| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale 11:42 - Jan 30 with 13653 views | SitfcB |
|  |
| |  |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 11:45 - Jan 30 with 8539 views | Kieran_Knows |
Little bit misleading that, given it goes on to say 'but Blackburn are categorically unwilling to sell as they don't have a replacement lined up'.
They're just about to sign a striker and have also been linked with Jerry Yates, so imagine he'll become available if they get them both.
They're not turning down the best part of £2m for someone who will walk away for nothing in 6 months. The Venky's are thick as sh!t, but not that much. |  |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 11:46 - Jan 30 with 8514 views | berkstractorboy |
Bad news. Finding it hard to understand the logic on this if they won't renew his deal and lose him for nothing.
Wonder it we go for Yates now. |  | | |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 11:46 - Jan 30 with 8506 views | LankHenners |
"Ipswich Town have lodged multiple bids for the 28-year-old, but Blackburn are categorically unwilling to sell as they don't have a replacement lined up."
Except they do if this guy from the US signs. Bit of a clickbaity headline in that post as well surely - categorically not for sale and categorically unwilling to sell without a replacement are quite different things! |  |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 11:48 - Jan 30 with 8459 views | itfcjoe |
Meanwhile, Rovers continue to fend off interest in Sam Gallagher.
Ipswich Town have lodged multiple bids for the 28-year-old, but Blackburn are categorically unwilling to sell as they don't have a replacement lined up. |  |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 11:48 - Jan 30 with 8390 views | Ryorry |
What's Gordon's record like re info? |  |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 11:52 - Jan 30 with 8248 views | whymark4lazio0 |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 11:46 - Jan 30 by LankHenners |
"Ipswich Town have lodged multiple bids for the 28-year-old, but Blackburn are categorically unwilling to sell as they don't have a replacement lined up."
Except they do if this guy from the US signs. Bit of a clickbaity headline in that post as well surely - categorically not for sale and categorically unwilling to sell without a replacement are quite different things! |
I think that's the correct take. It's all getting a bit tense. Squeaky bum time. | |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 11:56 - Jan 30 with 8078 views | Ryorry |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 11:52 - Jan 30 by whymark4lazio0 |
I think that's the correct take. It's all getting a bit tense. Squeaky bum time. |
Even I'm glued to my screens, & I've always previously been a "shrug shoulders, if it happens it happens & if it doesn't it doesn't, I'll know in due course anyway" kinda person. | |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:12 - Jan 30 with 7595 views | whymark4lazio0 |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 11:56 - Jan 30 by Ryorry |
Even I'm glued to my screens, & I've always previously been a "shrug shoulders, if it happens it happens & if it doesn't it doesn't, I'll know in due course anyway" kinda person. |
I'm the same.Ali Al-Hamidi is a great signing and excellent prospect but we can't expect him to lead the line consistently for the rest of the season. Only an experienced striker can be expected to bear that responsibility. At the moment we are probably just about evens to get promoted (25% chance via automatic, 25% play-offs). If we get Gallager or equivalent we'd be odds-on (30% auto, 30% play-offs). Next 36 hours critical.
Ashton and McKenna have already achieved a great transfer window, if we get big Sam it will be an excellent one. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| One negative on 12:21 - Jan 30 with 7349 views | unstableblue |
They did not play Adam Wharton against Wrexham, unused sub
Wharton seems to be joining Palace today/tomorrow.
Playing Gallagher doesn’t signal that a deal is imminent.
Don’t think it’s over - If Gallagher and his agent push hard enough and a striker that they deem good enough is available at the right price - but close to not happening.
Such a shame as Gallagher looked the absolute prefect fit.
But again it ain’t over.
I’m convinced we’ll still get a Gallagher or Moore type striker, too much to expect our young Iraqi to take responsibility for the rest of the automatic campaign.
Imagine Gallagher bullying defender for 65mims and then we bring on our young beat mode striker… he’d terrify tiring defenders.
We live in hope. |  |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:22 - Jan 30 with 7339 views | BloomBlue |
As I said on another thread, Blackburn are worried an offer they cannot refuse will come in at the last minute for Sczmodics, and they wil be left without him and Gallagher. So they want to get replacements in before selling Gallagher. However the other option is if the Sczmodics offer is large enough it would also cover the £1million+ they will lose on keeping Gallagher now and then letting him go for free in the summer. |  | | |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:22 - Jan 30 with 7324 views | Parky |
Not one I’d be overpaying for, personally.
I’m sure a last minute loan deal will emerge to help our push and we can reassess again in the Summer. | | | |
| POST OF THE DAY on 12:26 - Jan 30 with 7173 views | unstableblue |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:12 - Jan 30 by whymark4lazio0 |
I'm the same.Ali Al-Hamidi is a great signing and excellent prospect but we can't expect him to lead the line consistently for the rest of the season. Only an experienced striker can be expected to bear that responsibility. At the moment we are probably just about evens to get promoted (25% chance via automatic, 25% play-offs). If we get Gallager or equivalent we'd be odds-on (30% auto, 30% play-offs). Next 36 hours critical.
Ashton and McKenna have already achieved a great transfer window, if we get big Sam it will be an excellent one. |
I’ve just mirrored some of your thoughts above.
