Corey Blackett-Taylor - (p34 - signed for Derby on loan til the end of the season)

peterreeves said:

I'm still seething about this, it's bad enough getting rid of Apples 6 games later than he should've got but whoever is responsible for agreeing that Cbt can play us should be shot.

If, as I suspect we lose both the Derby games it could make all the difference at the end of the season.

This for me sums up not only the sheer stupidity of this Board but also for putting money ahead of survival... £300k is nothing bearing in mind the compensation payment to Holden and Apples. The Board should have taken less and told Derby to feck off. 

They simply don't get it. 

He didn’t want to be here, if you want to blame anyway it’s the old owners who didn’t renew his contract before going into the last year of a contract. Hopefully we invest that money in the next few days.

FWIW I'm someone who believes that although CBT provided us with some great moments at one end of the pitch he cost us an awful lot by not doing ANYTHING defensively or even attempting to close down, putting pressure on the middle of the park and the defence, costing us at the other end. This, unfortunately is unquantifiable statistically. I therefore don't think as a team we will miss him as much as some seem to think. 
What I do think however is that reportedly he paid his own expenses when on trial, cost us nothing, made us some money in the loan/transfer department, and, as mentioned, gave us some excitement. For these reasons I really hope when he returns he gets a good reception from the valley faithful. You can't blame him for wanting to leave us for more money and a club with better prospects at present.

shirty5 said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68146902

I’ll bet he’s “relishing it”.

i don’t know what is more dumb; that Scott/Methven failed to negotiate a no-play clause for this one game; or that I am going to pay good money to watch this car-crash in person. 

7/2 to score any time on Saturday 

Hartleypete said:

Hope we kick him off the park, what he did was as bad as Taylor., Parker etc.

Have i missed something? Did CBT refuse to play?

golfaddick said:

If he's playing on the left wing then our defenders need to keep him there & make him cross with his left .....just dont let him cut inside onto his right. 

He has also got that little get to the by-line and dinked left footed ball towards the penalty spot down pretty well as well.

And considering it feels like most of our goals for the last couple of years have come from sideways balls into that area from the edge of the box - I'm not feeling confident. 

Good thing about playing 5 at the back is at least we can keep one wing-back deep and then try and overload that massive space CBT tends to leave through our midfield and probably May.

Hartleypete said:

Hope we kick him off the park, what he did was as bad as Taylor., Parker etc.

Absolute nonsense. No comparison at all. He bettered himself , and good luck to him , without refusing to play unlike the other two rats.

Red_Chester said:

ChiAddick said:

Hartleypete said:

Hope we kick him off the park, what he did was as bad as Taylor., Parker etc.

Have i missed something? Did CBT refuse to play?

Probably more likely the club didn’t let him play otherwise what use would it be if he got injured and the left on a free…Charlie boy loves to spin the narrative 

Exactly, while completely failing to spot the PR car crash that he would be due back here first game after the window closes,and persuading Derby not to play him.

Fun fact. Everyone in advertising thinks PR people are the biggest bunch of wankers in the communications sector. ( yes I’m aware that the general public think we are all the same wankers🤣) 

billysboots said:

So is there not a league rules that a player who is on loan cannot  play against their parent club in a competitive game ? 

Seems a bit open to corruption otherwise. We have sent agent CBT in to score three own goals …….

According to Richard Cawley the deal is “essentially” a transfer not a loan. I have no idea what he means by that but it stinks of clubs getting round regulations. 

billysboots said:

PragueAddick said:

billysboots said:

So is there not a league rules that a player who is on loan cannot  play against their parent club in a competitive game ? 

Seems a bit open to corruption otherwise. We have sent agent CBT in to score three own goals …….

According to Richard Cawley the deal is “essentially” a transfer not a loan. I have no idea what he means by that but it stinks of clubs getting round regulations. 

Naturally we have bent over backwards to help Derby as much as possible including letting him play against us just two weeks after he has gone. 

Charlie Methven is “one of the top 10 PR people in the country”

If we still hold his player registration he’s our player isn’t he - which makes it a loan. 

Can’t believe we have done this - screams of incompetence 

I’ve sent him a DM via Linked In. Who knows whether I wiĺ get a reply…

As I recall something similar happened before with Luke Varney. By coincidence the club involved was also Derby county.Varney came back to The Valley, playing against us whilst on loan in a deal that would become permanent in the January.  I think he may have assisted a goal. Derby won of course.

We were in a real mess at the time on and off the field and I remember feeling it was a real kick in the bollocks for the fans for the sake of a few extra quid. We got relegated later that season....

It's a strange situation and a PR own goal by the decision makers if he now plays an important role on Saturday beating us. 

All for a few more pennies I would assume. 

A needless situation that will create a toxic atmosphere in The Valley if he rips our defence apart.