Current Squad and Contracts

[DFCAnth]

So.. Scott, Hunter, Brown, Mitchell, Galbraith, Lovegreen and Thompson have just signed new deals. I believe Hardy, Turnbull, Burgess, Jameson? and Cartman all have existing deals.

What is the situation with the other players and their contracts - Portas, Kowski, Purewal (read that he will be staying somewhere), Gaskell, Weldon, White and Provett?

GK - Jameson (1 year left?)

RB - Hunter (2 years left)

CB - Burgess (1 year left?)
Brown (2 years left)
Lovegreen (1 year left?)

LB - Galbraith (2 years left)

RM - Mitchell (2 years left)

CM - Turnbull (1 year left?)
Scott (2 years left)

LM - Thommo (2 years left)

ST - Cartman (1 year left?)
Hardy (1/2 years left?)
Purewal (1 year left?)

If that's the current squad who would you offer new deals to out of the remaining? For me it would be all of them. What position would you look to strengthen in?

[Neil Johnson]

Purewal was to be offered a contract, but maybe with some fitness proviso.

I suppose Gaskell & Hardy were offered long contracts on signing, bearing in mind their past scoring achievements.

[D_F_C]

Gaskell isn't on a contract

[Ingleby]

Think Gaskell will be released if we sign who we are after.

[AndyPark]

...

[poppyfield]

Think Gaskell will be released if we sign who we are after.

This guy has got to be something to step into the 'magicians' boots, I would keep him if he wants to stay.

[DFCAnth]

Just been walking my dog past the arena and saw some geezer named Lewis Nightingale getting out his car.

[DFCAnth]

Oh and Brian Atkinson is following him on Twitter. So he MUST be signing - just googled him and he played for Farlsley Celtic last season.

[liddle_4_ever]

Just been walking my dog past the arena and saw some geezer named Lewis Nightingale getting out his car.

Is he the new prop forward?

[Beano]

Think Gaskell will be released if we sign who we are after.

Why on earth would we release Gaskell?!?

Nonsense.

[Darlo_Pete]

Gaskell should be kept on, Salford away need I say anymore?

[lo36789]

need I say anymore?

No but it's never stopped you before

[Robbie Painter]

Think Gaskell will be released if we sign who we are after.

Why on earth would we release Gaskell?!?

Nonsense.

Because he lives & works over 2 hours away, is the wrong side of 30 & scored just once in the last 1/3 of the season.

Not saying it would be the right or wrong decision but those are the facts. He might not even want to commit himself for another season.

[Quakerz]

Agree with this. He's a quality forward but isn't exactly local - it may not even suit him to stay.

Often decisions at this level about who to keep or release are based as much on the players personal circumstances as they are on whether the club wants them to stay.

Just look at Gary Brown last close season, we released him because he wanted to leave - if it was purely the club decision this never would have happened (but had a happy ending anyway)

[joejaques]

Just been walking my dog past the arena and saw some geezer named Lewis Nightingale getting out his car.

He had his sister, Florence, with him. New Medic?

[darlo2001uk]

She's also a top quality singer down in London. Did a live gig in Berkeley Square a couple of weeks ago.

[bga]

Think Gaskell will be released if we sign who we are after.

Why on earth would we release Gaskell?!?

Nonsense.

Because he lives & works over 2 hours away, is the wrong side of 30 & scored just once in the last 1/3 of the season.

Not saying it would be the right or wrong decision but those are the facts. He might not even want to commit himself for another season.

Case of "The Emperor's new clothes" to me. I agree with Robbie. The stats are interesting (and they never lie of course!) if you take Gaskell's 2 hatricks out of the equation it means he made 23 starts for us and scored 8 goals. Add 9 sub appearances to that and he is hardly prolific is he? Am I being too harsh?

[Ingleby]

Lewis Nightingale will be signing from Farsley by all accounts. Decent squad player but being a right winger I wonder if that rules out Arran W.

Edit - this was supposed to be in different thread but nvm.

[Quakerz]

if you take Gaskell's 2 hatricks out of the equation it means he made 23 starts for us and scored 8 goals. Add 9 sub appearances to that and he is hardly prolific is he? Am I being too harsh?

Too harsh.

I hate it when people use the "if you take x away from y, it just leaves z" argument to back up the point they're trying to make.

We might as well go the whole hog and say "if we take the 14 goals he scored away from the 14 goals he scored, that means he scored 0 goals. From 23 starts and 9 sub appearances" Which would make him shite!

You can't selectively deduct goals from a goal scoring record to make it seem worse.

But he isn't shite is he, because 14 from 23+9 is a good record!

[DarloOnTheUp]

Think Gaskell will be released if we sign who we are after.

Why on earth would we release Gaskell?!?

Nonsense.

Because he lives & works over 2 hours away, is the wrong side of 30 & scored just once in the last 1/3 of the season.

Not saying it would be the right or wrong decision but those are the facts. He might not even want to commit himself for another season.

Case of "The Emperor's new clothes" to me. I agree with Robbie. The stats are interesting (and they never lie of course!) if you take Gaskell's 2 hatricks out of the equation it means he made 23 starts for us and scored 8 goals. Add 9 sub appearances to that and he is hardly prolific is he? Am I being too harsh?

I'm sorry what? You're taking goals he scored away from him now?

