Taking the focus from Saunders

[BobG]

Although I don't know if it's true or not, I have heard it said by a pretty well connected person that Billy was JR's signing - not SOD's. SOD wanted the money but he would have spent it differently. Make of that what you will!

Personally, I'm tempted to believe it - on no grounds other than it just doesn't seem like a SOD thing to have done.

Cheers

BobG

[RoversAlias]

I'm totally lost as to what people are even trying to argue about on this forum now and I think that's because even those people don't appear to have a clue what they're arguing about either.

[Mr1Croft]

I'm totally lost as to what people are even trying to argue about on this forum now and I think that's because even those people don't appear to have a clue what they're arguing about either.

There is a difference (albeit a slim one) between arguing and stating our personal opinons, that is all that has been said here, no one is really starting arguments but having their own opinions slandered.

For example I did not write \"I don't care what anyone says the signing of Sharp has ruined this football club\" that would be looking for an argument, instead I put across my veiw that I personally doubt SOD was 100% behind the Billy Sharp signing but decided in the end to take the risk, and it in truth it backfired.

Given we have been told various 'truths' about SOD and Bramall disagreeing I doubt SOD went to the board and demanded they stick their hands in their pockets to fund the Billy Sharp signing, SOD wasn't like that and did his best on the budget he was given. I think he said no to the current proposal because it was against everything he beleived in, he was the kind of man that looked for stability and balance in a squad (alot like what Moyes encourages at Everton) the only players that were here short term were those that were either out of our price range (JET) or not up to scratch (Harry Worley).

[i_ateallthepies]

There is a difference (albeit a slim one) between arguing and stating our personal opinons, that is all that has been said here, no one is really starting arguments but having their own opinions slandered.

For example I did not write \"I don't care what anyone says the signing of Sharp has ruined this football club\" that would be looking for an argument, instead I put across my veiw that I personally doubt SOD was 100% behind the Billy Sharp signing but decided in the end to take the risk, and it in truth it backfired.

Given we have been told various 'truths' about SOD and Bramall disagreeing I doubt SOD went to the board and demanded they stick their hands in their pockets to fund the Billy Sharp signing, SOD wasn't like that and did his best on the budget he was given. I think he said no to the current proposal because it was against everything he beleived in, he was the kind of man that looked for stability and balance in a squad (alot like what Moyes encourages at Everton) the only players that were here short term were those that were either out of our price range (JET) or not up to scratch (Harry Worley).[/quote]

In whose truth is that MrCroft?  It's your opinion, which you're entitled to of course. But I say in truth Billy's signing kept us in the division.  No more or less truthful or valid than your truth is it.

[benaldo]

I have to agree. Whatever you thought/think about Sharps signing. Whomever actually made the decision (and I find it hard to believe that SOD thought his signing was a bad idea) kept the club in the Championship. I wondered at the time if the club had put all their eggs in one basket, but that basket kept knocking the goals in didn't he.....

I couldn't see Hayter, or Fairhirst, knocking them in like him. True, the defence were shocking, midfield too, but the goals when they mattered came from him. Who knows who said what to who and how and why and when (say that pissed), it doesn't matter, it's history. The end result is a club still in the championship with one of the best strikers in the league still on its books.

[Mr1Croft]

Mr1Croft wrote:

There is a difference (albeit a slim one) between arguing and stating our personal opinons, that is all that has been said here, no one is really starting arguments but having their own opinions slandered.

For example I did not write \"I don't care what anyone says the signing of Sharp has ruined this football club\" that would be looking for an argument, instead I put across my veiw that I personally doubt SOD was 100% behind the Billy Sharp signing but decided in the end to take the risk, and it in truth it backfired.

Given we have been told various 'truths' about SOD and Bramall disagreeing I doubt SOD went to the board and demanded they stick their hands in their pockets to fund the Billy Sharp signing, SOD wasn't like that and did his best on the budget he was given. I think he said no to the current proposal because it was against everything he beleived in, he was the kind of man that looked for stability and balance in a squad (alot like what Moyes encourages at Everton) the only players that were here short term were those that were either out of our price range (JET) or not up to scratch (Harry Worley).

In whose truth is that MrCroft?  It's your opinion, which you're entitled to of course. But I say in truth Billy's signing kept us in the division.  No more or less truthful or valid than your truth is it.

Just to iterate my point was that the Billy Sharp signing was a risk to SOD, yes it paid off in terms of keeping us in the Championship; but Billy bieng injured (albeit along with others) lead to a 19 game winless streak. But we only just limped across the line last season in terms of staying up.

Just to summarise my point above which you boldtyped: It never backfired on us as a club, but it backfired on SOD, otherwise he would still be manager.

[dickos1]

So SOD got sacked because he signed sharp?? Is that really what your trying to suggest??

[Al4475]

dickos: So SOD got sacked because he signed sharp?? Is that really what your trying to suggest??

No, I don't think that's what Crofty's trying to say. To me it sounds like he's saying that the injury to Billy, who was our one and only marquee signing left us short where it matters most, at a time that cost us dearly, and if we'd had had another player or two of Billy's stature things probably wouldn't have spiralled downwards so badly - or that's how I see it anyhow!

JR wanted two more players of Billy's calibre - he made that clear when he did the question and answer session at Doncaster Little Theatre on April 1st 2010.

His exact words to a question aimed by one of the audience members (the question itself was, \"Who would you really like us or expect us to sign at the end of this season?\") were: \"Sharp, Shackell and one other.\"

SO'D, RO'K, JR and the board delivered one BS, we lost the other two JS and (merely a guess, reading between the lines) JET (on a full season loan) so we were left short - in the end this contributed to our poor run that has subsequently continued into this season, but the fact that SO'D signed BS is pretty obviously not the reason SO'D went. However, maybe the fact SO'D missed out on two others to compliment BS is a factor that could be added as a reason for poor form when injuries kicked in and we ran out of an efficient plan B (if we ever had one! Haha!)

There's been many factors, many of which debated on here ad infinitum, but now, as ever in our recent history, we continue to move forward...Albeit in a controversial but possibly revolutionary way.

I'll just keep enjoying the ride, and let's see where our destination is!:rtid: