robf

Absolutely. However, as I said in a previous post - surely they need to do an internal review if something was missed or a mistake made. If it wasn't and was a fluke injury or something then fair enough - but if (I'm not saying it was just if it was) it was an internal mistake there has to be appropriate measures in place as we're a professional club, we can't be carrying people if they are not up to the role.

To be fair it has appeared now so perhaps it was just a timing thing and I spoke too soon.

I agree. Surely, as in any role, there are repercussions if you make a huge mistake? I appreciate that the club will probably keep any such actions inhouse (and that's fair enough - there's no need to publicly shame someone) but I would hope there's some repercussion (disciplinary or dismissal) if someone on the medical team has just made a major mistake. After all, we're supposed to be a professional football club.

Perhaps I'm jumping to conclusions but the news story announcing it: https://www.port-vale.co.uk/news/2024/february/rhys-williams-returns-to-liverpool/ isn't anywhere on the official site homepage or on the news index. There may be an innocent explanation but if it's a case to try and slip bad news out without people noticing it's a bit rubbish - do they think people will forget he signed and not notice he's not in the squad? I'm not saying you need to lead on this story (the club would obviously prefer to have a good news story as the top story) but surely it deserves to be somewhere on the homepage and news index?

Explaining Williams' spell at Aberdeen (where he failed to make a League appearance) their manager said "Rhys came up injured and has struggled." Was that not a bit of a red flag?

I think by games he means appearances. I think it's bit unfair to lump Massey in there though. He's played out of position upfront and then a lot of his appearances have been at wingback. If you make it Loft, Ikpeazu and Wilson, for instance, then it's five League goals in 42 appearances.

I would suspect he's on big wages there though.

Absolutely agree. I'd be pretty concerned about the medical team if it's true. We've already had several signings this summer who have broken down, despite the improvements to pitch and training facilities. Two of them (Jones and Grant) were considered to be good enough to be handed 2 year deals (rather than the rather more obvious - you have had injury issues so it's a one year deal with an option if you play a certain number of games). To bring in a player who isn't fit to make the squad for his first game is a bit worrying. It's not even like it's the first transfer window where that has happened (Matty Taylor). However, to bring in a player who has to return because he is miles away from playing is a huge error!

The Burke move seems wrong on so many levels... He's mainly a winger which we don't play The club have said they won't pay over the odds yet presumably he would be on huge wages with presumably Vale expected to meet some of them He's a loanee but we can only have five in the squad. If we get him that means we only have room for one more (and we are supposedly targeting a striker and a LWB - i.e. two more) We could get more loans but then you'd have to start leaving some out of the squad. That goes against the idea of gaining favour from big clubs by taking on talented young kids on loan and playing them

I know it's a bit rubbish to be thinking about other teams losing players rather than Vale adding them, but that's good news I reckon. Reading have sold another player too, so those two teams look weaker after this window.

A round-up of the latest X/Twitter/Whatever it's called today rumours... Port Vale deadline day rumours - "at least two signing" - onevalefan.co.uk WWW.ONEVALEFAN.CO.UK

Yep, it seems to be a pattern in recent windows. Didn't the last two last-minute deals bring us Ryan Loft and Matty Taylor... it looks like we don't have much choice other than to hope one works out this time...

I should probably know this but when does this window close? Is it tonight or does it go on to Feb 1st like some other windows have?

Sorry, I'm already breaking my own rule here in coming back onto the thread... In the press articles on that fine, Vale received it because among the pitch invasion there was violence, missiles thrown etc. That's referenced as part of the reason for the fine. FA quote - "Port Vale FC admitted failing to (prevent its fans) using threatening and violent behaviour whilst encroaching onto the pitch area..." I presume the Reading verdict was lesser because there wasn't any violence. Yes, it was disruptive and annoying but not violent and I think that's the difference. As I've said earlier, I think it's odd to fine clubs for individual actions anyhow - personally I think only the people who are found to have been violent should be fined and not the club.

Not picking and choosing. His punishment is to do with him clearly looking to be violent against the ref, just as some of those at the Swindon game were given harsh individual punishments for violence on the pitch then. There was no violence at the Reading protest, the majority of the Vale pitch invaders for the Swindon game were non-violent. They didn't get harsh penalties as a result. That is the differential factor I think - it's not a black and white same ban for anyone treading on the turf, just the same as it's not the same ban for every foul tackle in the game - some get greater punishments than others. It's people taking it to extremes, fighting other fans, trying to attack the referee who get harsher penalties than those simply coming onto the pitch. I fear I've taken this off topic far too much. I've made my point, some will doubtless disagree but I'll shut up now.

