Tyreik Wright

Villa have recalled winger Tyreik Wright from loan at Bradford as we are rumoured to be signing him.  He's not greatly experienced but Bradford fans are very unhappy at this move.

'Erald

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

if he comes here wouldnt that leave us a little overstocked on midfielders/wingers??

i would think a defender should be on the shopping list before we go for a player in an area we have plenty of bodies in

Angry wrote:

if he comes here wouldnt that leave us a little overstocked on midfielders/wingers??

i would think a defender should be on the shopping list before we go for a player in an area we have plenty of bodies in

Azaz and Cosgrove are loanees and Mayor is no spring chicken (and would struggle in the Championship imo)


Also wouldn't be surprised if Schoee changes the preferred formation for next season.

Grovehill wrote:

Angry wrote:

if he comes here wouldnt that leave us a little overstocked on midfielders/wingers??

i would think a defender should be on the shopping list before we go for a player in an area we have plenty of bodies in

Azaz and Cosgrove are loanees and Mayor is no spring chicken (and would struggle in the Championship imo)


Also wouldn't be surprised if Schoee changes the preferred formation for next season.

I am on about now and this season we can worry about next season in the summertime when we know which league we are in.

Angry wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

Angry wrote:

if he comes here wouldnt that leave us a little overstocked on midfielders/wingers??

i would think a defender should be on the shopping list before we go for a player in an area we have plenty of bodies in

Azaz and Cosgrove are loanees and Mayor is no spring chicken (and would struggle in the Championship imo)


Also wouldn't be surprised if Schoee changes the preferred formation for next season.

I am on about now and this season we can worry about next season in the summertime when we know which league we are in.

I'm with Angers on this front. We still struggle at the back at times and did last season, if you watched the Wendies game yesterday their defence is superb, not at all worried about soaking up pressure from a top half prem team all afternoon, they would have battered us like a piece of Cod.

Angry wrote:

if he comes here wouldnt that leave us a little overstocked on midfielders/wingers??

i would think a defender should be on the shopping list before we go for a player in an area we have plenty of bodies in

unless they know already that some are going out the mayor rumour resurfaced again along with striker Hardie as well

RegGreen wrote:

Angry wrote:

if he comes here wouldnt that leave us a little overstocked on midfielders/wingers??

i would think a defender should be on the shopping list before we go for a player in an area we have plenty of bodies in

unless they know already that some are going out the mayor rumour resurfaced again along with striker Hardie as well

Im sure one or two will be leaving this month but i dont see this guy being a replacement for Mayor as they are two different types of players.

If we sell Mayor or Hardie we are mental. My opinion, obviously that of a negative, mouth breathing Hallet hating twat but there it is.

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

i agree fully with that.

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

Spot on.

Czarcasm wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

Spot on.

It would be spot on IF either player had put in a transfer request, quite different from the club transfer listing a player as happened with Pan, which is in black and white from club sources.
One step forward, two steps back, queue applause from Argyle fans, I really do dispair.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

Spot on.

It would be spot on IF either player had put in a transfer request, quite different from the club transfer listing a player as happened with Pan, which is in black and white from club sources.
One step forward, two steps back, queue applause from Argyle fans, I really do dispair.

they listed him as he turned down their offer and made it clear he wanted to move on they enforced the option of a further 12 months to sell him and not loose him for free. Nothing new there again many clubs rich and poor would have done the same and have done and continue to do so. Besides getting £500,000 for an injury crock and someone who wouldnt have fit in with this new system at all as his postition/role being redundant while we are top of the league is good buisness from the club not as if hes been missed is it.

A sad day for Bradford City as Tyreik Wright heads to Plymouth Argyle

Angry wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

Spot on.

It would be spot on IF either player had put in a transfer request, quite different from the club transfer listing a player as happened with Pan, which is in black and white from club sources.
One step forward, two steps back, queue applause from Argyle fans, I really do dispair.

they listed him as he turned down their offer and made it clear he wanted to move on they enforced the option of a further 12 months to sell him and not loose him for free. Nothing new there again many clubs rich and poor would have done the same and have done and continue to do so. Besides getting £500,000 for an injury crock and someone who wouldnt have fit in with this new system at all as his postition/role being redundant while we are top of the league is good buisness from the club not as if hes been missed is it.

