Di Canio surprised Benson is still at County Ground (From Swindon Advertiser)

LeGod wrote:
i hear Palace are ready to bid for Ritchie they also mentioned it on the radio this morning.

SAPFanSTFC wrote:

LeGod wrote: i hear Palace are ready to bid for Ritchie they also mentioned it on the radio this morning.

That WOULD be a good move for Ritchie!....they could also offer enough to make it financially worthwhile/tough to turn down.

SAPFanSTFC wrote:

LeGod wrote:
i hear Palace are ready to bid for Ritchie they also mentioned it on the radio this morning.

That WOULD be a good move for Ritchie!....they could also offer enough to make it financially worthwhile/tough to turn down.

the wizard wrote:
If its down to our manager then Ritchie wont go, if its down to Patey it could be interesting....... to say the least.

Swindon on stand-by for a rapid thaw if our man goes into melt down, thermo nuclear !!!!

old town robin wrote:

SAPFanSTFC wrote:

LeGod wrote:
i hear Palace are ready to bid for Ritchie they also mentioned it on the radio this morning.

That WOULD be a good move for Ritchie!....they could also offer enough to make it financially worthwhile/tough to turn down.

They'll have the cash if Zaha goes to Utd for a reported 12 million. If they were serious with a bid, it would be a very good move for him, they can loan him back to us for the rest of the season, that would be acceptable.

It would be a shame to see Ritchie go, such an important player now, seems a long time ago when he could hardly make the bench under Wilson. Think he and us can thank Paolo in making him the player he is today.

London Red wrote:
It can't just be about money for Benson - It said Bradford's offer was very similar to his current wage and had an extra year on top - so he could have made more
.
This could be his last move - why shouldn't he make sure it is right for him and his family?
.
Southend seems the best fit if true they are interested again - so lets hope they come in with a decent offer

LeGod wrote:
No way will Caddis be back and do we need him now as Thompson has been superb since he came in at fullback and he is going to be a very good player if he keeps up his level of performance.
Birmingham havent got money and rumour is they want to off load 7 players so i could see Caddis back in L1 very soon.

SAPFanSTFC wrote:

London Red wrote:
It can't just be about money for Benson - It said Bradford's offer was very similar to his current wage and had an extra year on top - so he could have made more
.
This could be his last move - why shouldn't he make sure it is right for him and his family?
.
Southend seems the best fit if true they are interested again - so lets hope they come in with a decent offer

I think that Bradford was a no as he doesn't want to move but surprised he didn't fancy Cheltenham as scoring goals is what he loves doing....even if it was for slightly less wages.
.
He may be tempted by Bristol Rovers given their mini-revival and they do have a bit more money to offer....easy to get to if Benson lives that way.

old town robin wrote:

SAPFanSTFC wrote:

London Red wrote:
It can't just be about money for Benson - It said Bradford's offer was very similar to his current wage and had an extra year on top - so he could have made more
.
This could be his last move - why shouldn't he make sure it is right for him and his family?
.
Southend seems the best fit if true they are interested again - so lets hope they come in with a decent offer

I think that Bradford was a no as he doesn't want to move but surprised he didn't fancy Cheltenham as scoring goals is what he loves doing....even if it was for slightly less wages.
.
He may be tempted by Bristol Rovers given their mini-revival and they do have a bit more money to offer....easy to get to if Benson lives that way.

He was prepared to move to Bradford when they high-jacked our original bid back in November 2011 and then found out they didn't have the money tpo complete the deal. Remember we had to wait until January to sign him because of it and he rotted away at Charlton. Maybe that is the reason he would not want to play for Parky again. (although it was probably not his fault the move went sour).

LeGod wrote:
No way will Caddis be back and do we need him now as Thompson has been superb since he came in at fullback and he is going to be a very good player if he keeps up his level of performance.
Birmingham havent got money and rumour is they want to off load 7 players so i could see Caddis back in L1 very soon.

southside7 wrote:

LeGod wrote:
No way will Caddis be back and do we need him now as Thompson has been superb since he came in at fullback and he is going to be a very good player if he keeps up his level of performance.
Birmingham havent got money and rumour is they want to off load 7 players so i could see Caddis back in L1 very soon.

