robf

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?

I mentioned this guy in the summer. I am no scout so no idea if he would be the answer but interesting that clubs in our sort of level are circling. If true, then they clearly think he's a good addition. It may cost a six figure sum but it may be a player who is more of an Uche replacement (he's 6 foot 4) than an unknown, inexperienced loanee (and though it may cost - would that be worth paying to ensure L1 survival?) https://the72.co.uk/2024/01/30/exeter-city-cambridge-united-and-cheltenham-town-eyeing-league-one-striker/

I think Cass and Balmer are both the same age - both had an error in them, I thought Cass was more reliable, more willing to break up front and was our own player after all. So, I was always a bit confused when a loanee was often chosen ahead of him. I'm not saying Cass is a world beater but I would have had him ahead of Balmer (i.e. Cass on the bench rather than Balmer) in the pecking order.

You can have as many as you want - but you can only pick five in the squad.

Not if that academy in addition to self-funding itself is producing a batch of players who could make it in the first-team - Plant (already in there), Shorrock, Lomax, Walters, Dipepa, McDermott, Brazier etc. In that case, it's producing potentially some first-team players for the club and because it's self-funding there's no outlay for those players. BTW, I don't think all of the above will make it (that's somewhat unlikely) but one or two (perhaps more) may. I would also think that with the new rules about having a proportion of "homegrown" players in the squad it's essential to have an academy that is producing decent prospects. You can wish all you want for big-name, big-money additions to the squad but the rules still state there's a limit to how many you can pick in your squad - you still need to have some club-produced talent in there. If the Academy can produce those "homegrown" kids to as high a standard as possible then that's got to be a good thing - especially if the thing that is producing them is doing so at zero cost to the club.

From what I've read about Hudlin he's a bit of an oddity. He's like a poor man's Peter Crouch (or perhaps in lower league terms Kevin Francis) in that he may be tall but his ability (and that can be in question given his record) is more about the ball on the ground, rather than beating players with power/aerial ability. So, he's not a targetman as such in the same way that Crouch/Francis, despite their height, didn't really score too many headers. Having said that, I would 100% agree that a pacy forward would be a good signing . Someone to play off the likes of Uche and to pick up Wilson/Chislett's (and perhaps Gore/Weir's too) through balls. Hudlin may not be a classic target man but he also isn't renowned for pace either (at least I think so) so he wouldn't fit that profile. I'm not sure Hudlin is the right signing but I'd be delighted to be totally wrong if he does sign.

Klopp told the assembled media: "After reading the reaction of some Liverpool fans upset at the loan of a promising defender to the likes of Port Vale, I have to now take responsibility and step down..."

Yep, that would make sense if Vale are looking for one loan signing from Chelsea and one from the Championship (which I am sure I have read somewhere). A LWB (possibly Sturge) from Chelsea and possibly Hudlin from Hudd. Not entirely sure about that second signing (would be delighted to be proved wrong) but I'm commenting about what may happen rather than what I'd like to see happen. EDIT: additional note. Putting two and two together and making five... looking at Hudlin's contract situation, it makes a lot of sense he will go on loan this window. He's out of contract in the summer and not broken through to the first-team regularly. From a Huddersfield perspective you get him out on loan to either a) give him a final chance to earn a new deal b) get him off the books as you're going to release him anyhow c) give him a chance to try and impress other clubs for when he becomes a free agent in the summer

On the Chelsea front. They (of course) have a load of young forwards and I think it could be anyone's guess if Vale have targeted one of them. However, if it is a LWB then there's an obvious contender... Zak Sturge is a 19 year-old, six foot two inches tall, attacking, left wingback. He was on loan to Peterborough for the first-half of the season but was recalled in January after "limited first-team opportunities". I reckon he could be a good bet if Vale are looking to bring LWB cover in. Zak Sturge is a defender who joined our Academy from Brighton during the 2022/23 season. WWW.CHELSEAFC.COM

I don't think that's the case - it's just that Vale are having to address it one position per window at a time... Let's take goalkeeping... for a couple of seasons we had sub-standard signings padded out by loanees. For last season, for over half the season we had Jack Stevens, a loanee. That fits your method of padding out positions with loanees. But then we put in more budget in the summer and got Connor Ripley, who's good for a few years I would hope. That has effectively sorted out the GK position long-term. The club say they want to do the same with forwards this summer - that is address that position by allocating more budget to it to get a higher quality player(s) in. That would potentially sort that position for a couple of years IF they get it right. Clearly even then there's still gaps but I guess the club can only do it one position at a time unless they get a cash windfall somehow. However, there is also the parallel long-term project of bringing young homegrown kids in. So, I guess potentially they would perhaps hope that the likes of Shorrock would sort out the LWB, Walters come into central midfield etc. Clearly some of the kids won't make it but if one or two join Plant in the squad then that would also resolve those positions too. So, yes there is a reliance on loans to fill the gaps right now, but I do think there is a plan to bring in permanent and youth players (and then the Vale can look at adding loanees that add value rather than using them as 'cover' for a lack of permanent signings) - but it's just a slow process and doesn't fill all the gaps yet.

Maybe but not necessarily. Newport have been bought by Hew Jenkins, former Swansea chairman so maybe their transfer budget has gone up and they are strengthening their squad rather than bringing in a replacement?

Perhaps you're right and in the know - I certainly don't know who they are targeting... However, signing Young would directly contradict some of the stuff said in the fans forum last night that is the Vale - will probably only get loans in this window, permanent moves are too expensive in this window , the best time to recruit permanent players is in the summer, they are looking outside of the UK as transfer fees are too high etc...

There was an interview with Will Ryder in the Mike Baggaley newsletter and the reply was the club were bemused by it all and had stressed there had been no contact from any of those clubs enquiring about Brazier.

I think there's an element of spin from the club about their status as a prime loan location - but that's only to be expected, your official channels are always going to carry positive PR messages. But then again I think there has been progress. I wonder in terms of scouted, it doesn't mean as a unique case but rather Man Utd paid due diligence and reckoned Vale was a good place for loan players. It doesn't mean we're the number one or only destination but rather we're one of several clubs they have reviewed and we're not seen as somewhere you don't send your youngsters (which perhaps we would have been a few years ago). I think big clubs are always going to have a number of clubs they deal with often, simply because they often have quite a few to loan out (of varying levels of development) so they are going to want a range of clubs at different levels of the pyramid, in different locations etc. For me, I think it's a good thing that Vale are clearly in a group of clubs that several Premier League clubs believe create a good environment for young loanees. While some of Flitcroft's statements may be pushing things to the extreme, I think it's perhaps to be expected and in fact some of this PR (the positive endorsements from Arblaster and Devine, for instance) may have actually have helped Vale make their case. Ultimately, whether you agree with Flitcroft's comments or not - the proof of the pudding is that this season we have had some of the most successful loanees in years, who have left the club singing our praises and have now been replaced with another crop of Premier League loanees. That surely can only be a good thing and something the club should be proud to promote.

There's some full 90 minute games from years long gone on the OVF YouTube channel if you are missing watching Vale in action. Note: they are of varying quality due to a) VHS tape deterioration b) production values (the in-house ones can be poor quality) so you may need to click on a few to find the ones with the best video/audio. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLitB7Hn9e6bkCSpx3SJKU6yenZxE0vfz-

I've found the occasional packet of half a dozen oatcakes for sale in my local Sainsbury's here in Bridgwater. It's always a total bonus to find some lurking there.