Well that's what we need. We miss Baldock, as there is no movement
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] There is ZERO chance of SIGNING anyone today.
- Thread starter Bladders
- Start date
Well that's what we need. We miss Baldock, as there is no movement
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BensGrandad
New member
Would Peter Crouch be cheap enough for a 1 year contract to score the goals to keep us up as an improvement on what we have at the moment.
S'hampton Seagull
Well-known member
Yes, just the nippy striker we are looking for [emoji85]
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
BensGrandad
New member
Not the nippy striker we all crave but an improvement as a target man on what we have with a lot of Premier experience. Wouldnt think that he would cost that much
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
How much is not much
crookie
Well-known member
Lost in the Dad's race at school according to Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink on Goals on Sunday, so it's a no from me
BensGrandad
New member
But would have won the high jump. No idea of his value to Stoke but cant be a lot and probably not as much as we paid for GM.,
I’ve been watching Brighton for over 40 years and can’t ever remember a player being “unveiled” at a game.
crookie
Well-known member
I get where you're coming from, but the priority needs to be some creativity. I don't remember our strikers having a sniff in the first 2 games, so whoever is up front, Murray/Hemed/Crouch, is irrelevant if there is zero service
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
If you've no idea of his value how can you say it can't be much to Stoke
1. He played for Stoke against Everton last week and was on the bench in their last game too. Stoke use him as an impact sub so why would they sell?
2. He is probably on £50k+ per week. We wouldn't pay him that.
3. He is 37 in January and settled in Stoke. Why move when he'll probably retire next year.
4. We already have two target men/immobile strikers, we don't need a third
File this with your Torres inquiry under 'not in a millions years'.
Next!
BensGrandad
New member
1. They have just signed and played another striker
2. Possibly not a lot more than our top earners
3 We only need him for this season and usually pictured in the papers either in London or Dubai with his wife
4. Far more effective than the two we have and has vast Premiere experience and we need a 3rd striker perhaps a speedier one though
Leeds and Celtic locked in battle to sign Arsenal striker Chuba Akpom on permanent deal
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/leeds-celtic-locked-battle-sign-11024646
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/leeds-celtic-locked-battle-sign-11024646
Gazwag
5 millionth post poster
On Saturday there was actually quite a lot of movement up front, it was our midfield who dithered on the ball and ended up getting closed down and passing backwards.
Sorry, I don't agree. Murray was stationary in the main (particularly after Maguire trod on him). Gross did not make a forward run.
I do agree though the midfield were ponderous at best.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
??BensGrandad
New member
Will possibly do well at Celtic but not so sure he is a good replacement for Wood at Leeds.
Gazwag
5 millionth post poster
Not Murray but Murphy made numerous runs when we broke with the ball and to be fair Gross made some as well but none were spotted by our defence/midfield. This was in the first half, in he second half towards the end Dunk did try a few long balls into the runs but were over hit/effected by the wind.
brighton_tom
Well-known member
- Jul 23, 2008
- 4,817
Apart from the obvious signing of a striker that is needed, are we still looking at one or two others? A full back? Or back up keeper? Gone a bit quiet on that front....