What’s this Terrel Thomas chap all about? Opinions?
Does no one have an opinion on Terrel? Or did i miss the discussion?
Proper bargain bucket stuff but that's where we are. Signed a 12 month contract with Crewe at the start of last season, mutually terminated by January because in part, he couldn't hold a place in their side (they got relegated). Turned up at Reading on a short term deal in March, played 2 Champ games, released. Failed trial at Portsmouth in the summer. Still no club... now here.
What’s this Terrel Thomas chap all about? Opinions?
Does no one have an opinion on Terrel? Or did i miss the discussion?
Proper bargain bucket stuff but that's where we are. Signed a 12 month contract with Crewe at the start of last season, mutually terminated by January because in part, he couldn't hold a place in their side (they got relegated). Turned up at Reading on a short term deal in March, played 2 Champ games, released. Failed trial at Portsmouth in the summer. Still no club... now here.
Fits our MO! We'll have him long term injured by November. Looking forward to Tommy boy's welcoming statement...
"It is great to welcome Terrel to club, we have been working on this for a number of afternoons. He has two legs and a head on him, he was shit at Crewe, pony at Reading and was laughed out of the door at Portsmouth". Kerrrangh!!!
What’s this Terrel Thomas chap all about? Opinions?
Does no one have an opinion on Terrel? Or did i miss the discussion?
Proper bargain bucket stuff but that's where we are. Signed a 12 month contract with Crewe at the start of last season, mutually terminated by January because in part, he couldn't hold a place in their side (they got relegated). Turned up at Reading on a short term deal in March, played 2 Champ games, released. Failed trial at Portsmouth in the summer. Still no club... now here.
Fits our MO! We'll have him long term injured by November. Looking forward to Tommy boy's welcoming statement...
"It is great to welcome Terrel to club, we have been working on this for a number of afternoons. He has two legs and a head on him, he was shit at Crewe, pony at Reading and was laughed out of the door at Portsmouth". Kerrrangh!!!
Bloody hell. We can’t be signing players that had a contract terminated by Crewe last year. They were awful and got relegated. You might as well get Elerewe back from his loan and involve him more.
I'm pretty sure a number of championship clubs that are struggling will be way ahead of us on choice due to league status and wages. Whoever we bring if they are League 2 dropouts, they will likely offer less than what we have. As Curbs used to say, he would only (knowingly) sign someone he knew was better than what he already had, thus always improving his squad.
As for singing anyone with that kind of a record, I can seriously see fan protests on the horizon. Promising bright young things that were the best at their (lower-league) club is one thing, cast-offs from lower-league is going to piss people off.
Not sure why my comments on Dobson and Clare I made 12 months ago are being brought up for discussion. Neither were any good at the start of last season, and although they turned their form around incredibly well and are far from being an issue in the current side, that’s not the issue. They proved a lot of people wrong. Good on them! However, one is playing out of position by necessity yet proving to be decent, the other is all about winning it back and the more Garner has time to implement his style, the less I’ll see the him being used. We got a taste of that already against Derby. Give it a few months or another transfer window and I can see it being a way we go forward under Garner. But those two are not an issue and not what the conversation is about. Using a comment and opinion from a year ago to devalue an opinion now is a bit frustrating.
Stockley has offered us nothing this season. He doesn’t possess the leadership skills on the pitch to take us up a level. He doesn’t press but when he does lots like he’s running through water, he’s constantly moaning at other players, like I’ve said before he doesn’t run in behind, his hold up play is actually poor for a man of his size, he’s not great with the ball at his feet, he’s often behind the play and unless we have patient build up and put the ball in the box, he doesn’t look threatening. I actually believe Davison would have offered us more so far because at least he’s willing to stretch a defence, he works hard, he’s less predictable.
We saw last season Stockley up front on his own is shocking and in a new style and system, I’ve seen nothing this season to change that.
So why keep playing him? Put Leaburn up there, put Stockley and maybe Kanu on the bench. I know people, and probably the club, don’t want to put too much pressure on Leaburn, but at this point, can he do any worse? We know he can run, we know he can hold the ball up and pass. Sure he might get outmuscled by some of the old hands, but at this point, what is there to lose by going that route.
It’s not Stockleys fault Garner keeps playing him.
It’s not Garners either.
Perhaps it is partially because he could tweak the system to play to Stockley's strengths, I accept where you are coming from though, the SMT got it wrong and TS has not backed him.