The club transfer listed him he didnt ask to be transer listed. End of.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Angry wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

Spot on.

It would be spot on IF either player had put in a transfer request, quite different from the club transfer listing a player as happened with Pan, which is in black and white from club sources.
One step forward, two steps back, queue applause from Argyle fans, I really do dispair.

they listed him as he turned down their offer and made it clear he wanted to move on they enforced the option of a further 12 months to sell him and not loose him for free. Nothing new there again many clubs rich and poor would have done the same and have done and continue to do so. Besides getting £500,000 for an injury crock and someone who wouldnt have fit in with this new system at all as his postition/role being redundant while we are top of the league is good buisness from the club not as if hes been missed is it.

The club transfer listed him he didnt ask to be transer listed. End of.

no cause if he wanted to stay here he would have accepted the contract offer that was offered which had improvements each time on the 4 times that he was offered terms and it wasnt to his and his agents liking. Thats the matter you refuse to accept and move on from still. He did not want to be here and had we forced him into staying here to see out his year like you seem to feel that we should have he more than likely would have demand a transfer and we arent a charity case nor is camara bigger than the club and wouldnt even make most fans top 11 of all time sides so we sold him. Good business all round.

Angry wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

Spot on.

It would be spot on IF either player had put in a transfer request, quite different from the club transfer listing a player as happened with Pan, which is in black and white from club sources.
One step forward, two steps back, queue applause from Argyle fans, I really do dispair.

they listed him as he turned down their offer and made it clear he wanted to move on they enforced the option of a further 12 months to sell him and not loose him for free. Nothing new there again many clubs rich and poor would have done the same and have done and continue to do so. Besides getting £500,000 for an injury crock and someone who wouldnt have fit in with this new system at all as his postition/role being redundant while we are top of the league is good buisness from the club not as if hes been missed is it.

The club transfer listed him he didn't ask to be transfer listed. End of. Pan was contracted until the end of this season, so from that we can assume he was happy to stay until then?
I get the club wanted to cash in but lets not change the facts to make it look like this was instigated by Pan it wasn't. And no one knew he was a "crock" until about November.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Angry wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

Spot on.

It would be spot on IF either player had put in a transfer request, quite different from the club transfer listing a player as happened with Pan, which is in black and white from club sources.
One step forward, two steps back, queue applause from Argyle fans, I really do dispair.

they listed him as he turned down their offer and made it clear he wanted to move on they enforced the option of a further 12 months to sell him and not loose him for free. Nothing new there again many clubs rich and poor would have done the same and have done and continue to do so. Besides getting £500,000 for an injury crock and someone who wouldnt have fit in with this new system at all as his postition/role being redundant while we are top of the league is good buisness from the club not as if hes been missed is it.

The club transfer listed him he didn't ask to be transfer listed. End of. Pan was contracted until the end of this season, so from that we can assume he was happy to stay until then?
I get the club wanted to cash in but lets not change the facts to make it look like this was instigated by Pan it wasn't. And no one knew he was a "crock" until about November.

uhmm no cause it was in his contract that the club could activate the additional 12 months not his option so that was triggered so the club could sell him regardless to him rejecting new and improve terms for a new contract regardless to the current one still having that clause. Him rejecting is NOT a sign that someone wants to stay even more so when he made it clear to the club he wanted to move on too which resulted in the club transfer listing him.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Angry wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

Spot on.

It would be spot on IF either player had put in a transfer request, quite different from the club transfer listing a player as happened with Pan, which is in black and white from club sources.
One step forward, two steps back, queue applause from Argyle fans, I really do dispair.

they listed him as he turned down their offer and made it clear he wanted to move on they enforced the option of a further 12 months to sell him and not loose him for free. Nothing new there again many clubs rich and poor would have done the same and have done and continue to do so. Besides getting £500,000 for an injury crock and someone who wouldnt have fit in with this new system at all as his postition/role being redundant while we are top of the league is good buisness from the club not as if hes been missed is it.

