Yeah, neophox was questioning his release.

We need to get signing players soon, business seems to be starting now and we cannot be left behind.

Twine (a stand out League 1 talent for a decent fee) and Jed Wallace (a proven top quality stand out Championship player no doubt on decent wages) would be 2 very shrewd additions and would prove the power of a recently Premier League side unfortunately if they got done. If Pope goes for £10m that could be the signing of the summer for Newcastle, worth far more than that and England's best keeper. Peacock-Farrell is a disaster so I suspect if Hennessey is over the hill then a new keeper will be a must. Much different to us? We have a manager still waiting a work permit, and when he does he has to work with mainly staff that were already here. We have lost loads of players for no money and are behind most in making signings ourselves. No sign of the kit and although it has been announced, it seemingly will be drip fed in.

Davenport is the one likely to be injured. Is £4m not a problem?!

My point is specific to Gallagher though in that I don't think the likelihood of him scoring increases much when he plays either as a central striker or as a "wide forward." I look last season, he got 9 often playing wide, some were central like the 2 you mention and v Boro, he scored v Cardiff and Swansea when he was coming from wide, against Boro at home he was as a wide striker. He got 8 the season before again often from wide. The season before that he got 6 and he played central more that season than in the last 2. He got 11 in more games (no injures unlike the last 2 seasons) predominately playing in a front 2 with 2 wide men in his initial spell. Most goals are obviously between the posts in general but those players you mention were all masters at sniffing out and taking chances. I do think that those sort of central poachers are less common and there seems to be more wide strikers like Salah, Mane, Son etc who often outscore the middle attacker. I do think Gallagher is moderately more suited to playing central but there isn't much difference in his effectiveness/ineffectiveness either way and indeed the one thing I am sure of is that I don't want to go into a season with him as our main striker. Graham isn't going to criticise a friend on national radio is he?! Like I said, I watched the full game and his whole round game was typically poor but he did score a great goal in that game. I don't think your expectations of his likely goal tally if he plays regularly as a striker are too dissimilar to mine, I would suggest 10-12 personally and I think that tallies more with history, perhaps even on the generous side. I am also not sure that Tomasson being a striker (with different attributes) makes a huge difference either, people often expect a former player to be better with players in that position but it seldom works out like that.

I personally am not convinced that being played "wide" massively impeded his ability to score goals. It was either towards the side of a 3 or as part of essentially a front 2 with Buckley as sort of an attacking midfielder/striker hybrid. It isn't like hes playing out wide in an old fashioned 4-4-2. strikers and wide men are very fluid in modern formations. I suspect that the key to whether he can "score goals" depends on what sort of numbers we expect. Extrapolating goals in the way you have done @Angry_Pirate is based on massive assumptions which to me seem like too much of a logic leap. 15 as a minimum (would love to be proven wrong) seems very ambitious for a striker who lacks a goalscoring instinct. 10 players including Brereton got 15 or more last season, so not thinking that Gallagher is capable of being in the top 10 goalscorers in the league is not being "fundamentally negative." I think the expectations of @Wing Wizard Windy Miller are most realistic. Gallagher scored 11 in a team that played an old fashioned 4-4-2 under Coyle with Conway and sometimes Marshall wide with a partner, so 1 in 4. In general, I don't think he is much if any more effective even when he does play centrally, it highlights further major flaws such as hold up, link up play, winning headers etc and his goalscoring potential doesn't seem to change much if at all. @chaddyrovers highlighted 2 games (he was not generally good in either game mentioned, especially at Boro, aside from his goals) but they are not examples of his general performance level as a striker, and he also had effective performances from wide, notably at home v Cardiff and Swansea. If he was our main number 9 for a season, which I wouldn't be comfortable, my guess would be that he would get 10-12 goals. It all comes down to what "he will score goals as a number 9" specifically means, obviously literally he will, but how many? I also don't like the assertion that anyone is just being "negative" as I don't think that is a constructive argument.

But when Gallagher did play as a central striker he didnt score that many goals, he is not a good finisher and he does not have a goalscoring instinct. He never at any point made it impossible not to use him centrally because he didnt score enough when he did play there and in fact a number of his primary flaws become even more obvious. Even under Coyle when he played in a unsustainably attacking side with 2 wingers and 2 strikers, he was scoring 1 in 4. When I question why people seem so confident that he would score goals implying with regularity the response is usually just a repitition of that same line. His reputation as a striker improved when he didnt play there and I think its partly because it can be used as a Mowbray criticism. I didnt agree with the use of him out wide but I just dont think he is anything beyond a striker for whom double figures is not far off his ceiling at this level. Id love him to get 20 goals but I cant see it sadly.

Another sign of Venkys continuing reign of terror. 10k season tickets is seen as a decent achievement.

As I said, I dont see the evidence from his career or signs that hes a poorly utilised potential regular goalscorer. Hes not a natural goalscorer, he never has been and he hides behind the whole "Mowbray wasted him" narrative that ignores his flaws as a striker in the first place. We need a new first choice striker. If Gallagher is deemed to be that man with the main responsibility, we can forget the top 6.

