeper.....who saved one at point blank range. Sitters? 3 or 4 goals? Which Looney Toon are you? Bugs, Daffy?

Cheltenham has a lot of the ball, but they only created 2 or 3 really decent chances, only one of which was on target. funnily enough so did we however we scored ours.

It's absolute bullshit to suggest Cheltenham should have scored 4.

One on target? hitting the bar and bouncing virtually on the line does that not count either?. Harry Pell heading wide in the last five minutes with the goal gaping that's three guilt edge chances just in the last ten minutes. 15 shots to our 4. Yeah a real looney tune for suggesting we could easily have conceded 3 or 4

no it doesn't count, at no point was it going in, it was close, very close, but it didn't and was never going to. they had one truly great chance, which they hit straight at our keeper at point blank range, the follow up effort was off side and didn't count. If you're going to count nearly chances then what about the 2 or 3 we had? I remember Fenwick being a studs length away from making it 2, or are we making the rules to suit?

It was still a fantastic chance though and the free header late on. Making what rules to suit, pools probobly should of got the second goal that doesn't mean Cheltenham didn't have the chances to get a few themselves. One minute your saying their shot against the bar was never going in as if it wasn't a good chance but then we should of scored two even though the player never connected with the ball. We were outplayed for long periods of the second half we dug in and got a great result. We now have a fantastic chance of reaching round three.

i'm not disagreeing with that at all. just disagreeing with the notion that they could have scored 4.

Well they could of possibly if they had a finisher well maybe 3 anyway. Lets hope tommorow we play better. Four fairly new signings and a big few weeks ahead.