Man United have hardly built a reputation for good decision making in the last decade however.Brogue wrote:there is no way utd would have put a first-refusal clause in the deal if they didn't think he's going to go on to be a good player in the future. we should defo keep hold
Weird comparison with Elliott too.Hendo wrote:Other than for the winner on Monday though...hughsies no.1 wrote:So much hype around this signing, but lets be honest - he has underwhelmed and hasn't earned a starting spot and since he has lost his starting spot we have seen our recent upturn in form.
Sideways and backwards passing, Elliot is streets ahead of him currently and he can't get in the team either.
Obviously a signing for the future, but wouldn't be a disaster if he went by any means imho.
It was his forward pass into space for Dorsett which started the move.
Can I just clarify here that both of you are suggesting Charlie Savage might be good enough to play for Man United one day?YorkshireRoyal99 wrote:Man United have hardly built a reputation for good decision making in the last decade however.Brogue wrote:there is no way utd would have put a first-refusal clause in the deal if they didn't think he's going to go on to be a good player in the future. we should defo keep hold
NoJohn Smith wrote:Can I just clarify here that both of you are suggesting Charlie Savage might be good enough to play for Man United one day?YorkshireRoyal99 wrote:Man United have hardly built a reputation for good decision making in the last decade however.Brogue wrote:there is no way utd would have put a first-refusal clause in the deal if they didn't think he's going to go on to be a good player in the future. we should defo keep hold
C4yStranded wrote:Given the views aired today by Sam Smith - it will be interesting* to see if some players feel they have been sold a dud push for a move away. Savage's dad could well be one of those esp if not playing.
No.John Smith wrote:Can I just clarify here that both of you are suggesting Charlie Savage might be good enough to play for Man United one day?YorkshireRoyal99 wrote:Man United have hardly built a reputation for good decision making in the last decade however.Brogue wrote:there is no way utd would have put a first-refusal clause in the deal if they didn't think he's going to go on to be a good player in the future. we should defo keep hold
The way they are going he might just beJohn Smith wrote:Can I just clarify here that both of you are suggesting Charlie Savage might be good enough to play for Man United one day?YorkshireRoyal99 wrote:Man United have hardly built a reputation for good decision making in the last decade however.Brogue wrote:there is no way utd would have put a first-refusal clause in the deal if they didn't think he's going to go on to be a good player in the future. we should defo keep hold
Hound wrote:The way they are going he might just beJohn Smith wrote:Can I just clarify here that both of you are suggesting Charlie Savage might be good enough to play for Man United one day?YorkshireRoyal99 wrote:
Man United have hardly built a reputation for good decision making in the last decade however.
Because he’s under contract?SouthDownsRoyal wrote:He will leave, why would he stay?
We all know that means jack in football but yes, he can't just walk away there needs to be a deal done with Derby that gives us something we can be happy with. Am pretty sure Derby are still limited in the level of fee they can pay - seem to remember reading they can only pay a max. of 250k, which if I am remembering correctly, I just don't see a deal at that level unless Savage makes it clear he feels he has been misled into signing for us and is no longer happy as a result. Then, we may feel that is better to move him on.Hound wrote:Because he’s under contract?SouthDownsRoyal wrote:He will leave, why would he stay?
Ah true, no way he will leave then.Hound wrote:Because he’s under contract?SouthDownsRoyal wrote:He will leave, why would he stay?
He might be it’s not up to him (unless he has some clause)SouthDownsRoyal wrote:Ah true, no way he will leave then.Hound wrote:Because he’s under contract?SouthDownsRoyal wrote:He will leave, why would he stay?
I'm guessing, if Stockport were involved, they would've been looking for a loan - which there was no chance of us agreeing to. A Championship club taking a look is a bit more interesting, but I doubt he'd be a first team player at any Championship club right now.morganb wrote:Stockport and an unnamed Championship club have joined the race for Charlie Savage. Reading have told them he’s not for sale.
https://twitter.com/RFCLatest/status/17 ... 5130031208 and Daily Star
Users browsing this forum: Horsham Royal and 26 guests