I dont recall reading that but may have missed it. Where did he say it? The main disagreement was the difference in numbers that we believe we need to sign on the assumption that all of these kids are good enough now. Specific to Vale, you cant really judge against kids. He struggled earlier in the season in non league. I would personally look to loan him to League 1 or 2 and see if he can get regular goals, but either way, my point was more that if any of these kids break through, it should be seen as a bonus, not just assumed instead of signing players as the likelihood of a clutch of kids all breaking through at once with a 100% record is minimal. So if Vale is kept around, we still need an out an out striker as you say. Same with Garrett, Wharton, Phillips and Brown.

Most of the time he was injured. Suppose that doesnt fit the narrative as well. Be interesting to see where he goes next as he impressed more here when he didnt play than when he did play. When he has played up front he has not impressed. He isnt a natural goalscorer, he has a poor first touch, struggles to hold the ball up and bring others into play, he is poor in the air, he doesnt jump as well as he should for his size. Like Davenport who impressed more when he didnt play, Gallaghers reputation as a striker improved more when he didnt play up front. 17? Youve added a few on there.

Did Lenihan state that?

What are his strengths?

I genuinely have no idea why so many seem so confident that if this that and the other happen, that Gallagher can score loads and loads of goals.

Whoever it is deemed that either played/play for, I can't fathom how anyone would prefer an attacker who scores and assists only fleetingly to someone who scores consistently. We could have done with Armstrong last season during that dry patch. I know you despise Mowbray but the idea that Mowbray beat the creativity out of either of the players mentioned is nonsensical. Travis has never been a creative player, he has always been a spoiler so the idea that Mowbray has beat it out of him is inaccurate. Dolan has been pretty similar in both of his seasons, he scored 1 more league goal and 1 more cup goal last season compared to the previous one so he was slightly more effective. He has often been afforded a central role which suits his energy and pressing but IMO he doesn't offer enough of a goal threat there. Also, I don't recall how "class" he was when Armstrong was out, I always saw that as somewhat of a myth. He put in a typically energetic performance at Millwall that was impressive but ultimately he failed to score in each of the 3 games that he played before Armstrong returned and his influence massively waned v Swansea and Brentford. He is a talent but he has lots to learn to become a consistent goal threat/creative influence which he has only been in the last 2 years very fleetingly. That being said, he is very young still and seems a keen learner so lets hope that he really pushes on this season, there is plenty of raw attributes to work with.

If you have come to such a firm conclusion that Vale is "more than good enough" following about an hour of senior football spread across 3 or 4 cameos to the extent that you would assume that he is ready and sign a player less as a result then fair enough. Just respect that I wouldn't assume that yet, I am not saying that he isn't good enough but simply that we don't know either way.

100%. A key problem is that the club (as well as a number on here which exacerbates the problem) seemingly cannot fathom that supporters of any club differ wildly in their desire to attend matches and their personal circumstances. Many supporters choose to see this as an opportunity to criticise and berate other supporters, showing a lack of empathy. The club just sees this as an uncontrollable condition that they try and tackle through aggressive committment questioning campaigns.

I don't think he lost his way under Mowbray, it seems the convenient excuse to make him a scapegoat for everything. He has obviously got ability but he often allows games to pass him by from an attacking sense and you even look at some of the games when he does catch the eye, it is often through his energy and enthusiasm rather than creating or providing a goal threat, take QPR at home, he was really important in the win without ever looking like scoring or creating a goal. He is only young so as a member of the squad he offers something for sure and any fee would likely be swallowed up anyway so it is most likely in our best interests to keep him. He needs to try and warrant a regular starting place first and foremost and go from there. He does clearly have raw attributes to build on but he needs to provide more of a goal threat and create more chances which hopefully will come with time, this season our best run came with Khadra and Brereton as the attacking threats, I think Dolan missed a few games with a knock if I remember correctly.

Are there not valid reasons to "moan" or indeed constructively criticise the continuously ineffective pricing and advertising strategies, as seen by the poor sales? I would like to think that Waggott has more of an open mind in regards to the poor sales figures and indeed the criticisms from supporters but based on his actions, seemingly not.

Surely if anything it would make sense that people on here who are "decrying" the terrible sales figures haven't or can't buy one due to the very same pricing and advertising campaigns to which are rightfully being lambasted?

Did Nyambe not initially join up with Namibia before pulling out, in which case I would assume that he doesn't report back on day 1? Either way, I very much doubt that he would report until if and when he did sign a new deal and it was all finalised.

I wouldn't assume that they all would, because if any don't, we are short of players. I would loan Vale to League 1 or 2 and see if he can score regularly there off the back of a poor spell in non league. I think we could have all predicted that they wouldn't bother. Personally looking to schedule? Empty words.

@J*B said similar, there should be two considerations. Firstly, decide what types of companies we would not be willing to advertise. I personally don't why betting companies are not considered (especially if they offer more money as has been I think said by Waggott previously) yet vaping companies are, but it is a conundrum either way. Then pick the best financial deal ignoring any that are not seen as ethically acceptable. I am similar to you in that I don't have any issue personally with vaping companies or indeed betting companies, I don't buy a shirt regardless of sponsor, you seemingly do either way. But many do so the club must consider potential reaction not only because it cannot afford to upset any fans but also because any increased income from advertising deals may be offset by less people willing Whether any sponsor is from down the road or indeed from Timbuktu is totally irrelevant, everything should revert back to generating the most possible money within the moral framework to which we have deemed acceptable.

Who they support is ultimately irrelevant as far as I concerned. But the envelope works is not a valid comparison as there is no moral question there.