I think if we add two more players of quality in this window - an experienced, strong, target man striker (to soften up defences for Ali), and a versatile full back/winger as back up and a sub for Davis, and competition for Sarmiento and the failing Broadhead.
Well the. We we are a completely different option for promotion. As you say the odds shoot up. We’re a different prospect.
Also don’t like the idea of McKenna not getting his key player needs fulfilled… especially with the Hirst injury having happened some time ago.
Hoping Travis is a secret agent and mate of Gallagher.
He looked a perfect fit yesterday. | |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:26 - Jan 30 with 7166 views | Steve_M |
The Athletic are saying Wharton is agreed:
|  |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:41 - Jan 30 with 6802 views | Jimmy86 |
If Blackburn are unwilling to sell Gallagher then we need to move on to another target and quickly! It's the one problem with putting all of your eggs in one basket... | | | |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:42 - Jan 30 with 6788 views | Ryorry |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:22 - Jan 30 by BloomBlue |
As I said on another thread, Blackburn are worried an offer they cannot refuse will come in at the last minute for Sczmodics, and they wil be left without him and Gallagher. So they want to get replacements in before selling Gallagher. However the other option is if the Sczmodics offer is large enough it would also cover the £1million+ they will lose on keeping Gallagher now and then letting him go for free in the summer. |
Think you're right unfortunately - Blackburn just got c £22m for Wharton according to SteveM's link. They could now afford for Gallagher to go for nothing in the summer. | |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:44 - Jan 30 with 6686 views | Ryorry |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:41 - Jan 30 by Jimmy86 |
If Blackburn are unwilling to sell Gallagher then we need to move on to another target and quickly! It's the one problem with putting all of your eggs in one basket... |
Pretty sure Ashton & co. will have finger/s in other pie/s all the time. They're no Marcus Evans, thank heavens! | |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:49 - Jan 30 with 6531 views | GavTWTD |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:44 - Jan 30 by Ryorry |
Pretty sure Ashton & co. will have finger/s in other pie/s all the time. They're no Marcus Evans, thank heavens! |
Timing is getting tight. There must be a case of us putting in a deadline to them before moving on, whilst already working on all targets.
I don't envy Ashton and Co. |  |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:50 - Jan 30 with 6497 views | Jimmy86 |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:44 - Jan 30 by Ryorry |
Pretty sure Ashton & co. will have finger/s in other pie/s all the time. They're no Marcus Evans, thank heavens! |
True enough! And that's one of the good things about keeping things under wraps, for as long as possible, with our transfer dealings... Can't fathom why people think having an agreement with the local media is a bad thing.. they're not being controlled or gagged... It's a working relationship with the club, to not weaken our hand, negotiation wise | | | |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:54 - Jan 30 with 6387 views | Ryorry |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:49 - Jan 30 by GavTWTD |
Timing is getting tight. There must be a case of us putting in a deadline to them before moving on, whilst already working on all targets.
I don't envy Ashton and Co. |
I do! 
Spot on with your first para though. | |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:56 - Jan 30 with 6322 views | GavTWTD |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:50 - Jan 30 by Jimmy86 |
True enough! And that's one of the good things about keeping things under wraps, for as long as possible, with our transfer dealings... Can't fathom why people think having an agreement with the local media is a bad thing.. they're not being controlled or gagged... It's a working relationship with the club, to not weaken our hand, negotiation wise |
The last signing was far more public and seems there were late offers which could have scuppered our deal. | |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:56 - Jan 30 with 6318 views | Horsham |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:42 - Jan 30 by Ryorry |
Think you're right unfortunately - Blackburn just got c £22m for Wharton according to SteveM's link. They could now afford for Gallagher to go for nothing in the summer. |
I still think regardless of the Wharton cash they would be pretty silly to turn down £2m now and let Gallagher walk away for nothing in 6 months. If they are down the tracks in signing a replacement then I’d guess there are more reasons to sell Gallagher than not sell him. My money is on this happening. | | | |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:59 - Jan 30 with 6210 views | vilanovablue |
Just like that Blackburn have signed Duncan McGuire from the States. |  | | |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 13:02 - Jan 30 with 6116 views | Ryorry |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:56 - Jan 30 by Horsham |
I still think regardless of the Wharton cash they would be pretty silly to turn down £2m now and let Gallagher walk away for nothing in 6 months. If they are down the tracks in signing a replacement then I’d guess there are more reasons to sell Gallagher than not sell him. My money is on this happening. |
I think your thinking is probably more astute & logical than that of Blackburn's owners! Can also see them/fans not wanting to let Gallagher go now unless they get a replacement in for him. Hope you're right though, obvs. | |
| |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 13:03 - Jan 30 with 6079 views | ReusersTown |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:59 - Jan 30 by vilanovablue |
Just like that Blackburn have signed Duncan McGuire from the States. |
Have they? | | | |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 13:19 - Jan 30 with 5733 views | pointofblue |
| Sam Gallagher categorically not for sale on 12:56 - Jan 30 by Horsham |
I still think regardless of the Wharton cash they would be pretty silly to turn down £2m now and let Gallagher walk away for nothing in 6 months. If they are down the tracks in signing a replacement then I’d guess there are more reasons to sell Gallagher than not sell him. My money is on this happening. |
Didn’t they let Brereton Diaz go for free in the summer rather than cash in for him in January last year? | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