If Ritchie went to Palace (hope he doesn't but still can't believe he isn't playing championship football) howbout Thompson at right back,Caddis right midfield?

LeGod wrote:
Everyone has to remember Caddis and PDC had a bit of a fall out can never see it happenning him being back.

If he did cant see him replacing Thompson who has improved with every game and is going to be a top player and fair play to him he has taken the opportunity and the position is now his to lose.
It's great seeing young players come through the academy and english as well its a pity some of the premier league teams dont do the same as the number of english players in the premier league gets reduced every year. I've got no time for the premier league a over hyped league with alot of average foreign imports.
watching that saints v everton game last night it was unbelievably poor quality. The ball was treated like a hot potato and i reckon we would have given them a good game last night with our football.

burley01rs wrote:
I think if Benson had as many starts as Martin here he would have scored a few by now

LeGod wrote:
i think people underestimate what Martin does in a game his first touch is very good and his movement and he has more pace than Benson.
Benson is more of a sniffer in the box but he did well for us last season plus his age is against him.
Martin is still fairly young about 24 i think and i still feel if keep him for a while longer he will score a few.

Di kanny oh wrote:
I suppose one question to ask ourselves is would Matt Ritchie be replaceable and I feel the answer is yes with what we have at the club. As LR said RDV and Roberts with Luke Rooney as cover and Williams can play the wings also. Ritchie for me has been class but I have to say this, that this season he has not been his usual self and the fact is he does miss Caddis. I have only noted a few games where Ritchie has been on top form and one of those games was against Tranmere where he was unplayable but fact is he has been poor by his own standards and I do feel we could cash in with the cover we have at the club. Yes he scores plenty of goals and can win a game out of the blue but if the money were right I feel it would be too good to turn down in our present plight. Im sure there are plenty of wingers out there without clubs who could be looked at but I do reckon Rooney is worth more than he has shown recently and Paolo just needs to spend time with the lad. I am certainly worried about next month and salaries and if the choice was Ritchie or administration I know which one I would choose. Andrew Black will not put any more money in so its either the new buyers are quick or big trouble I am afraid to say.

Highworth red wrote:
Would absolutely prefer Benson over Martin.

Oxon-Red wrote:

Di kanny oh wrote:
I suppose one question to ask ourselves is would Matt Ritchie be replaceable and I feel the answer is yes with what we have at the club. As LR said RDV and Roberts with Luke Rooney as cover and Williams can play the wings also. Ritchie for me has been class but I have to say this, that this season he has not been his usual self and the fact is he does miss Caddis. I have only noted a few games where Ritchie has been on top form and one of those games was against Tranmere where he was unplayable but fact is he has been poor by his own standards and I do feel we could cash in with the cover we have at the club. Yes he scores plenty of goals and can win a game out of the blue but if the money were right I feel it would be too good to turn down in our present plight. Im sure there are plenty of wingers out there without clubs who could be looked at but I do reckon Rooney is worth more than he has shown recently and Paolo just needs to spend time with the lad. I am certainly worried about next month and salaries and if the choice was Ritchie or administration I know which one I would choose. Andrew Black will not put any more money in so its either the new buyers are quick or big trouble I am afraid to say.

What is the sudden worry about salaries. The budget for the whole season was set up before it started and further funds were RELEASED in October to get us out of the embargo.

Has it suddenly been removed from the STFC coffers.

Perhaps someone could elaborate on this.

COYMR

Is that you Lovesey wrote:
I have just had a response from the editor of the football league paper, this is how it starts. I understand your complaint fully and we are in the process of making remedies. Chris Dunlavy is writing an apology in the paper and we have contacted Swindon Town FC. So it seems they did have their facts wrong.....

Is that you Lovesey wrote:
I have just had a response from the editor of the football league paper, this is how it starts.

I understand your complaint fully and we are in the process of making remedies. Chris Dunlavy is writing an apology in the paper and we have contacted Swindon Town FC.


So it seems they did have their facts wrong.....

