Released and retained lists....

No worries guys, Shez must have got it right.. After all, Cobi agrees!

Moronic decision from one, the other is just a moron.

Agree in general with the list, but who knows.. Maybe we offered him a deal and he rejected. I hear his wages were pretty good..

spowell92 wrote:

Blanchard as a CB isn't to be underestimated. If we play against him next season, our strikers will have a tough day. His biggest flaw is his use of arms though, he's a grabber and fell foul to that v Oxford (?) a few weeks back and I think that's why he was sent off at Rochdale on the final day last season.

I really did rate Trotman too, from when he joined until March. He made a very solid partnership with Nelse and a good 3 when Blanchard was added in there. All of a sudden his form dropped dramatically and it was one clumsy error after another. Cost us about 4 goals in 3 matches!

I see nothing other than Reid destroying Blanchard with his pace and power.

Blanchard struggled with Zebroski at Newport, and Reid is much more direct when at full steam.

GreenSam wrote:

ejh wrote:

GreenSam, disagree entirely regarding Blanchard.

Too weak to excel at CB, mobility issues and lacks pace for RB. Can't distribute which rules out midfield.

Earns too well to consider such a pay reduction. If we are trimming the fat, Max is the perfect example of where it needs to be cut.

Young is different in that he has one excellent attribute in his passing range, and at 21, will be a much improved playmaking midfielder at 23/24. His contract would have been an investment at quite a reasonable cost.

If he does earn well and wouldn't consider a reduction then I'd see the logic in the decision. Trimming the fat and all.

Purely on ability though, I think he would excel at CB next to a dominant partner (ala Wotton, Purse). He ability to position himself defensively is the best we've got at the club imo (even better than Nelson) and he can make last ditch challenges very well when he's needed to. He's not a ball playing defender but he can (usually) stop men getting past him. Playing next to Trotman though is going to make his own job tougher. I think if we could have signed a shouter CB and paired him with Max then that could have been worth trying- but agreed with you that today's biggest disappointment is Young.

him and trotman were liabilities together clean slate next season with a better pair at cb.

UndercoverGreen wrote:

No worries guys, Shez must have got it right.. After all, Cobi agrees!

Moronic decision from one, the other is just a moron.

Agree in general with the list, but who knows.. Maybe we offered him a deal and he rejected. I hear his wages were pretty good..

It is a bit vague who you are referring to here.

In any case these players have flatly been refused deals. No negotiations have taken place.

Bhasera had a deal on the table until July last season - that is a player negotiating his contract with the club.

No but they will have spoken beforehand about lengths and pay etc. It's why I suspect Cole left as he had a discussion and decided he didn't want to be no 2. Maybe Shez outlined he would be receiving a pay cut and he simply didn't see the point of it anyway. Who knows.

I have heard an oft repeated expression regarding Young - how long do you give contracts based on 'potential'?

'He was given time and chances, he didn't take it' etc.

What centre midfielder in the history of football had reached their full potential by the age of 21? Had fully physically and mentally developed and was at the top of their all round game?

I cannot think of a single midfielder that didn't go through a significant development and maturing phase aged 21 - 25 to emerge much better players than they were as early 20 year olds. Meanwhile 25 - 29, that is a player's prime. We are still 4 years off that even starting for Young, and yet we are getting rid because he hasn't 'fulfilled his potential'.

We have witnessed first hand the rapid improvement of Hourihane after three years of constant first team football aged 19 - 23 - it is so strange to deny Young that same nurturing process.

It may simply be that, though Sheridan recognised Young's abilities & potential, he doesn't provide what he wants at the club. He doesn't play in a style that Sheridan wants to develop. Whatever, let's hope that Young gets signed up by another club and establishes a successful career. He deserves it.

Mock Cuncher wrote:

I'm more pissed off about keeping Wotton than I am about letting Young go.

Feeeerkin hell I thought we'd got rid of this clomper years ago...before he got slower (and slower, and slower).

Amen to that, Mockers...

What wotton lacks in speed he makes up for in commitment

What Wotton lacks in speed could get me to Jupiter by tomorrow.

I'm committed too, Can I have a contract please.

Mock Cuncher wrote:

What Wotton lacks in speed could get me to Jupiter by tomorrow.

he lacks alot less then you.
that's for sure

Jethro, you're either blind, never go to watch us play or are just deranged - possibly all three.

