Coyle Out?

[Garrp]

No..The question was whether we would have been better off getting by without Eagles & keeping AAH instead.

 

Despite the injury to Lee & there being no out & out competition for the position, Eagles has not been good enough to guarantee his place in the side whereas AAH would almost certainly be our first choice keeper now. This would suggest that we would have been better off keeping AAH.

 

Any comments about "after the event" or "hindsight" are meaningless as the majority of people queried these deals at the time.

 

So lets go back to the beginning

 

We don't buy Eagles and we go with what weve got

 

we play one of Pratley, M Davies, Blake, Ngog or k Davies on the right.

 

great idea

[Sluffy]

You forgot Petrov because isn't that exactly what the man who signed Eagles (twice!) did in his last match?

 

Kick off v Chelsea - K.Davies on the right - Eagles on the bench.

 

Second half - Petrov on the right - Eagles on the bench.

 

Eagles came on as sub with just 16 minutes to go.

 

 

 

Coyle at least currently thinks that there are TWO other players a better option than Eagles on the right.

 

Even he's reached the conclusion that we are better off without him in the starting side - even without Lee being available!

 

 

 

What's it matter anyway - it's not like we can un-buy him - the money as already been spent and up to now it looks like we bought another dud.

Edited October 6, 2011 by Sluffy

[tylswhite]

Hypothetically the problem is if we bring AAH back Ngog is gone and we are then left with SKD, Klasnic, Tuncay & Blake. Only one of them knows where the goals are and he has fitness issues and is a bit of a nutter, the other 3 are getting on or cant run or both.

 

Ngog will be our first choice striker eventually and I would rather have him than AAH back and maybe 2 goals at most off our goal difference.

[Traf]

I blame Eddie Davies, the tight-fisted cunt.

 

He should have tipped up another ?25m in the summer. A distinct lack of ambition.