I find it intriguing that Adkins, Jackson and now Garner are sticking to one system on the whole and so far non of them were prepared to change or tweak a system. Even though they didn't/don't have the round pegs for round holes.
Not sure why my comments on Dobson and Clare I made 12 months ago are being brought up for discussion. Neither were any good at the start of last season, and although they turned their form around incredibly well and are far from being an issue in the current side, that’s not the issue. They proved a lot of people wrong. Good on them! However, one is playing out of position by necessity yet proving to be decent, the other is all about winning it back and the more Garner has time to implement his style, the less I’ll see the him being used. We got a taste of that already against Derby. Give it a few months or another transfer window and I can see it being a way we go forward under Garner. But those two are not an issue and not what the conversation is about. Using a comment and opinion from a year ago to devalue an opinion now is a bit frustrating.
Stockley has offered us nothing this season. He doesn’t possess the leadership skills on the pitch to take us up a level. He doesn’t press but when he does lots like he’s running through water, he’s constantly moaning at other players, like I’ve said before he doesn’t run in behind, his hold up play is actually poor for a man of his size, he’s not great with the ball at his feet, he’s often behind the play and unless we have patient build up and put the ball in the box, he doesn’t look threatening. I actually believe Davison would have offered us more so far because at least he’s willing to stretch a defence, he works hard, he’s less predictable.
We saw last season Stockley up front on his own is shocking and in a new style and system, I’ve seen nothing this season to change that.
So why keep playing him? Put Leaburn up there, put Stockley and maybe Kanu on the bench. I know people, and probably the club, don’t want to put too much pressure on Leaburn, but at this point, can he do any worse? We know he can run, we know he can hold the ball up and pass. Sure he might get outmuscled by some of the old hands, but at this point, what is there to lose by going that route.
It’s not Stockleys fault Garner keeps playing him.
It’s not Garners either.
Perhaps it is partially because he could tweak the system to play to Stockley's strengths, I accept where you are coming from though, the SMT got it wrong and TS has not backed him.
I find it intriguing that Adkins, Jackson and now Garner are sticking to one system on the whole and so far non of them were prepared to change or tweak a system. Even though they didn't/don't have the round pegs for round holes.
I am speaking only of Garner's situation (as it's sufficiently different I think to warrant it) but I would say that in his defence he's always tried to implement the system he's pushing and pretty much every signing we DID make was geared towards making that system work.
I'm fairly sure that if he'd known going in that he was not going to be given one of the key ingredients he might have come up with a different plan but it feels to me that he's had the metaphorical rug pulled out as much as we have, if not more.
What’s this Terrel Thomas chap all about? Opinions?
Does no one have an opinion on Terrel? Or did i miss the discussion?
6ft3. 26yrs old. 150 or so games. Seems he did quite well at AFC Wimbledon a few years ago and there was talk of Championship interest (I think he was player of the year for them). But weirdly he joined Crewe instead which suggests interest did not materialize into anything. As said above he seems to have failed there and then at Reading. Not a hugely promising CV but you never know. He is also a full international.. of St Lucia.
Not sure why my comments on Dobson and Clare I made 12 months ago are being brought up for discussion. Neither were any good at the start of last season, and although they turned their form around incredibly well and are far from being an issue in the current side, that’s not the issue. They proved a lot of people wrong. Good on them! However, one is playing out of position by necessity yet proving to be decent, the other is all about winning it back and the more Garner has time to implement his style, the less I’ll see the him being used. We got a taste of that already against Derby. Give it a few months or another transfer window and I can see it being a way we go forward under Garner. But those two are not an issue and not what the conversation is about. Using a comment and opinion from a year ago to devalue an opinion now is a bit frustrating.
Stockley has offered us nothing this season. He doesn’t possess the leadership skills on the pitch to take us up a level. He doesn’t press but when he does lots like he’s running through water, he’s constantly moaning at other players, like I’ve said before he doesn’t run in behind, his hold up play is actually poor for a man of his size, he’s not great with the ball at his feet, he’s often behind the play and unless we have patient build up and put the ball in the box, he doesn’t look threatening. I actually believe Davison would have offered us more so far because at least he’s willing to stretch a defence, he works hard, he’s less predictable.
We saw last season Stockley up front on his own is shocking and in a new style and system, I’ve seen nothing this season to change that.
