robf

I never said in my post that the things they wanted to do were wrong. Far from it, I actually said the infrastructure changes would be "great to have" and I think some of them sound amazing. I admire the long-term thinking (but the key words in that sentence are "long" and "term"). As my post says, it's the order of things that I think is wrong. Get the first-team picture right (and we saw that for spells under Billy Bell) and that success allows you the leeway to make gradual infrastructure changes as well. Arguably Bell's reign came to an end when rather than smaller scale, sustainable projects he took away a load of the first-team budget to start the LS work. In that he also tried to run before he could walk.

They may be but I think the other reason to mention it was in the open letter there were loads of mentions of the infrastructure projects in order to justify David Flitcroft's role. However, surely his first priority, regardless of budgets, is to make sure the playing side is fit for purpose. We're having a new door fitted at this very moment. If they came to me and said - we've removed the old door and taken it away, we've tidied up but unfortunately we've not fitted the new door, then while they've done some other useful things, they've failed in their fundamental first and most important task* *important note - I sincerely hope this won't be the case today - or there will be no five star review from me!

I may be being overly simplistic but I see it as: Infrastructure improvements - great to have A competitive, balanced first-team squad - must have In order of priority: 1) First-team squad 2) Infrastructure I'm also surprised that when other clubs in similar positions were clearly able to bring in experienced strikers (Lyle Taylor to Cambridge say, or Mo Eisa to Exeter) these moves appeared to raise no alarm bells and no change of plan. The club seemed to stay in its bubble of - let's wait and see what happens / wait till bigger clubs make signings and get their offcasts / look at the PL2 market / wait till deadline day - almost as if adding another striker was a nice thing to have, not an absolute essential. Where were the alarm bells once Uche had been injured? Why, if these other clubs are paying over the odds for Taylor, Eisa etc, did we not react and see if we could move some of the budget from other things to the playing budget and pay over the odds to ensure we get the right player in? Perhaps there was no budget to move, but the attitude after failing to sign anyone seems to be for the club to have shrugged its shoulders and say "Oh well, we missed out on some targets" as if it's a slight mishap rather than something that could seal relegation. Why does the club appear to not have learnt any lessons from the previous transfer windows? This is a club that on the 1st August had one senior striker in Ellis Harrison. A club who started the previous season with one fit, senior striker in Jamie Proctor. A club who waited till the very final day in January 2023 to add an injured striker despite us having no fit strikers at the start of the year. Yes, we all get it's difficult to get a striker in. We realise there's a load of factors to getting someone in - but other clubs seemed to manage to do so. You won't get very far if you continually repeat the same mistakes every window.

Folks - @manc_vale has added Cloudflare (this is a cache that should help speed during busy periods) and will be tweaking the settings over coming hours. If anyone spots anything odd please message @manc_vale or myself. Thanks!

I would completely agree. It's something to aspire to but you can't expect it every time.

It's on the Sentinel website now. Injuries to James Collins, Connor Washington and Martyn Waghorn so they need another striker in... Derby County boss lifts lid on free agent transfer for ex-Stoke City man Dwight Gayle - Stoke-on-Trent Live WWW.STOKESENTINEL.CO.UK

Not in mine. He hasn't played for months and will be weeks away from playing, if he's even interested in doing so. Look at how long Uche took to get fit. We need a player who can play straight away, who is match fit. Wickham's last game was nine months ago - Gayles' was five weeks ago.

Some comments on t'Oatcake suggesting Dwight Gayle was spotted at Vale Park today. Anyone near to Vale Park know if there's any truth in it? It could be total nonsense/mischief making of course...

In case you haven't seen the front page... Former Valiants: Port Vale loanee reportedly targeted by top Premier League side - onevalefan.co.uk WWW.ONEVALEFAN.CO.UK

According to this newspaper we did play last night after all. Can we have the point added to our tally please?

If we have to mend and make do, I'd quite like a front three of Mighten, Wilson and Chislett. Mighten's played on the left before. With Loft, Dipepa and possibly Plant (who doesn't appear too far away) as bench options (and we'd possibly have to swop in Loft for Wilson from time to time if his body can't cope with two games a week). Then hopefully Uche and possibly Ben Garrity also available for the final weeks. I'd also consider bringing on a defender in the closing stages and throwing big Jesse upfront if we're chasing. It's not great, it's not ideal, but it may be OK for us to win enough games with the above...

Hi @Doha request received and I'll look into it. I may have accidentally switched off that option when I was switching various options off to save on bandwidth etc during the slow times. I need to ask the forum support team what's possible (and what I need to switch on if so - the backend of the forum is somewhat complex so it's sometimes tricky to find the correct option). It may be a day or two before I know - but I'll pose the question and come back to you

I see Darren Moore's brother works in Finnish football. I wonder if he can advise on whether there are any free agent strikers from places like there?

