- Jun 27, 2012
- 13,936
Try a bit harder... Some of the more gloomy on here think that Steve Sidwell signing is confirmation that both Kayal and Stephens are definitely OFF.
Last edited:
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Jordan Cousins
- Thread starter dylan_bha
- Start date
Try a bit harder... Some of the more gloomy on here think that Steve Sidwell signing is confirmation that both Kayal and Stephens are definitely OFF.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
We do like to slag Naylor off on NSC, but he's always cautious on transfer rumours, and often refers to a source. He seems to get an awful lot more things right than wrong, which suggests that his source/s is/are pretty central.
Icy Gull
Back on the rollercoaster
- Jul 5, 2003
- 72,015
Who has suggested that the signing of Sidwell means that BOTH are off? I know Sidwell is good but even his biggest fan can't think that he is good enough to replace both Kayal and Stephens
I trust you'll revise "gloomy" to "realists" should STEPHENS leave?
Last edited:
- Jun 27, 2012
- 13,936
Who has suggested that the signing of Sidwell means that BOTH are off? I know Sidwell is good but even his biggest fan can't think that he is good enough to replace both Kayal and Stephens
I trust you'll revise "gloomy" to "realists" should STEPHENS leave?
If Stephens leaves , which he might, then we'll replace Stephens. Sidwell was bought and (loaned in January.) because presumably Hughton didn't have confidence in Ince and JFC as third or fourth choice CMs, let alone poor old Danny Holla. or to give him options if he needed to go 4-3-3 and as sensible back up in case of injuries. And Sidwell was presumably happy to sign on that basis. Thats still the case.
The idea that we lured him here on basis that we already knew a player is leaving, and in fact told him that in our contract negotiations, is nonsense.