So why keep playing him? Put Leaburn up there, put Stockley and maybe Kanu on the bench. I know people, and probably the club, don’t want to put too much pressure on Leaburn, but at this point, can he do any worse? We know he can run, we know he can hold the ball up and pass. Sure he might get outmuscled by some of the old hands, but at this point, what is there to lose by going that route.
It’s not Stockleys fault Garner keeps playing him.
I don’t think Garner wants to start either of them up front on their own. It’s almost a case of less of the two evils. Leaburn has done well but he’s not ready or good enough for a team who need to overachieve to gain a top 6 position. It would not be fair at all, not on him, not on the rest of the players. We also start to venture into that territory we headed into around this time last season where Stockley was dropped because it wasn’t working. We don’t want to repeat history. It shouldn’t have come to this in the first place.
Then he has to change his formation. If you don’t want to play either Leaburn or Stockley on their own, use a formation that plays to their strengths. Consensus is we won’t be top 6 with Stockley, so saying we won’t be top 6 with Leaburn doesn’t appear to change anything.
You’ve got to make it work with the players you have. Sticking to a playing style that can’t work makes no sense. It’s what got JJ the sack
But I think the criticism of Stockley is wildly overdone. Half the problem is poor balls into the box, and that he’s left completely isolated.
The playing style is not the problem. It’s the first time in years and years we have had an identity and a playing style. It’s not Garner’s fault we don’t have a striker available to do the things he and the team want to achieve.
Do you not think that Garner is part of the problem too. Has he no balls to say the TS.. "look, you brought me in because I play a certain way. You want your team to play this way too. So give me the players to play this system, otherwise you'll find that the club is still stuck in this division for another season which ultimately will cost you more money in the long run".
Or is Garner just another (in a long line of managers) that are afraid to ruffle some feathers & tell it the boss the truth.
All that talk about data, about lists of players and targets they've been working on for months, about being well-prepared for transfer windows now and it gets to deadline day and all they've got is former player Macauley Bonne. It really is farcical.
This is really the story - we talk about data and sign two very promising loanees from the PL, three players from the manager’s former club and two others who will have been well known on the scouting circuit, neither of whom have yet pulled up any trees or are likely to do so at this stage of their career. What does Martin do again?
I’m not defending Gallen, but at least he has a football background. He can’t perform miracles if the owner can’t or won’t pay.
Wollacott and the two loanees look good. The others we’ll have to see about over the course of the season.
Churlish to withhold praise from EOC and Payne imo. They've been, on the whole, good
Not sure why my comments on Dobson and Clare I made 12 months ago are being brought up for discussion. Neither were any good at the start of last season, and although they turned their form around incredibly well and are far from being an issue in the current side, that’s not the issue. They proved a lot of people wrong. Good on them! However, one is playing out of position by necessity yet proving to be decent, the other is all about winning it back and the more Garner has time to implement his style, the less I’ll see the him being used. We got a taste of that already against Derby. Give it a few months or another transfer window and I can see it being a way we go forward under Garner. But those two are not an issue and not what the conversation is about. Using a comment and opinion from a year ago to devalue an opinion now is a bit frustrating.
Stockley has offered us nothing this season. He doesn’t possess the leadership skills on the pitch to take us up a level. He doesn’t press but when he does lots like he’s running through water, he’s constantly moaning at other players, like I’ve said before he doesn’t run in behind, his hold up play is actually poor for a man of his size, he’s not great with the ball at his feet, he’s often behind the play and unless we have patient build up and put the ball in the box, he doesn’t look threatening. I actually believe Davison would have offered us more so far because at least he’s willing to stretch a defence, he works hard, he’s less predictable.
We saw last season Stockley up front on his own is shocking and in a new style and system, I’ve seen nothing this season to change that.
So why keep playing him? Put Leaburn up there, put Stockley and maybe Kanu on the bench. I know people, and probably the club, don’t want to put too much pressure on Leaburn, but at this point, can he do any worse? We know he can run, we know he can hold the ball up and pass. Sure he might get outmuscled by some of the old hands, but at this point, what is there to lose by going that route.
It’s not Stockleys fault Garner keeps playing him.
I don’t think Garner wants to start either of them up front on their own. It’s almost a case of less of the two evils. Leaburn has done well but he’s not ready or good enough for a team who need to overachieve to gain a top 6 position. It would not be fair at all, not on him, not on the rest of the players. We also start to venture into that territory we headed into around this time last season where Stockley was dropped because it wasn’t working. We don’t want to repeat history. It shouldn’t have come to this in the first place.
