MelvinBragg

Other than Blyth, who else could we mover our of our thin squad..?

To be fair he is quoted as saying "The way way they were playing isn't for me" so he is making a direct comparison...

Looking at the squad, given Frear and Tanner are the only natural wingers on our books (and Robinson seems to see Tanner as a second striker/attacking midfielder), I'm wondering if the perseverance with three at the back is less to with the defence and more a way to get width into the team..? Haven't seen any of the games so basing the question on highlights and what I've read on here...

Lot of beard action in last year's squad. Easy to get confused...

Not as bad as some made out, Clay probably was never going to be good enough for this level. But at a time where there are other former players being discussed as having talent but lacking application, I take my hat off to Clay. Certainly strikes me that he'll make the most of what ability he had. Unlike Brian Kerr, Derek Riordan and countless others, Clay won't sit at the end of his career and say "Could I have done more..?"

Difference is those three high profile players had resale value and value to the team so it may be that the clubs weren't motivated to simply get rid of them, not that they couldn't have. Blyth is a totally different kettle of fish...

Pretty sure that Fisher will score goals but Bowman certainly making a case for being first choice at the moment. He's at least making a mockery of those who lumped him in with Blyth as dead wood to be cast aside. I actually thought we might move him on simply on the basis that there may be more clubs interested in him than Blyth. But if we can get shot of Blyth somehow due to his behaviour on holiday and we see Moult move on, Bowman and Fisher as our two options at number nine doesn't horrify me. Interesting for me from yesterday's lineup. No Clay on the bench, instead Rose and Gordon. No Campbell either. If you figure that Campbell may have jumped Clay in the queue then Clay is now at least sixth choice for a midfield spot behind two teenagers. Robinson surely trying to move him on on that basis...

As does everyone with sense. What did he do?

Official club twitter has Carson tipping superbly on to the bar ahead of Queens Park goal. BBC has him flapping at a close range header. Which is more accurate?

Anyone any idea of lineup or scorers?

Indeed. How much is staying in the top division worth to us? Any fee for Moult has to be a bigger number than that. I know it's only a friendly but sounds like we're creating chances but not taking them at Gateshead. Maybe underlines (if it was needed) the value of Moult, not simply in terms of cash but in terms of what he offers the team..? EDIT Of course, as I type that we score two goals..

I had previously thought that but reading Robinson's comments, you wouldn't think so...

Despite Robinson's words on the official site, you have to suspect that he was one of the players that he was hoping to move on and therefore this affects the possibility of another striker coming in. Other than Clay, can't see many other first team wages we could free up with players being deemed surplus to requirements. Not sure how much money would be freed up by loaning out a couple of younger players...

How much are they willing to pay for Stevie May?

I see on twitter a rumour that if Aberdeen don't get Stevie May then they might move for Moult...

I think the chances of us finding someone to take Blyth off our hands are slim and that's why Bowman may be more likely to move on. Suspect that the degree of interest in Moult will also be a factor. Moving Bowman on and leaving us with Moult, Fisher and the pacey striker is one thing. But moving him on and selling Moult, leaving Fisher, a pacey striker and Blyth as your options is less appealing. And I know if we sell Moult, we'd probably try and replace him but it's another deal to try and get done while Bowman is already here and may (I stress MAY) be able to contribute...

The thing with Bowman is that he's probably best suited to playing as a 'number 9' leading the line. Same could also be said of Moult and Fisher. Given Robinson targeted Fisher, assuming Moult stays then Bowman would probably start the season as third choice for that role. Moult leaving would probably mean Fisher and Bowman being our two options for that position. For me, none of the three look suited to playing off a main striker in the same way McDonald did. Looking increasingly like Tanner may get a chance in that position unless we can get the other pacy striker in that Robinson is after. On the debate regards Kipré or Dembele being the better player/priority, having seen neither play I won't comment. But as others have said, we needed at least two defenders and the hope would be, as with all signings, that they're better than those they're replacing in the squad. So far (and I know it's not 100% like for like) we're looking at. Carson for Samson Kipré for Ferguson Dunne for Chalmers Bigirmana for Pearson Rose for Lucas Tanner for Ainsworth Fisher for McDonald The two attacking replacements are probably the ones where you would say there's maybe a loss of quality although if Tanner is more consistent than Ainsworth has been recently we may get more out of him over the course of a season and if we can get Blyth off the books, Fisher being seen as his replacement would definitely seem like an upgrade (allowing for the fact we then bring in another striker to replace McDonald). Generally the business we've done this summer has me cautiously optimistic that we may be slightly better than we were last season. Caveat there being if Moult or Heneghan leaves, we're again light on numbers...

Tanner has been given 27 as his squad number...

Need to assume that Robinson has seen enough of him over the last couple of weeks to think Kipré offers us something. Unlike Clay and Lucas last summer when we had them playing in the league cup as trialists so disorganised were we, at least we're signing a trialist when we have time to look at other options so you'd hope it wasn't a case of panicking and signing him simply because he's available...

Given the type of strikers we already have at the club, that is the stupidest rumour I've heard in a while...

Neat and tidy in possession. Fair assessment of his best asset. Don't recall Clay giving the ball away too often but it's easy to do that if you don't try and play the killer ball and just shift the ball 10 yards to the side. Quite good at retaining the ball under pressure as well. Must confess, I don't dislike Clay as a player despite the knowledge he's not good enough to be starting every week. Always gives 100%, never hides and seems a good character who fits in well. If we didn't have Campbell coming through, you could make a case (and with Lasley's retirement you possibly still can) for having him on the bench as a cheap backup option. But the signing of Rose and the emergence of Campbell and Gordon will probably see him not even make the bench. Wouldn't slate the guy though. Always gives his all, just that his all probably isn't enough at this level. Always feel if a player gives his best and it's not good enough, then the manager is to blame for picking him. Would only dislike a player if they have ability but don't give it their all...

I would tend to agree. I thought he might get moved on rather than Blyth only on the basis that his record in non league might mean we would find it easier to find a club to take him rather than Blyth. Having said that, while I agree he's not the worst and has something to offer, he'll probably find himself third choice for the number nine position unless we sell Moult. Don't think any combination of Moult, Fisher and Bowman looks like a partnership that would work...

Tongue in cheek, maybe, but I'd gladly chip in. Probably more than a couple of pounds. Let's call it both players being sponsored by the Well Society...

Get 1000 fans to set up a £2 a week direct debit and offer them an extra £1000 a week each..