Maybe the terms of the deal say that Sterling has to start and if he doesn’t we have to pay more of his wages.
But lots on here slag him ! I agree with you he’s been a bit unlucky to lose his spot but that’s football, personally having watched him twice at the moment I don’t think Sterling is quite ready yet for a regular spot.
Never seen Grimmer get a slagging off on here ever. Every player has weaknesses at this level though. Discussing those weaknesses on a football forum doesn't equate to a slagging off. He got beaten around the outside too easily last year on many occasions, I can see why Robins felt the need to bring in another right back in a division where players are visibly quicker and stronger. Sterling's had a couple of goes now though and looked no better. Time for Jack to take his chance at Oxford on Tuesday and get his place back for Argyle.Never have understood the slagging off he gets, yes he isn’t Maldini defensively... but always gives his all and actually gets forward quite effectively. Grimmer > Sterling for me.
I suspect it is a Murphy type loan thing where he has to play a certain amount of games. We will find out in weeks to come I would guess.
If the squad imbalance is one thing, the potential loss of team spirit by dismantling the team from last year is something else that concerns me. I can't see any reason why Grimmer was dropped.
Where is the evidence we had to play Murphy every week?
Nothing was ever revealed, but how else would the worst player on the pitch for 5 games in a row per time still get selected like that?
At the time is was quite openly talked about, but since then the positives have been more focused on and stuff like that have been forgotten about.
Ah made it up then
Nothing was ever revealed, but how else would the worst player on the pitch for 5 games in a row per time still get selected like that?
At the time is was quite openly talked about, but since then the positives have been more focused on and stuff like that have been forgotten about.
The same bloke that was sold for millions last year.
It does seem to be a case of rip it up and start again when we had a great platform and way of playing that worked. I suppose the big factors in doing so are no McNulty and Andreu being fit, but I'm not sure what the likes of Grimmer and Shipley did to be dropped.I suspect it is a Murphy type loan thing where he has to play a certain amount of games. We will find out in weeks to come I would guess.
If the squad imbalance is one thing, the potential loss of team spirit by dismantling the team from last year is something else that concerns me. I can't see any reason why Grimmer was dropped.
Nothing was ever revealed, but how else would the worst player on the pitch for 5 games in a row per time still get selected like that?
At the time is was quite openly talked about, but since then the positives have been more focused on and stuff like that have been forgotten about.
We might have had a manager that could see, like many other did, that Jacob Murphy was capable of doing things that not many other players could do and he kept faith in him. Like Robins with McNulty last season. Utter tripe to suggest we had to play Murphy.
Not really.
Either you have a short memory or you're just deliberately choosing to ignore that this was talked about significantly when he was here.
It's also pretty commonly spoken about throughout the footballing world that loan players sometimes come with playing time clauses.
As I said anyway, it is just a suspicion, not fact. Exactly like it could be with Sterling.
It's not tripe at all. Even when McNulty wasn't scoring early he still made things happen and got involved. The polar opposite of not making an effort and being the worst player on the pitch for five games in a row.
It was fairly widely acknowledged on here that he probably had something in his contract.
There are clauses for monthly contracts and other short term deals. You may have talked about it in your frenzy about Murphy but I can’t recall anyone agreeing with you
Widely acknowledged?
Evidence?
Go and find Bernards Watch and go back to 15/16. You're telling me these clauses don't exist?
You mean you're deliberately attributing it to me because it suits your argument now? Many people said the same.
For someone who is such a know it all, the inability to comprehend some parent clubs ensure clauses are put in their players contrats when they go on loan is quite baffling.
As he was one of our best and most effective players that season it would never have had to be enforced.Why leave out one of your best players. You bring up your dislike of him at every possible occasion. Maybe time to let it go.I suspect it is a Murphy type loan thing where he has to play a certain amount of games. We will find out in weeks to come I would guess.
If the squad imbalance is one thing, the potential loss of team spirit by dismantling the team from last year is something else that concerns me. I can't see any reason why Grimmer was dropped.
It's irrelevant.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?