Di kanny oh wrote:

Oxon-Red wrote:

Di kanny oh wrote: I suppose one question to ask ourselves is would Matt Ritchie be replaceable and I feel the answer is yes with what we have at the club. As LR said RDV and Roberts with Luke Rooney as cover and Williams can play the wings also. Ritchie for me has been class but I have to say this, that this season he has not been his usual self and the fact is he does miss Caddis. I have only noted a few games where Ritchie has been on top form and one of those games was against Tranmere where he was unplayable but fact is he has been poor by his own standards and I do feel we could cash in with the cover we have at the club. Yes he scores plenty of goals and can win a game out of the blue but if the money were right I feel it would be too good to turn down in our present plight. Im sure there are plenty of wingers out there without clubs who could be looked at but I do reckon Rooney is worth more than he has shown recently and Paolo just needs to spend time with the lad. I am certainly worried about next month and salaries and if the choice was Ritchie or administration I know which one I would choose. Andrew Black will not put any more money in so its either the new buyers are quick or big trouble I am afraid to say.

What is the sudden worry about salaries. The budget for the whole season was set up before it started and further funds were RELEASED in October to get us out of the embargo. Has it suddenly been removed from the STFC coffers. Perhaps someone could elaborate on this. COYMR

Benson, Cox, L Rooney, Caddis possibly, keeping Martin and Hollands all adds up.

London Red wrote:
Ritchie should not be sold for under £2m money trouble or not - we have lost too many players in the past for under their real value
.
Losing Ritchie won't be great for a sale of the club - I wouldn't want to be buying a club which has just flogged its star player on the cheap
.
If Ritchie was to go for £2m+ then the initial solution would be Roberts on the right with RDV on the left
.
L Rooney would then come on to the bench as cover (plus we also have Storey as an option)
.
Granted not as potent as with Ritchie but we won't suddenly become a poor side
.
RDV has improved significantly this year and lots wnat him on the left anyway
.
Roberts is improving game by game with us and is a great player at this level - he has also played on the right a lot for Udders so could offer us the inverted winger option by going there
.
Then as the Loan window is still open (or will re-open a week after the perm one closes) we can reserect our interest in Green at Charlton who is a very good right winger - who like Ritchie chips in with goals - got double figures for D&R in both L1 and L2!
.
Caddis is STFC past - we should look forward

Oxon-Red wrote:

Di kanny oh wrote:

Oxon-Red wrote:

Di kanny oh wrote: I suppose one question to ask ourselves is would Matt Ritchie be replaceable and I feel the answer is yes with what we have at the club. As LR said RDV and Roberts with Luke Rooney as cover and Williams can play the wings also. Ritchie for me has been class but I have to say this, that this season he has not been his usual self and the fact is he does miss Caddis. I have only noted a few games where Ritchie has been on top form and one of those games was against Tranmere where he was unplayable but fact is he has been poor by his own standards and I do feel we could cash in with the cover we have at the club. Yes he scores plenty of goals and can win a game out of the blue but if the money were right I feel it would be too good to turn down in our present plight. Im sure there are plenty of wingers out there without clubs who could be looked at but I do reckon Rooney is worth more than he has shown recently and Paolo just needs to spend time with the lad. I am certainly worried about next month and salaries and if the choice was Ritchie or administration I know which one I would choose. Andrew Black will not put any more money in so its either the new buyers are quick or big trouble I am afraid to say.

What is the sudden worry about salaries. The budget for the whole season was set up before it started and further funds were RELEASED in October to get us out of the embargo. Has it suddenly been removed from the STFC coffers. Perhaps someone could elaborate on this. COYMR

Benson, Cox, L Rooney, Caddis possibly, keeping Martin and Hollands all adds up.

Moving Benson, Cox and Co will free up salaries to allow new players in or Martin/Hollands to be kept longer.

I was asking about the sudden worry that the club will not be paying players in February. Where is this coming from ??

COYMR

LeGod wrote:
Just got my response from the Football League paper below:


I understand your complaint fully and we are in the process of making remedies. Chris Dunlavy is writing an apology in the paper and we have contacted Swindon Town FC.


Ironically, Chris Dunlavy has always been a champion of Swindon; in this instance his zeal to criticise clubs who live beyond their means has carried him away to make clearly unfounded, and deeply regretted, statements about the club.


His intention had been to raise the wider issue of insolvency and debt in football, and more precisely the need for clubs to move towards self-sustainability.




He saw Sir William Patey’s reported comments about administration and used this as the basis for his remarks. He chose the wrong target.