According to Crosby's interviews with the press it was a calf injury. I've seen mention of a "mid-March" return in a Crosby pre-match press call but that was an interview held in mid-January, I'm not sure if there has been a more recent update?

Regardless of Dwight Gayle's wage demands would he want to move to Vale Park? He's rumoured to be interesting the likes of Ipswich, Sheff Wed, Barnsley and Derby, so he may think one of them is a better option for him.

I think the fact we are desperate to see if there are any free agents who can come in and immediately do a job shows just what an awful January we had. The problem with free agents is most are nowhere near match fit (look at Ikpeazu who took weeks) so they are not going to be a quick fix. Then there's the big names who will probably expect wages way beyond us (Gayle for instance who's rumoured to be attracting the deeper pockets of Derby) Then there's the "free agents" who may not even be interested (Wickham, as I've posted above, may have just moved on from football after his injuries) I think you may want to take on a free agent who hasn't played for a bit if you've got a decent squad and you're not in a rush to play them. However, we haven't got a decent squad and we are in a rush so if we bring in someone who hasn't played at all this season it's going to be weeks till they are anywhere close. By then we'll have played loads of games and the players he was brought in to cover are likely to be close to coming back anyhow. I think we're made a massive hole for ourselves with the January business and adding a free agent just isn't a quick fix - unless we're really lucky and there's another player like Dwight Gayle, who is match fit, wants to join us, is on reasonable wages and would improve us. I doubt there is, frankly, and I think we may be stuck with what we have - which is a real worry until the likes of Garrity and Ikpeazu come back.

Wickham may technically be a "free agent" but I'm not sure he wants to play anymore. I can't remember the article but he was linked to another club earlier this season and the piece was saying that it's not entirely clear if he wants to continue to play. I guess that's the thing with "free agents" - they are not necessarily fit, available and have the desire to play. After all, a lot of them are free agents due to long-term injury issues and I would suspect it takes an awful lot of commitment to get back from that sort of thing. Wickham's had loads of injuries and probably also earned a decent amount from the game - he may have decided to move into another job now. I personally hope I'm wrong as we need a short-term fix upfront but I think there's sometimes a grey line between "free agent" and "retired"...

They're coming thick and fast... this is the thread for the midweek Posh game... Admin note - we are using this thread originally set up for the postponed game in February, for the rearranged tie. You may notice some of the earlier posts are about the first game! Thanks!

In trouble again... https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/feb/07/huddersfields-kian-harratt-banned-for-four-months-over-484-bets-on-matches

I've worked out how to add the vote from this topic to the sidebar. You should see it on the RH side across the forum (desktop users only - it won't show on mobile).

I've just been reading a Guardian article from Flitcroft's time at Bury (and we all know how Bury ended up). Any of this sound familiar... I know Bury was different in that owner was spending beyond his means but all the above wouldn't have helped the budget. It's somewhat disconcerting that the very same things seem to be taking place in Burslem... Link: https://www.theguardian.com/football/football-league-blog/2014/oct/10/david-flitcroft-interview-bury-league-two

I'd agree. I can see why you'd need a good, experienced club secretary to manage transfers, contracts all the other EFL requirements (i.e. the admin side) especially if the owners don't have that specialist knowledge. But there's no need for a DoF and presumably if they removed the role a significant wage saving too.

If the club do read this (and I think they are all off reading "social media" anyhow so they probably aren't) there's numerous comments on the frontpage features that are 100% behind Flitcroft leaving. I think I've had circa 100 comments since Crosby left and not a single one in support of Flitcroft. I appreciate the owners want someone in charge of the football side of things to cover for their lack of experience but while the role may be worthwhile I just think they have the wrong person in the role. I also appreciate that they may not want to act now while the recruitment is apparently happening but unfortunately I think they have no choice, regardless of how disruptive it is. If he appoints the wrong person then long-term damage could be done. If they still want someone to run the football side... I hope they give some thought to getting a Colin Garlick style experienced club secretary in who can deal with the administrative side and allow a new manager to deal with all the transfers and tactics etc. Speaking personally, I agree that Flitcroft has to go. I'm perhaps a late adopter but came to that decision after the January window closed. there was just no excuse for not bringing a striker, of some sort, in. Leaving it till the last day and then failing is totally unacceptable. I also hope the club would see that, after throwing Ryder and co under the bus, rather than taking charge and responsibility himself, what sort of person they have as DoF.

Vote now added.

I'm adding a vote to this topic now