I see in today's Herald that they suggest that JS is keen to get Lee Cox down here..Not a new' story, but one to keep an eye on..

We were linked with Cox all season - he seems a player that is easier to want than actually get.

But Shezza persuaded Banton to sign permanently so who knows.

He had the balls to drop Young so you would like to think he has a guaranteed better replacement lined up.

ejh wrote:

We were linked with Cox all season - he seems a player that is easier to want than actually get.

But Shezza persuaded Banton to sign permanently so who knows.

He had the balls to drop Young so you would like to think he has a guaranteed better replacement lined up.

As soon as Cox was mentioned again, I thought of Banton.

Another player who made a big difference the season before who we figured wouldn't become available to 'the likes of us' again. Unlike Banton I'd hope that Cox has retained some of his ability and focus and isn't still trading on the 'glory' of a few good games in a relegation scrap in 2013.

It was a mystery how Banton suddenly became available, surely Palace and MKD hadn't missed something? Turns out they hadn't, he'd become pish. I reckon we should therefore be cautious of rushing in there and ask ourselves just why Cox has become available again.

We rushed in with 'T-shirt boy' and now Banton needs to be subjected to a serious 'check-up from the neck up' this summer. With the aim being a smaller, higher quality squad we can't afford another passenger so we'd to thoroughly look at other 'gift horses' more closely.

I think Banton will come good. For whatever reason he didn't fit at MKD and they destroyed his confidence and at Palace he was obviously superfluous. The cumulative effect is to destroy the lad's match fitness and confidence - both of which will come back given time and encouragement. He'll do fine next season, I reckon.

The Cox thing is hard to fathom. He's barely played at Swindon and you would have thought that shipping him out somewhere, anywhere, would have benefitted both him and them. Maybe with his contract running down he didn't want to risk getting an injury that would stop him getting a new club and just wouldn't go anywhere on loan.

Here's hoping on Banton, it just worries me that the same could follow with Cox. Not sure we can afford one 'Rufus Smalls style rehabilitation project for mentally scarred footballers', let alone two.

Tangential to that is the attitude of the fans if/when he comes back. The levels of messianic slurping that went on on PASOTI the night we signed him was just embarrassing. The 'great and the good' would happily have handed over their most eligible daughters to him.

We were playing well and were settled at the time, with no appreciable match exposure and being ineligible to play against Vale anyway Sheridan should never have upset the apple cart by starting Banton in the next game. I've defended Sheridan over many things but that was just nuts, I think he just caved in to the unrealistic expectation or maybe just threw him in in a triumph of hope over plain facts. Either way it derailed that game, disrupted the continuity before Vale and arguably lost us momentum at a critical time.

If Cox did return therefore I hope Sheridan, and the armchair experts who'll demand his inclusion, will be a little more patient and pragmatic with him. He's probably not the messiah, just as Jason Banton wasn't, isn't and won't be unless he gets his shit together.

X Isle wrote:

Here's hoping on Banton, it just worries me that the same could follow with Cox. Not sure we can afford one 'Rufus Smalls style rehabilitation project for mentally scarred footballers', let alone two.  

Tangential to that is the attitude of the fans if/when he comes back. The levels of messianic slurping that went on on PASOTI the night we signed him was just embarrassing. The 'great and the good' would happily have handed over their most eligible daughters to him.

We were playing well and were settled at the time, with no appreciable match exposure and being ineligible to play against Vale anyway Sheridan should never have upset the apple cart by starting Banton in the next game. I've defended Sheridan over many things but that was just nuts, I think he just caved in to the unrealistic expectation or maybe just threw him in in a triumph of hope over plain facts. Either way it derailed that game, disrupted the continuity before Vale and arguably lost us momentum at a critical time.

If Cox did return therefore I hope Sheridan, and the armchair experts who'll demand his inclusion, will be a little more patient and pragmatic with him. He's probably not the messiah, just as Jason Banton wasn't, isn't and won't be unless he gets his shit together.        

Amen to that one..

The difference with Cox is that he always gave 100% for us and wasn't dependant on everyone else passing to him.

He was just a good player generally- not a good player under specific circumstances like Banton is.

Banton still has more talent than Young will ever have.    Seriously though Banton will come good.

I agree with most of Sherries comments on this one, not enough improvement shown for me.

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