1 of 1- Tek
- Administrator
Offline 
- From: East Kilbride
- Registered: 05/7/2014
- Posts: 20,292
Who else should be surplus to requirements?
What players should we still be looking to move on in this Window, if possible?
- Arabdownsouth
- Tekel Towers LEGEND
Offline
- Registered: 25/12/2017
- Posts: 2,874
Re: Who else should be surplus to requirements?
Tek wrote:
What players should we still be looking to move on in this Window, if possible?
Aird and loemba for starters
- Tek
- Administrator
Offline
- From: East Kilbride
- Registered: 05/7/2014
- Posts: 20,292
Re: Who else should be surplus to requirements?
What players should we still be looking to move on in this Window, if possible?
Aird and loemba for starters
They'd definitely be the first two out the door.
Hate to say it but think times up for Matty Smith.
And maybe controversial but Cammy Smith hasn't been able to break into two Utd Championship sides now and two young boys were preffered to him tonight from the bench.
I'm not seeing what he brings to the table.
- •
Thread Starter- scarpia
- Unregistered
Re: Who else should be surplus to requirements?
Booth, Frans for sure if we bring another CH in and maybe Watson.
- JerryDungle
- Tekel Towers LEGEND
Offline
- Registered: 08/8/2015
- Posts: 1,002
Re: Who else should be surplus to requirements?
All the names mentioned above. None are good enough to really stake a claim for a place in the first team, so why keep them? Get them out and get boys in who will push those ahead of them. You could probably throw Sam Stanton in there as well maybe, he has decent moments like the part he played in last nights opener, but they’re few and far between. I think he’s very much a championship player
- SlatefordArab
- Tekel Towers LEGEND
Offline
- Registered: 30/3/2015
- Posts: 1,633
Re: Who else should be surplus to requirements?
Agree with all the names above but would probably keep Watson. Cammy Smith has s a strange one, Neilson brings him back in January then just doesn’t play him, or when he does play him, plays him out wide where he is really ineffective.
- scarpia
- Unregistered
Re: Who else should be surplus to requirements?
Agree with all the names above but would probably keep Watson. Cammy Smith has s a strange one, Neilson brings him back in January then just doesn’t play him, or when he does play him, plays him out wide where he is really ineffective.
Would like to see Smith get a game in a Betfred or two and see how he does.
If he can't look at least decent in them...
- kingdomarab
- Tekel Towers 1st Team
Offline
- From: North East Fife
- Registered: 23/4/2019
- Posts: 464
Re: Who else should be surplus to requirements?
Loemba, Aird, M.Smith, Frans, Booth - probably the closest to the chopping block atm.
Seeing people on Twitter saying they prefer Frans to Connolly and Reynolds. I’m not Connolly’s biggest fan but absolutely mental that people can have watched the three of them play and deduce Frans is the best.
C. Smith unlikely to play much part this season it seems so not adverse to him moving if it doesn’t cost us.
- LarsErikKjell
- Tekel Towers LEGEND
Offline
- Registered: 14/6/2017
- Posts: 1,896
Re: Who else should be surplus to requirements?
For me I'd let Aird, Loemba, Booth and Matty Smith go. If we bring in another CH then I'd say Frans but not overly fussed as plenty cover in that area cant hurt.
I hope we keep Cammy Smith but actually play him as a 10. Clark is not the whole package in that position and I'd like to see Smith playing just off Shankland with King or Harkes in centre midfield and able to feed the ball into them.
- TheShed
- Tekel Towers LEGEND
Offline
- Registered: 16/5/2015
- Posts: 3,239
Re: Who else should be surplus to requirements?
Aird & Loemba not even on the squad list on the official site, they need to go.
Booth, Frans, Wardrop, M Smith are all surplus too.
Would also like to replace Sow & C Smith with better options if we can and bring in another winger & CH. I’d still like a better keeper but I’ve given up on them doing anything on that front.