David Emery

LeGod wrote:
Just got my response from the Football League paper below:


I understand your complaint fully and we are in the process of making remedies. Chris Dunlavy is writing an apology in the paper and we have contacted Swindon Town FC.


Ironically, Chris Dunlavy has always been a champion of Swindon; in this instance his zeal to criticise clubs who live beyond their means has carried him away to make clearly unfounded, and deeply regretted, statements about the club.


His intention had been to raise the wider issue of insolvency and debt in football, and more precisely the need for clubs to move towards self-sustainability.




He saw Sir William Patey’s reported comments about administration and used this as the basis for his remarks. He chose the wrong target.


David Emery

Di kanny oh wrote:

Oxon-Red wrote:

Di kanny oh wrote:

Oxon-Red wrote:

Di kanny oh wrote: I suppose one question to ask ourselves is would Matt Ritchie be replaceable and I feel the answer is yes with what we have at the club. As LR said RDV and Roberts with Luke Rooney as cover and Williams can play the wings also. Ritchie for me has been class but I have to say this, that this season he has not been his usual self and the fact is he does miss Caddis. I have only noted a few games where Ritchie has been on top form and one of those games was against Tranmere where he was unplayable but fact is he has been poor by his own standards and I do feel we could cash in with the cover we have at the club. Yes he scores plenty of goals and can win a game out of the blue but if the money were right I feel it would be too good to turn down in our present plight. Im sure there are plenty of wingers out there without clubs who could be looked at but I do reckon Rooney is worth more than he has shown recently and Paolo just needs to spend time with the lad. I am certainly worried about next month and salaries and if the choice was Ritchie or administration I know which one I would choose. Andrew Black will not put any more money in so its either the new buyers are quick or big trouble I am afraid to say.

What is the sudden worry about salaries. The budget for the whole season was set up before it started and further funds were RELEASED in October to get us out of the embargo. Has it suddenly been removed from the STFC coffers. Perhaps someone could elaborate on this. COYMR

Benson, Cox, L Rooney, Caddis possibly, keeping Martin and Hollands all adds up.

Moving Benson, Cox and Co will free up salaries to allow new players in or Martin/Hollands to be kept longer. I was asking about the sudden worry that the club will not be paying players in February. Where is this coming from ?? COYMR

I know the budget for the season had been set aside but I thought we were over with the present playing staff at the club plus Risser cost us a pay off which has bought forward his salary if you like.

Oi Den! wrote:
I was very pleased with Emery's reply. It's a proper apology and doesn't hide from the fact that his paper made a serious mistake in not checking the facts. I give him great credit for that. The tone of his email suggests to me that the apology in the next issue will be wholehearted and not half-arsed, as suggested by some - including me yesterday. I won't bear a grudge against Dunlavy. He's written good stuff about us in the past, and it's clear that he's made an honest mistake with the best of intentions. The concern he (ham-fistedly) tried to highlight should be a concern to all of us.

Di kanny oh wrote:
Blimey get this Al Waleed Bin Talal on board that would make our rival fans choke on their dinners for sure. Wow, so may be Sir William has got some major contacts after all. We can all but dream as this is really the type of investor we need a mega rich oil sheik who would have ambitions to take his investment all the way to the top. May be its not the way to do it in true spirit and like the old Wimbledon type scenario but in my lifetime I would love to see Swindon mixing it again with the big boys and the only way that will happen is money and lots of it. We could easily become the Southampton of Wiltshire and certainly give Reading something to think about.
Ah well back to my bog repairs and fixing me flush.

the don69 wrote:
I don't blame Benson for not being in any rush to leave!he's always given his best for us and we gave him his contract,so he's in control of his life!good luck Paul keep working hard and make the right move for you and your family!!!!!!!!!!

southside7 wrote:

LeGod wrote:
No way will Caddis be back and do we need him now as Thompson has been superb since he came in at fullback and he is going to be a very good player if he keeps up his level of performance.
Birmingham havent got money and rumour is they want to off load 7 players so i could see Caddis back in L1 very soon.

If Ritchie went to Palace (hope he doesn't but still can't believe he isn't playing championship football) howbout Thompson at right back,Caddis right midfield?

