capt_oats

This post's a bit Football Manager pointless speculation so apologies in advance: Given the sort of player we've brought in so far someone like John Lundstram stands out in terms of players who are available. 21, central midfielder released by Everton without ever playing a game for them, plenty of experience in lower leagues in England via loans. Capped by England at every level up to u20s. He was on trial with Wigan recently (played vs Thistle) but Caldwell seems to have pied him if reports are anything to go by, so he's still without a club. Not saying we would be interested or even if we were that we could afford but is more illustrative that there are alternatives to the likes of Bolger kicking about.

He's already said he's staying at St Pats until December (which is when his contract is up according to Transfermarkt) and going by the statement it looks unlikely he'll sign a new deal. Also, while I appreciate the fact that we're looking at occasionally paying modest fees, do we really want to be upping bids with Les Hutchison's money that we'll ultimately have to pay back for a player who's soon to be out of contract? Especially since there's a month of the window to go and there are plenty of midfielders still without clubs. We made an approach, St Pats knocked it back. Given we've invested in a scouting system I'm sure Bolger isn't our only option. He won't be the first player we'll have approached where the deal hasn't gone through.

we don't need to be upping bids for anyone. there are plenty of midfielders out of contract who could do a job for us. both the manager & GM have confirmed we have been looking to bring in a CM. if the Pearson injury is serious enough to keep him out for a while (I hope it's not) it'd be interesting to see whether that changes things in terms of who we're looking to bring in.

Welcome 3 points & clean sheet. Going by the radio coverage it seems ICT were still in the same form as their European games: possession but unable to do anything with it and never really looking like the could create chances. Defence clearly needs to take credit for stopping them creating as well. Either way, very positive start and by all accounts it sounds like it could (should) have been a more comfortable shoreline.

Signed up & paid via PayPal during the week there with no issues.

Not only do McDonald & McManus know him he's played with Laing & Kennedy as well. The only question should be whether or not he'll be comfortable going straight in after 1 session & by all accounts he was asked that in his interview & his response was "yeah, I want to play games". Though having said that I doubt he'd come out and say "no", wouldn't create much of a first impression would it? It'd be a bit of a boot in the baws for Dan but only really if he's been told he's #1 which I can't see being the case. What's more likely is he'll have been told "we're looking for another GK. if we don't get someone in, you're playing vs ICT so be prepared." You can read what you like about what that says about Dan's position but I think that was fairly clear when Long arrived. Either way, there's not a chance Ripley would be here if we hadn't told Boro he'd be first choice as their manager has explicitly said he wants him to get games rather than sit on their first team bench as back-up to their #1.

For what it's worth going by Karanka's comments here I'd imagine that assuming Ripley's playing regularly for us that the initial 6 months would be extended to a season if that's what we're after. http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/boro-tie-down-young-goalkeeper-9659286 Given Long seems to have been the manager's preferred choice then he's brought in a pretty equivalent alternative in so much as Ripley & Long were part of the same England u20s team, roughly the same age etc. Indeed if you look at his Transfermarkt page then George Long is listed in the 'comparable players' section. http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/connor-ripley/profil/spieler/163531. There's also the fact he's played with Laing and Kennedy at u20 international level and knows McManus & McDonald from Boro, which hadn't registered with me until he mentioned in his interview. If you can be bothered there's a few YouTube videos up of that England u20s team & also some Boro u21s vs Chelsea u21s games that he features in.

In fairness Ruddy was an initial 6 month loan and we ended up getting him for the full season. Ripley's signed up with Boro til 2018 (he just signed a new 3 year deal in July) and is pretty highly thought of so a permanent deal would be pretty much ruled out I'd say. http://www.mfc.co.uk/news/article/2014/middlesbrough-fc-boro-connor-ripley-aitor-karanka-2547204.aspx

On the Bolger KB. From reading his statement it'd seem from his wording ("yes, there was a bid on the table from Motherwell") that this would have been another deal where we'd have been paying a (presumably small) fee. Suggests there's still some budget kicking about for us to move onto an alternate.

He's suspended following the play-off game I think.

Craig Moore out to Ayr on loan. https://twitter.com/AyrUnitedFC/status/626761629766529024

St Pats apparently knocked back a Motherwell bid for Greg Bolger. Tweet links to statement from the man himself: https://twitter.com/seidodge/status/626761637622628352

I think you're mis-interpreting what I'm saying. Or maybe not, who knows. I'm not saying we'll treat Dom Thomas or any of the other young players as bit part players. What I'm saying is that just because they're not getting chucked in to the team for the first game of the season away to Inverness doesn't preclude them from having significant involvement over the course of the season, the best way for them to develop is to be integrated into the team and justify their selection as starters. Similarly, starting with Chalmers on the left of midfield away from home if the manager feels that tactically speaking he needs more physicality in a specific game then I'm fine with that. Absolutely none of what I posted is a slight on any of the younger players. It's simply an acknowledgement that we're looking at running a smaller squad over the course of a season and we'll see those young players being rotated and given game time in appropriate games.