Apologies - I am as guilty as anyone of taking this off-topic

No, I think what some of us are saying is the level of punishment depends on what you do when you enter the pitch. Reading fans enter the pitch to protest. No violence ensues but game is disrupted - club is given a warning of points deduction if it happens again. Vale fans enter the pitch (in the main) to celebrate a win over Swindon. Like Reading, the club is also warned. Some individuals that night (who were threatening violence) were identified and had individual punishments. It was people from both clubs if I remember rightly who were picked up off CCTV. This latest incident hasn't received punishment yet. The club is suspending him until the police report. I suspect the police report will weigh up if he was threatening violence and an appropriate punishment dished out. It ISN'T a lifetime ban yet because the decision hasn't been reached yet.

I've seen people keep mentioning Reading. 1. The FA did act on that - they've been told they'll be docked points if it happens again. 2. If everyone is so upset with the Reading fans then what about the Vale fans coming on after we beat Swindon? Or is it one rule for fans of another club? If people want to keep saying Reading fans should be punished more harshly, should the same rules apply for the Vale fans on the pitch then? I personally think the difference is that it's one thing to enter the field of play for a protest or a celebration. The rules say you shouldn't do that. Rightly, there is a level of punishment if you break them. In Reading's case it's very much a "don't do it again or else" (I think Vale got the same sort of message after Swindon so there's some consistency there). However, it's another thing to enter the field of play and try and smack someone. That (to my view) is what was attempted on Saturday and was attempted by some fans (of both sides) during the Swindon game. That, I think, is a worse offence and deserves a greater, individual punishment. Speaking personally, I think the rules have it wrong here. The FA may charge the club with failing to control its fans and give Vale a fine. I think one way of stopping it would be to drop that notion (how can a club really control thousands of people) and just fine the individual.

Totally agree. We know the rules. To try and lamp someone in any trade because you are unhappy with their performance is simply not on. The ref may have been doing a poor job and was being rightly jeered for it. But to try and confront him about it is just not on - not only because no-one deserves that but also because of the damage that person has potentially done to Vale's reputation now. The incident has been covered by loads of websites and newspapers. The last thing the club probably needs is an FA fine because of the actions of one individual.

Left wingback.

I believe the club have been disappointed with the quality of DJs in the UK and are busy scouting the Scandinavian, American and New Zealand markets for a possible replacement...

I'm with you on this. I think in an ideal world, you don't have to do too much in the January window, just maybe the odd loan in and out. In that ideal world you then don't pay over the odds for players. However, for a couple of January windows we've not been in that ideal world. It's something to aspire to and would be great if we could do it but we're simply not there. Last January we were in dire need of striking additions with a day or so to go and this window (oh look it's the same)... I think there's a short-term question - which is there's some maths to be done weighing up whether it's worth paying over the odds for someone who will potentially keep us in the division and not paying it and the loss of income a relegation battle may result in. And then there's the long-term question of - how do they make sure the squad is balanced so this doesn't happen every January. That's for another day but, a starter for one, I think they need to think about the number of players with injury issues that came in the summer. But right now, with hours to go, I think the club has to think about what needs to be done to keep us safe, even if that is breaking the bank for someone.

Are you sure Darrell? Former Bristol City, Bristol Rovers, Oxford United and Port Vale forward Matty Taylor is Cheltenham Town target - Gloucestershire Live WWW.GLOUCESTERSHIRELIVE.CO.UK

To me (and I say I'm no scout) he sounds like a young Uche. Not the most prolific (which may explain why he's a lower league player) but a six footer, muscular and difficult to get off the ball. He's also a fair few years younger than Uche. After all that, he could be the next Ryan Loft but he seems to have the attributes to be an Uche replacement - but would cost a fair chunk of money. As I say - is it worth an investment to guarantee safety though?

Erm, sorry @TJHValiant but he didn't play for Stevenage in League 2 - he's only ever played L1 football (for Wimbledon, Accrington and now Stevenage). Are you confusing him with another player?