Transfer Rumour Outgoings? (2 Viewers)

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Clearly Waghorn hasn’t been let go without Robins having a replacement in attack coming in early next week imo.

If he hasn't, can we blame Boddy? If he's taking a salary and all that...

 

---

[rexo87]

What's good business about it? The fact the club's finances appear so perilous that we weaken our already wafer thin squad ahead of a match against the league leaders. It's embarrassing really, we can't be that desperate surely that we couldn't hold them off until a replacement is agreed?

Ridiculous. Took the chance to get rid of two high earner who never play

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

 

[rexo87]

Kane and Waghorn are two players contributing almost nothing other than a respectable chunk out of the wage bill and a seat on the bench. We wanted them gone in the summer (allegedly) and couldn't find any takers. If the wage bill needs cutting in order to bring players in, and we have takers for those two, then for me it is a pretty open and closed case that you move them on whilst you have the chance.

Are we low on numbers tomorrow? Yes
Are we probably going to lose tomorrow anyway? Yes
Will they bring in replacements that surely can't be any worse? All being well yes

I get that last point is probably where it lies, but I can't see why we're getting upset about losing Waghorn and Kane.

Yep this is exactly it. We probably lose tomorrow anyway and if we do it isn't because kane and waghorn don't come off the bench. Get rid of them while we can

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

 

[larry_david]

It is baffling the posters who are against moving on waghorn and kane. Baffling

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

It is baffling the posters who are against moving on waghorn and kane. Baffling

They’re not they just want to pour cold water on any positivity

 

[fernandopartridge]

It is baffling the posters who are against moving on waghorn and kane. Baffling

Not against it in principle but do think it pretty ridiculous to do it in Waghorn's case where there is literally not another fit senior forward at the club.

 

[SBT]

means we get a look at Bapaga, I'll take that. He picked a good time to bag a hat trick in the U21s!

 

[rexo87]

Not against it in principle but do think it pretty ridiculous to do it in Waghorn's case where there is literally not another fit senior forward at the club.

Again, the option to do it may not have been there if we had waited until after Burnley. So it's a case of having to go 1 game with 1 striker, not the end of the world

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

 

[SBT]

Not against it in principle but do think it pretty ridiculous to do it in Waghorn's case where there is literally not another fit senior forward at the club.

There was barely one before yesterday tbf

 

[fernandopartridge]

Again, the option to do it may not have been there if we had waited until after Burnley. So it's a case of having to go 1 game with 1 striker, not the end of the world

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

Again the option is always there, who else are Huddersfield looking at?

 

[stupot07]

It is baffling the posters who are against moving on waghorn and kane. Baffling

No one is against it. It's more the timing of the Waghorn departure as we're very likely to have Harrison Nee and Will Bapaga on the bench today.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

 

[PVA]

No one is against it. It's more the timing of the Waghorn departure as we're very likely to have Harrison Nee and Will Bapaga on the bench today.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

I don't think Robins would have done it without having a replacement close to joining.

Whether that's Paterson or AN Other, with Godden & Walker to return in the next few weeks.