Given that Baraclough has spent virtually all close-season saying that the likes of Dom Thomas will get a chance then I've no reason to doubt him. In answer to your question though, Thomas will develop by moving on from 10 - 15 min cameos to getting 25 - 30 min stints in games and depending on how he fares you might see him start with some regularity after that, rotating with Ainsworth more than likely. Chucking him in away from home in the opening game of the season against a physical side isn't going to help him develop all it does is heap expectation on him. As Melvin says above, if we were at home vs Hamilton or Thistle on Saturday I'm pretty sure he'd have been in with a shout. Similarly in the case of Chalmers being played out of position? He's indicated he can play at centre half and left midfield as well as his preferred left back. Going out on a limb I'd suggest the reason that he'd be playing there in the pre-season games was to see if he was reasonably comfortable there. We know he can play left back, that's the position we signed him for after all. Horses for courses and that.

I'd suggest that him playing wide midfield in the pre-season games is more to do with the knowledge that Ainsworth isn't available for the first two games of the season than anything.

Fair enough. Watt's still listed on the 20s squad on the club's list of players though. Thomas is actually on the first team page, which is the distinction I was making is all.

Thomas is listed as a first team midfielder so it'd probably be fair to add him in to that current squad.

I think it really depends on what you were expecting to happen in this window. The squad we ended up with was bloated, imbalanced and given the number of injuries, ineffective. It's perfectly correct to suggest that an overhaul was needed but to expect us to achieve that in a single window is a big ask which is why I'd guess Baraclough seemed to indicate in an interview a while back that he's been looking ahead to the January window as well. Similarly it was made fairly clear that the intention was to work with a smaller squad to allow the younger guys the opportunity to step up. Ultimately this is as transitional a season as you can get. Given how vocal the club have been about changes in recruitment policy, beyond McDonald, I don't think it was ever on the cards that we were going to go out and buy in "experience" or continue in the McCall vein of stop-gap signings to drop into the first team. As it stands, of our expected first XI it includes Hammell, McManus, Lasley, Pearson, McDonald with Clarkson added to those 5. That's half the outfield players you'd class as "experienced" pros while Ainsworth is 27 and has played over 200 games in his career. We've brought in Kennedy and Chalmers while Laing's also come back in. As Ya Bezzer! pointed out in his post yesterday Laing had a significant influence on our defence and by extension McManus' performances. With that in mind we've at the very least taken steps to address the defence. Whether Kennedy and Chalmers are good enough we'll have to wait and see. The manager and GM have indicated at every possible opportunity in the past few weeks that we're looking to bring in a goalkeeper and a central midfielder to complete our business which on the whole puts them on exactly the same page as those here in terms of what we need. If it gets to the end of August and we still haven't brought either that's the point that it becomes an issue.

Cheers. I was wondering about that when I was writing that earlier post. Genuinely interested to see the impact Laing had there. I knew there would be some improvement but didn't expect it to be quite as dramatic.

I'm not totally distraught at the thought of not getting Long in, I'm in agreement that in terms of ability there probably wasn't that much between him and Dan. Nevertheless we did pick up more points and concede less with Long in goals than Dan. The obvious caveat there is that the team started to find a bit of form and benefitted from having a more settled back 4 and having the likes of Pearson & McDonald involved (though Long was playing in a team with Tony Straker at left back). Considering the suggestion is that Long made as many, if not more, gaffes per game than Dan then it seems curious taking that information into account that we conceded less goals with him in. Again, there's nothing to say the results wouldn't have been the same with Dan in goals and that outfield team playing in front of him. I guess we'll find out soon enough. The above isn't a defence of Long as such, or a slight on Dan per se. I'd like to think that there are better options out there than both and given there's obviously a GK spot available then we should be looking to bring in players who are better than what we currently have. There are players that we might be happy to pay a nominal fee for, I don't think Long's one of them, bringing him in on a free would be another story. I note that it looks as if Long's contract with Sheffield United is up at the end of the season, I suppose it all depends on whether how they view him & whether they cut him loose as Forest did with Laing. We may have been hoping for a season loan with a view to taking him on permanently after that, who knows. It's all fairly academic though if he's getting the opportunity for first team football at Sheffield though.

Recently released (former) player update: Fraser Kerr playing with Oldham Athletic tonight. https://twitter.com/matt_chambers_/status/626110624079183872 Francis-Angol playing for Leyton Orient https://twitter.com/totalorient/status/626088802713530368

Word on that was that he was St Mirren bound I think. Edit to add: St Mirren mention here: https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/sport/sport-editors-picks/648878/langfield-the-perfect-finalegoalkeeper-is-in-no-rush-to-decide-future-after-testimonial-win/

Similarly, the closer it gets to the deadline the more palatable an offer is likely to be to an out of contract player. It may well be the case that someone who would have been outwith our budget in June might be more amenable to what we're able to offer in August. it's not ideal but if it means holding off to get a better level of goalkeeper in then so be it. I'd be much more concerned if the management hadn't mentioned the GK position however both the manager and Flow have said it's a position we're looking to address so I've no reason to doubt that it will be sorted. Given the state of our GK recruitment since Randolph left I'd much rather we took our time with it since as has been pointed out it's a crucial position and we have little margin for error. A quick glance at a site like transfermarkt gives you an idea of the number of keepers currently out of contract.

The esteemed BBC Sport Gossip page I believe. (For avoidance of doubt I fully realise there has been no such claim from an official source.)

Mentioned this in one of the other threads so apologies of the cross-thread post.