Then he has to change his formation. If you don’t want to play either Leaburn or Stockley on their own, use a formation that plays to their strengths. Consensus is we won’t be top 6 with Stockley, so saying we won’t be top 6 with Leaburn doesn’t appear to change anything.
You’ve got to make it work with the players you have. Sticking to a playing style that can’t work makes no sense. It’s what got JJ the sack
But I think the criticism of Stockley is wildly overdone. Half the problem is poor balls into the box, and that he’s left completely isolated.
The playing style is not the problem. It’s the first time in years and years we have had an identity and a playing style. It’s not Garner’s fault we don’t have a striker available to do the things he and the team want to achieve.
Do you not think that Garner is part of the problem too. Has he no balls to say the TS.. "look, you brought me in because I play a certain way. You want your team to play this way too. So give me the players to play this system, otherwise you'll find that the club is still stuck in this division for another season which ultimately will cost you more money in the long run".
Or is Garner just another (in a long line of managers) that are afraid to ruffle some feathers & tell it the boss the truth.
I think Garner has said exactly this. Most people think when he does press conferences he’s speaking to the fans and the media. I think he’s been managing upwards too. He’s said it’ll take another couple of windows to get the team and squad to a place where it needs to be to be his team, where it needs to be in order to challenge. He’s said we have had more money come in transfers and haven’t spent anything. He’s not talking to us supporters.
Is the free list presented on here relating to UK based leagues only? Appreciate work permits may be required, but surely the bigger European or global pool of free agents are worth pouring over? We have a scouting network and big black box after all…
My understanding is that Bonne was agreed days in advance with Gallen despite TS then trying to renegotiate it himself, but was always a back up. Thing is, QPR knew that Charlton’s other options were unrealistic so they always expected the deal to come forward. Their end say it was over hours before Charlton confirmed it, although that doesn’t tally with Jaiyesimi being pulled back from Mansfield very late.
QPR offered Bonne a deal to make the Charlton deal permanent. Bonne refused and Charlton pulled out after a stand off.
In my opinion, everybody wins except QPR. I have some sketchy details , but I know a figure of 25% was involved. I really don’t know if QPR offered him 25% of his contract or not. Can’t ask my source for more details than this - ‘ QPR offered to pay up his contract to 25% but he turned it down’.
Sorry if I waffled a bit there, maybe someone can explain exactly what this means as I’m not totally sure. However, I do know the information is right.
There seems to be a lot of chat about Clare , who personally I think is an excellent player and rumours of championship clubs being interested but our problem is left back , we have tried to make Clayden into a full back who was a winger - he was at fault for the first 2 goals on Saturday - watch the highlights carefully - he is still young but he is not a full back and the goals are coming down that side - we need to sort that out first - it’s great having a left back who can get forward but he needs to be a defender first .
My understanding is that Bonne was agreed days in advance with Gallen despite TS then trying to renegotiate it himself, but was always a back up. Thing is, QPR knew that Charlton’s other options were unrealistic so they always expected the deal to come forward. Their end say it was over hours before Charlton confirmed it, although that doesn’t tally with Jaiyesimi being pulled back from Mansfield very late.
QPR offered Bonne a deal to make the Charlton deal permanent. Bonne refused and Charlton pulled out after a stand off.
In my opinion, everybody wins except QPR. I have some sketchy details , but I know a figure of 25% was involved. I really don’t know if QPR offered him 25% of his contract or not. Can’t ask my source for more details than this - ‘ QPR offered to pay up his contract to 25% but he turned it down’.
Sorry if I waffled a bit there, maybe someone can explain exactly what this means as I’m not totally sure. However, I do know the information is right.
None of the above is true as QPR manager has admitted today that the deal fell through because they failed to get the striker they wanted so .. pulled the Bonne deal nothing more nothing less .. people trying to make something out of lies
Not sure why my comments on Dobson and Clare I made 12 months ago are being brought up for discussion. Neither were any good at the start of last season, and although they turned their form around incredibly well and are far from being an issue in the current side, that’s not the issue. They proved a lot of people wrong. Good on them! However, one is playing out of position by necessity yet proving to be decent, the other is all about winning it back and the more Garner has time to implement his style, the less I’ll see the him being used. We got a taste of that already against Derby. Give it a few months or another transfer window and I can see it being a way we go forward under Garner. But those two are not an issue and not what the conversation is about. Using a comment and opinion from a year ago to devalue an opinion now is a bit frustrating.
Stockley has offered us nothing this season. He doesn’t possess the leadership skills on the pitch to take us up a level. He doesn’t press but when he does lots like he’s running through water, he’s constantly moaning at other players, like I’ve said before he doesn’t run in behind, his hold up play is actually poor for a man of his size, he’s not great with the ball at his feet, he’s often behind the play and unless we have patient build up and put the ball in the box, he doesn’t look threatening. I actually believe Davison would have offered us more so far because at least he’s willing to stretch a defence, he works hard, he’s less predictable.
We saw last season Stockley up front on his own is shocking and in a new style and system, I’ve seen nothing this season to change that.
So why keep playing him? Put Leaburn up there, put Stockley and maybe Kanu on the bench. I know people, and probably the club, don’t want to put too much pressure on Leaburn, but at this point, can he do any worse? We know he can run, we know he can hold the ball up and pass. Sure he might get outmuscled by some of the old hands, but at this point, what is there to lose by going that route.
It’s not Stockleys fault Garner keeps playing him.
I don’t think Garner wants to start either of them up front on their own. It’s almost a case of less of the two evils. Leaburn has done well but he’s not ready or good enough for a team who need to overachieve to gain a top 6 position. It would not be fair at all, not on him, not on the rest of the players. We also start to venture into that territory we headed into around this time last season where Stockley was dropped because it wasn’t working. We don’t want to repeat history. It shouldn’t have come to this in the first place.
Then he has to change his formation. If you don’t want to play either Leaburn or Stockley on their own, use a formation that plays to their strengths. Consensus is we won’t be top 6 with Stockley, so saying we won’t be top 6 with Leaburn doesn’t appear to change anything.
You’ve got to make it work with the players you have. Sticking to a playing style that can’t work makes no sense. It’s what got JJ the sack
But I think the criticism of Stockley is wildly overdone. Half the problem is poor balls into the box, and that he’s left completely isolated.
The playing style is not the problem. It’s the first time in years and years we have had an identity and a playing style. It’s not Garner’s fault we don’t have a striker available to do the things he and the team want to achieve.
Do you not think that Garner is part of the problem too. Has he no balls to say the TS.. "look, you brought me in because I play a certain way. You want your team to play this way too. So give me the players to play this system, otherwise you'll find that the club is still stuck in this division for another season which ultimately will cost you more money in the long run".
Or is Garner just another (in a long line of managers) that are afraid to ruffle some feathers & tell it the boss the truth.
Not sure why my comments on Dobson and Clare I made 12 months ago are being brought up for discussion. Neither were any good at the start of last season, and although they turned their form around incredibly well and are far from being an issue in the current side, that’s not the issue. They proved a lot of people wrong. Good on them! However, one is playing out of position by necessity yet proving to be decent, the other is all about winning it back and the more Garner has time to implement his style, the less I’ll see the him being used. We got a taste of that already against Derby. Give it a few months or another transfer window and I can see it being a way we go forward under Garner. But those two are not an issue and not what the conversation is about. Using a comment and opinion from a year ago to devalue an opinion now is a bit frustrating.
Stockley has offered us nothing this season. He doesn’t possess the leadership skills on the pitch to take us up a level. He doesn’t press but when he does lots like he’s running through water, he’s constantly moaning at other players, like I’ve said before he doesn’t run in behind, his hold up play is actually poor for a man of his size, he’s not great with the ball at his feet, he’s often behind the play and unless we have patient build up and put the ball in the box, he doesn’t look threatening. I actually believe Davison would have offered us more so far because at least he’s willing to stretch a defence, he works hard, he’s less predictable.
We saw last season Stockley up front on his own is shocking and in a new style and system, I’ve seen nothing this season to change that.
So why keep playing him? Put Leaburn up there, put Stockley and maybe Kanu on the bench. I know people, and probably the club, don’t want to put too much pressure on Leaburn, but at this point, can he do any worse? We know he can run, we know he can hold the ball up and pass. Sure he might get outmuscled by some of the old hands, but at this point, what is there to lose by going that route.
It’s not Stockleys fault Garner keeps playing him.