The club transfer listed him he didn't ask to be transfer listed. End of. Pan was contracted until the end of this season, so from that we can assume he was happy to stay until then?
I get the club wanted to cash in but lets not change the facts to make it look like this was instigated by Pan it wasn't. And no one knew he was a "crock" until about November.

It is quite surreal how you steadfastly refuse to accept what Schumacher said - yes, what Shumacher said…that agents had got in Pans Ear and had turned his head.

From that point onward you couldn’t get a more definitive situation whereby it is Pan absolutely having his head turned and angling for a move!

Czarcasm wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Angry wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

Spot on.

It would be spot on IF either player had put in a transfer request, quite different from the club transfer listing a player as happened with Pan, which is in black and white from club sources.
One step forward, two steps back, queue applause from Argyle fans, I really do dispair.

they listed him as he turned down their offer and made it clear he wanted to move on they enforced the option of a further 12 months to sell him and not loose him for free. Nothing new there again many clubs rich and poor would have done the same and have done and continue to do so. Besides getting £500,000 for an injury crock and someone who wouldnt have fit in with this new system at all as his postition/role being redundant while we are top of the league is good buisness from the club not as if hes been missed is it.

The club transfer listed him he didn't ask to be transfer listed. End of. Pan was contracted until the end of this season, so from that we can assume he was happy to stay until then?
I get the club wanted to cash in but lets not change the facts to make it look like this was instigated by Pan it wasn't. And no one knew he was a "crock" until about November.

It is quite surreal how you steadfastly refuse to accept what Schumacher said - yes, what Shumacher said…that agents had got in Pans Ear and had turned his head.

From that point onward you couldn’t get a more definitive situation whereby it is Pan absolutely having his head turned and angling for a move!

The facts.
Pan signed for Argyle until he end of this season which suggests whether he liked it or not he would have had to play until the end of this season. If he had refused to play his value would have been non existent.
Pan refused to sign an extension past THIS season.
The club decided to cash in for half a.million after THEY transfer listed him, all in black and white and from the clubs mouth.
There is nothing from the club ever saying Pan asked to be transfer listed that all comes from you lot.
I do get he has gone and with hindsight ie injuries then it turned out to be a good deal what I cannot cope with is the re writing of history about an unhappy player ect, ect.
I dont care what Schuey said he like you is just tying to cover the clubs blushes.
Selling clubs never get anywhere it is why we are one of the only clubs in the runoff if not tue only one to have never played the prem.

not really a selling club when you move a player who's contract is expiring. If he had 2-3 years left then maybe that argument would have legs.

again the 12 month extension was in his contract that he signed when he joined us before hand that the club could exercise or not Pan has no player option so the club could do that with or without his blessing. They have that clause with a few other players in the squad, its not something they agreed with him during these contract talks that failed.
Again he told the club he wasnt signing and wanted to move on.
Again the club took that option after he rejected their offer's in order to sell him for profit over allowing him to leave for free. That is good business.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Angry wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

Spot on.

It would be spot on IF either player had put in a transfer request, quite different from the club transfer listing a player as happened with Pan, which is in black and white from club sources.
One step forward, two steps back, queue applause from Argyle fans, I really do dispair.

they listed him as he turned down their offer and made it clear he wanted to move on they enforced the option of a further 12 months to sell him and not loose him for free. Nothing new there again many clubs rich and poor would have done the same and have done and continue to do so. Besides getting £500,000 for an injury crock and someone who wouldnt have fit in with this new system at all as his postition/role being redundant while we are top of the league is good buisness from the club not as if hes been missed is it.

The club transfer listed him he didn't ask to be transfer listed. End of. Pan was contracted until the end of this season, so from that we can assume he was happy to stay until then?
I get the club wanted to cash in but lets not change the facts to make it look like this was instigated by Pan it wasn't. And no one knew he was a "crock" until about November.

It is quite surreal how you steadfastly refuse to accept what Schumacher said - yes, what Shumacher said…that agents had got in Pans Ear and had turned his head.

From that point onward you couldn’t get a more definitive situation whereby it is Pan absolutely having his head turned and angling for a move!

I dont care what Schuey said he like you is just tying to cover the clubs blushes.

And there it is. When a statement doesn’t fit your narrative, Shumacher is a liar.