NewburyRobin wrote:
Wikipedia reports that Al-Waleed Bin Talal is in ongoing dialogue with the directors of STFC.

The last paragraph of his business interests state his son is a big fan of English football - interesting.

Bloomberg list him as the tenth richest man in the world.

MITTED wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:
I was very pleased with Emery's reply. It's a proper apology and doesn't hide from the fact that his paper made a serious mistake in not checking the facts. I give him great credit for that. The tone of his email suggests to me that the apology in the next issue will be wholehearted and not half-arsed, as suggested by some - including me yesterday. I won't bear a grudge against Dunlavy. He's written good stuff about us in the past, and it's clear that he's made an honest mistake with the best of intentions. The concern he (ham-fistedly) tried to highlight should be a concern to all of us.

Perhaps all those who have received the apology should reply themselves to the editor that it should give it equal prominence to the original article in their next edition and copy to BBC and SkySports.

Oi Den! wrote:

MITTED wrote:

Oi Den! wrote: I was very pleased with Emery's reply. It's a proper apology and doesn't hide from the fact that his paper made a serious mistake in not checking the facts. I give him great credit for that. The tone of his email suggests to me that the apology in the next issue will be wholehearted and not half-arsed, as suggested by some - including me yesterday. I won't bear a grudge against Dunlavy. He's written good stuff about us in the past, and it's clear that he's made an honest mistake with the best of intentions. The concern he (ham-fistedly) tried to highlight should be a concern to all of us.

Perhaps all those who have received the apology should reply themselves to the editor that it should give it equal prominence to the original article in their next edition and copy to BBC and SkySports.

Each to his own. I sent a pretty angry (but restrained) email to the Editor and I think the reply I and others have received is good enough. I reckon he's in no doubt about what he has to do on Sunday. Not sure what BBC and SkySports have to do with it though.

smirg kcab wrote:

southside7 wrote:

LeGod wrote:
No way will Caddis be back and do we need him now as Thompson has been superb since he came in at fullback and he is going to be a very good player if he keeps up his level of performance.
Birmingham havent got money and rumour is they want to off load 7 players so i could see Caddis back in L1 very soon.

If Ritchie went to Palace (hope he doesn't but still can't believe he isn't playing championship football) howbout Thompson at right back,Caddis right midfield?

Good shout caddis in midfield, tehoue upfront with kerrouche, smith in goal, Rooney,cox,risser,sm

ith in midfield,
Get over it caddis will and never will play for stfc unless Pdc goes.
Onwards and upwards

Old-Stager, Hilperton wrote:

NewburyRobin wrote:
Wikipedia reports that Al-Waleed Bin Talal is in ongoing dialogue with the directors of STFC.

The last paragraph of his business interests state his son is a big fan of English football - interesting.

Bloomberg list him as the tenth richest man in the world.

Another rival bid has been tabled by Andrei Terrabolikoff who is the grandson of a wealthy Russian Billionaire, who is also in the world's top ten rich list.

DarrenSTFCRomain wrote:
I bet benson wished he went to bradford

avo wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:

MITTED wrote:

Oi Den! wrote: I was very pleased with Emery's reply. It's a proper apology and doesn't hide from the fact that his paper made a serious mistake in not checking the facts. I give him great credit for that. The tone of his email suggests to me that the apology in the next issue will be wholehearted and not half-arsed, as suggested by some - including me yesterday. I won't bear a grudge against Dunlavy. He's written good stuff about us in the past, and it's clear that he's made an honest mistake with the best of intentions. The concern he (ham-fistedly) tried to highlight should be a concern to all of us.

Perhaps all those who have received the apology should reply themselves to the editor that it should give it equal prominence to the original article in their next edition and copy to BBC and SkySports.

Each to his own. I sent a pretty angry (but restrained) email to the Editor and I think the reply I and others have received is good enough. I reckon he's in no doubt about what he has to do on Sunday. Not sure what BBC and SkySports have to do with it though.

Nothing outside of fair representation that you mention in your comments ref the FL show where you state that you feel they offer a balanced view on us as a club.
.
The BBC and Sky could show the same balanced view in their sports bulletins by allowing some airtime to the fact that a story that they reported on has developed, and that the outcome is far from what was originally reported.
.
That's what it has to do with Sky and the BBC.