I don’t think Garner wants to start either of them up front on their own. It’s almost a case of less of the two evils. Leaburn has done well but he’s not ready or good enough for a team who need to overachieve to gain a top 6 position. It would not be fair at all, not on him, not on the rest of the players. We also start to venture into that territory we headed into around this time last season where Stockley was dropped because it wasn’t working. We don’t want to repeat history. It shouldn’t have come to this in the first place.
Then he has to change his formation. If you don’t want to play either Leaburn or Stockley on their own, use a formation that plays to their strengths. Consensus is we won’t be top 6 with Stockley, so saying we won’t be top 6 with Leaburn doesn’t appear to change anything.
You’ve got to make it work with the players you have. Sticking to a playing style that can’t work makes no sense. It’s what got JJ the sack
But I think the criticism of Stockley is wildly overdone. Half the problem is poor balls into the box, and that he’s left completely isolated.
The playing style is not the problem. It’s the first time in years and years we have had an identity and a playing style. It’s not Garner’s fault we don’t have a striker available to do the things he and the team want to achieve.
Do you not think that Garner is part of the problem too. Has he no balls to say the TS.. "look, you brought me in because I play a certain way. You want your team to play this way too. So give me the players to play this system, otherwise you'll find that the club is still stuck in this division for another season which ultimately will cost you more money in the long run".
Or is Garner just another (in a long line of managers) that are afraid to ruffle some feathers & tell it the boss the truth.
I thought he had just said that. He has also given him two windows to get there. That maybe too slow for some, but everyone has a budget. We have made a big step forward this season and at last have something to build on.
Posting without having read in case this has already been shared… but we could’ve had this kid if we hadn’t mugged spurs off with Nile John last season.
Posting without having read in case this has already been shared… but we could’ve had this kid if we hadn’t mugged spurs off with Nile John last season.
This 18-year-old is ready to start games but ours isn't?
If Leaburn were still at a Premier League club (which he probably should be, looking at him) then he'd likely be loaned out to L1 with the intention of playing.
What’s this Terrel Thomas chap all about? Opinions?
Does no one have an opinion on Terrel? Or did i miss the discussion?
6ft3. 26yrs old. 150 or so games. Seems he did quite well at AFC Wimbledon a few years ago and there was talk of Championship interest (I think he was player of the year for them). But weirdly he joined Crewe instead which suggests interest did not materialize into anything. As said above he seems to have failed there and then at Reading. Not a hugely promising CV but you never know. He is also a full international.. of St Lucia.
Posting without having read in case this has already been shared… but we could’ve had this kid if we hadn’t mugged spurs off with Nile John last season.
Posting without having read in case this has already been shared… but we could’ve had this kid if we hadn’t mugged spurs off with Nile John last season.
Comments
Does no one have an opinion on Terrel? Or did i miss the discussion?
"It is great to welcome Terrel to club, we have been working on this for a number of afternoons. He has two legs and a head on him, he was shit at Crewe, pony at Reading and was laughed out of the door at Portsmouth". Kerrrangh!!!
As for singing anyone with that kind of a record, I can seriously see fan protests on the horizon. Promising bright young things that were the best at their (lower-league) club is one thing, cast-offs from lower-league is going to piss people off.
I'm fairly sure that if he'd known going in that he was not going to be given one of the key ingredients he might have come up with a different plan but it feels to me that he's had the metaphorical rug pulled out as much as we have, if not more.
6ft3. 26yrs old. 150 or so games.
Seems he did quite well at AFC Wimbledon a few years ago and there was talk of Championship interest (I think he was player of the year for them).
But weirdly he joined Crewe instead which suggests interest did not materialize into anything. As said above he seems to have failed there and then at Reading.
Not a hugely promising CV but you never know.
He is also a full international.. of St Lucia.
Or is Garner just another (in a long line of managers) that are afraid to ruffle some feathers & tell it the boss the truth.
"However, after Rangers’ late efforts to bring in a striker failed, the plug was pulled on the move, forcing Bonne to return to the club."
He has also given him two windows to get there. That maybe too slow for some, but everyone has a budget. We have made a big step forward this season and at last have something to build on.
If Leaburn were still at a Premier League club (which he probably should be, looking at him) then he'd likely be loaned out to L1 with the intention of playing.
They started with Bishop and Scarlett, and had Piggott and Koroma on the bench (plus Reeco)