I agree with most of those points, however the money does not even come into it, we have paid his wages whilst he's sat on the treatment table and when he is fit and able to play we send him off to another team, plus I would imagine Millwall are paying close to nothing of his weekly wage anyway.
Now is not the time to start deciding people are paid too much, now is the time to make sure they earn fecking well earn it.
Unfortunately he'll be earning it for another team.
Such a ridiculous decision. If this is just a footballing thing then I really have no idea what Pearson is thinking. Are we broke, or something?
Liar! From reading this thread I've come to the conclusion he's the best elements of Franz Beckenbauer, Paolo Maldini and Bobby Moore all programmed into the body of an unbreakable cyborg.. And can we please stop saying he's any good. Suspect to pace, poor on the ball and not great in the air. Too top it off he's injury prone.
Is he match fit then?
I'm making this up, but it could be that Pearson wants him to work on his match fitness in case we make the playoffs. It could be that Pearson noticed that Millwall are playing Forest and Watford in the next month and saw the chance to strenghten a team who aren't a threat. It could simply be that Pearson doesn't want St Ledger at the club. It could be all three, or none of these.To be clear, I don't think he's very good either. But he is competent and has actually been starting in spots of late.
If there is a reasonable rationale for the decision I'd love to see it, because I'm a fairly logical fellow and I can't think of one.
I'm making this up, but it could be that Pearson wants him to work on his match fitness in case we make the playoffs. It could be that Pearson noticed that Millwall are playing Forest and Watford in the next month and saw the chance to strenghten a team who aren't a threat. It could simply be that Pearson doesn't want St Ledger at the club. It could be all three, or none of these.
Edit: Just noticed this isn't actually a month's loan as it runs to May 4th - which also includes their game against Crystal Palace.
I'm making this up, but it could be that Pearson wants him to work on his match fitness in case we make the playoffs. It could be that Pearson noticed that Millwall are playing Forest and Watford in the next month and saw the chance to strenghten a team who aren't a threat. It could simply be that Pearson doesn't want St Ledger at the club. It could be all three, or none of these.
Edit: Just noticed this isn't actually a month's loan as it runs to May 4th - which also includes their game against Crystal Palace.
Would be great if more fans did too.Would be great if NP showed that kind of inventive thinking....
I'm amazed that anybody should think the player's move was the decision of Nigel Pearson and Nigel Pearson alone.
I'm amazed that anybody should think the player's move was the decision of Nigel Pearson and Nigel Pearson alone.
Who else then?
I can't imagine Pearson didn't have a say in it
....but it may well be that the owners need to cut costs is having more immediate impact that I for one anticipated. I also suspect that the owners and their advisors believe that are promotion chances are shot - based on nosediving form. If therehad been any spare cash available and a realistic chance of going up I think that they would have brought a player in.
P | Pld | Pts | |
1 | Liverpool | 11 | 28 |
2 | Manchester C | 11 | 23 |
3 | Chelsea | 11 | 19 |
4 | Arsenal | 11 | 19 |
5 | Nottm F | 11 | 19 |
6 | Brighton | 11 | 19 |
7 | Fulham | 11 | 18 |
8 | Newcastle | 11 | 18 |
9 | Aston Villa | 11 | 18 |
10 | Tottenham | 11 | 16 |
11 | Brentford | 11 | 16 |
12 | Bournemouth | 11 | 15 |
13 | Manchester U | 11 | 15 |
14 | West Ham | 11 | 12 |
15 | Leicester | 11 | 10 |
16 | Everton | 11 | 10 |
17 | Ipswich | 11 | 8 |
18 | Palace | 11 | 7 |
19 | Wolves | 11 | 6 |
20 | Southampton | 11 | 4 |