Shorely even you can see that that’s about as lame an argument as you could ever give?

Earwegoagain wrote:

Angry wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And if either of them or any other player or even the manager decide they want to leave because their heads have been turned because of money offered or a ‘glamour club’ wants them which would probably mean more money than Argyle can offer then there is only 3 things that our club can do.

1 - refuse the bid and offer the player more money to stay and hopefully he will accept.

2 - If the player says no to the better deal then refuse the bid and hold him to the contract he signed and hope he will work to his full potential.

3 - If the player says no to the better deal then sell him for as much as the club can get and get someone in who wants to play for Argyle.

As far as I am concerned there is no point in keeping a player who doesn’t want to play for Argyle and there is every reason to cash in on the player.

Spot on.

It would be spot on IF either player had put in a transfer request, quite different from the club transfer listing a player as happened with Pan, which is in black and white from club sources.
One step forward, two steps back, queue applause from Argyle fans, I really do dispair.

they listed him as he turned down their offer and made it clear he wanted to move on they enforced the option of a further 12 months to sell him and not loose him for free. Nothing new there again many clubs rich and poor would have done the same and have done and continue to do so. Besides getting £500,000 for an injury crock and someone who wouldnt have fit in with this new system at all as his postition/role being redundant while we are top of the league is good buisness from the club not as if hes been missed is it.

The club transfer listed him he didn't ask to be transfer listed. End of. Pan was contracted until the end of this season, so from that we can assume he was happy to stay until then?
I get the club wanted to cash in but lets not change the facts to make it look like this was instigated by Pan it wasn't. And no one knew he was a "crock" until about November.

He was injured in March, didn’t start preseason training because of his groin injury, so he was buggered from March.

its official he has signed


wright that is not pan


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

link wrote:

Tyreik Wright has become Argyle’s fifth signing of the January transfer window.

The 21-year-old has been on loan at Bradford City from Aston Villa, but now leaves Villa Park in order to join Argyle on a permanent basis. He joins for an undisclosed fee.

Tyreik is a versatile attacking player, who has typically played wide on the left for the Bantams this season, and has also played as a striker.

Quick, direct and never shy to take on a defender, Tyreik has starred for Bradford this season. He played 17 times for City, scoring four times, and earned positive reviews for his performances at Valley Parade, with Bradford fifth in Sky Bet League Two.

From County Cork in Ireland, Wright almost went into Gaelic football, but opted for soccer, and eventually would head to England, and Aston Villa, when he was 15, in 2018.

He made his professional debut for Walsall, having moved to the Saddlers for the second half of the 2020/21 season. He played 16 games in his time there, often alongside Dan Scarr.

The following season, Tyreik played 18 times for Salford City in the first half of the season, then spent the latter half of it with Colchester United, where he played a further 12 times.

Along the way, Wright has picked up international honours with Ireland, playing for the Under-17s, Under-18s, Under-19s and the Under-21s, for whom he has played 15 times. His most recent appearance for the Ireland Under-21s was the European Championship qualifier against Israel in which Finn Azaz, on loan to Argyle from Aston Villa, made his Irish bow.

Tyreik is not eligible for selection for Argyle’s Papa Johns Trophy quarter-final tie against Bristol Rovers Tuesday night, as he has played for Bradford in that competition, but he will be available for league action from the weekend.

Argyle boss Steven Schumacher said: "Tyreik is another very talented youngster that we are delighted has signed for Argyle. He is an exciting player who enjoys taking people on and will get the Green Army off their seats.

“He has explosive power, really good ability, and hopefully is going to be a very good player for us. He will offer an option for us in various different positions, as he is very versatile.

“Credit once again to our hard-working recruitment and data teams who have identified several players that will benefit Argyle now, and going forward.

“Welcome aboard, Tyreik.”

Neil Dewsnip, Argyle Director of Football, added: "I’m delighted we have signed Tyreik, a very promising, attacking young player. We have watched his progress at Bradford City, his progress with the Ireland Under-21 team and we think he is an excellent addition both in the short and longer term at Argyle.”

Tyreik will wear squad number 29. His shirt is sponsored by Natalie and Les Farley.

Welcome, Tyreik.