[bga]

if you take Gaskell's 2 hatricks out of the equation it means he made 23 starts for us and scored 8 goals. Add 9 sub appearances to that and he is hardly prolific is he? Am I being too harsh?

Too harsh.

I hate it when people use the "if you take x away from y, it just leaves z" argument to back up the point they're trying to make.

We might as well go the whole hog and say "if we take the 14 goals he scored away from the 14 goals he scored, that means he scored 0 goals. From 23 starts and 9 sub appearances" Which would make him shite!

You can't selectively deduct goals from a goal scoring record to make it seem worse.

But he isn't shite is he, because 14 from 23+9 is a good record!

I never said he was shite just I donthink think he is as good as some of you do. If he did only score one goal in the last third of the season what does that tell you?

[DarloOnTheUp]

I never said he was shite just I donthink think he is as good as some of you do.

Fair enough, we all have opinions, but taking goals away from his tally is cheating.

If he did only score one goal in the last third of the season what does that tell you?

That despite only scoring one goal in the last third of the season he still managed to hit double figures and have a scoring ratio of about 1 in 2 (if you include the sub appearances).

[Quakerz]

if you take Gaskell's 2 hatricks out of the equation it means he made 23 starts for us and scored 8 goals. Add 9 sub appearances to that and he is hardly prolific is he? Am I being too harsh?

Too harsh.

I hate it when people use the "if you take x away from y, it just leaves z" argument to back up the point they're trying to make.

We might as well go the whole hog and say "if we take the 14 goals he scored away from the 14 goals he scored, that means he scored 0 goals. From 23 starts and 9 sub appearances" Which would make him shite!

You can't selectively deduct goals from a goal scoring record to make it seem worse.

But he isn't shite is he, because 14 from 23+9 is a good record!

I never said he was shite just I donthink think he is as good as some of you do. If he did only score one goal in the last third of the season what does that tell you?

Yes but if you take away the appearances he made in the last 3rd of the season, he scored 1 goal from 0 starts - which means he is that good he can do the impossible.

On a serious note, if what you say about the last 3rd of the season is true (1 goal) then he must have been knocking them in at nearly 1 goal per start for the first 2/3rds of the season? What does that say about him? And that's twice the time period that you're referring to.

But you can't judge him on 1/3rd or 2/3rds of the season, and in any case form ebbs and flows - which is why we always judge over a full season.

23+9 for 14 goals, all from open play I think, is pretty good, and I judge him on that.

[HarryCharltonsCat]

Don't think he was quite the same after dislocating his shoulder, and did seem to be carrying an injury for a while. Has he ever played as high as National League North? You'd think he would have, with the proliferation of teams local to him, and his previous goalscoring exploits. If not, perhaps it's been down to his choice and he might not want to do so with us.

[darlodaz]

plus you have to remember how knackered the lad must have been in the last part of the season how many games in last month etc?then remember the lad has another job to fit in. oh and what a priceless goal that was at blyth [away]

[TDS]

Tricky b****** and a good finish on him but he didnt look up to it in the last third of the season for me. Maybe injuries and fatigue. Wouldnt say no to him staying still as hes capable of the sublime.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Beano]

I genuinely despair as some of the crap spouted on this thread.

Quakers is spot on about the flawed and make believe statistical analysis of his goals.

Maybe injury and fatigue?! Stating the bleeding obvious.

[Spyman]

From what I've seen of Gaskell on the highlights and a couple of full games, he offers something different and can be a match winner on his day.

I think the fact he's not yet signed a new contract when half a dozen others have may speak volumes, but I've liked what I've seen of him and if he leaves I'm sure it won't be for footballing reasons.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[bga]

if you take Gaskell's 2 hatricks out of the equation it means he made 23 starts for us and scored 8 goals. Add 9 sub appearances to that and he is hardly prolific is he? Am I being too harsh?

Too harsh.

I hate it when people use the "if you take x away from y, it just leaves z" argument to back up the point they're trying to make.

We might as well go the whole hog and say "if we take the 14 goals he scored away from the 14 goals he scored, that means he scored 0 goals. From 23 starts and 9 sub appearances" Which would make him shite!

You can't selectively deduct goals from a goal scoring record to make it seem worse.

But he isn't shite is he, because 14 from 23+9 is a good record!

I never said he was shite just I donthink think he is as good as some of you do. If he did only score one goal in the last third of the season what does that tell you?

Yes but if you take away the appearances he made in the last 3rd of the season, he scored 1 goal from 0 starts - which means he is that good he can do the impossible.

On a serious note, if what you say about the last 3rd of the season is true (1 goal) then he must have been knocking them in at nearly 1 goal per start for the first 2/3rds of the season? What does that say about him? And that's twice the time period that you're referring to.

But you can't judge him on 1/3rd or 2/3rds of the season, and in any case form ebbs and flows - which is why we always judge over a full season.

23+9 for 14 goals, all from open play I think, is pretty good, and I judge him on that.

My point is I don't think he is consistent enough over the whole season. Others may disagree doesn't mean I am spiting crap Beano. Re the stats above it is actually (according to club website) 25+9 for 14 goals my original 23 excluded the two hatrick games if you see what I mean! I'll leave it to MG to decide as he is often (but not always) right. Sweet dreams everyone.

[D_F_C]

You can make statistics sound very bias. Did you know that darlo are unbeaten against Man U? We've only lost to Aston villa once in the past 30 years