Town target Sammie Szmodics started and netted twice as Blackburn Rovers thrashed Stockport County 6-1 in their Carabao Cup first round tie at Edgeley Park this evening.

Szmodics, who TWTD revealed the Blues are chasing more than a month ago, was making his first start of the season having missed much of pre-season as discussions continued regarding his proposed move and having come off the bench in Friday’s season opener against Derby, in which he scored one and assisted another.

Despite rumours to the contrary, there appear to be no new developments regarding the deal, the Blues having had a £8 million rising to £10 million turned down earlier this month.

With Rovers having established a 4-0 lead before half-time, Szmodics was replaced in the 63rd minute.

Elsewhere, Anel Ahmedhodžić, who TWTD reported is on Town’s list of potential recruits, was absent from the Sheffield United side which beat Wrexham 4-1 in their first round tie.

Photo: Craig Thomas/News Images

Edmundo added 09:39 - Aug 14 If we had him on our "A" list he'd be here. Clearly Venkys are shysters and aren't going to stick to any agreement. Gallagher was wanted in the Championship but not now. I trust that we will have the right players at the right price. We cannot just mortgage the club on one transfer window.
0

herfie added 09:44 - Aug 14 WestSussexBlue: whilst instinctively agreeing with your pov under normal circumstances, there will always be occasions where acquiring a special player’s services will require a pragmatic approach, particularly where the stakes are so high. Of course there’s an argument about just how ‘special’ SS is, and whether it justifies going that extra financial mile to secure him; but, given that we cannot yet compete with the PL’s big spenders, the (probably) modest increase in funding towards meeting BB’s valuation might be a price worth paying whilst remaining within the outer reaches of our business model. There are few other players of his quality potentially available in the pond we’re fishing in. So, agree that we must not be held to ransome, but rather treat every transfer on its risk v rewards merits. In my view, in this one instance the rewards outweigh the risk in terms of longer term benefits.

0

herfie added 09:44 - Aug 14 WestSussexBlue: whilst instinctively agreeing with your pov under normal circumstances, there will always be occasions where acquiring a special player’s services will require a pragmatic approach, particularly where the stakes are so high. Of course there’s an argument about just how ‘special’ SS is, and whether it justifies going that extra financial mile to secure him; but, given that we cannot yet compete with the PL’s big spenders, the (probably) modest increase in funding towards meeting BB’s valuation might be a price worth paying whilst remaining within the outer reaches of our business model. There are few other players of his quality potentially available in the pond we’re fishing in. So, agree that we must not be held to ransome, but rather treat every transfer on its risk v rewards merits. In my view, in this one instance the rewards outweigh the risk in terms of longer term benefits.

0

herfie added 09:44 - Aug 14 WestSussexBlue: whilst instinctively agreeing with your pov under normal circumstances, there will always be occasions where acquiring a special player’s services will require a pragmatic approach, particularly where the stakes are so high. Of course there’s an argument about just how ‘special’ SS is, and whether it justifies going that extra financial mile to secure him; but, given that we cannot yet compete with the PL’s big spenders, the (probably) modest increase in funding towards meeting BB’s valuation might be a price worth paying whilst remaining within the outer reaches of our business model. There are few other players of his quality potentially available in the pond we’re fishing in. So, agree that we must not be held to ransome, but rather treat every transfer on its risk v rewards merits. In my view, in this one instance the rewards outweigh the risk in terms of longer term benefits.

0

robmonkey007 added 09:48 - Aug 14 Bravo….. two goals against Stockport. They’re hardly Man City or Liverpool. If we haven’t purchased him it’s because he’s not worth what Blackburn are asking. I’m as frustrated as everyone else with lack of signings but we still have 17 days. The season will be a marathon, not a sprint.
0

herfie added 09:49 - Aug 14 Ooops! Many apologies for multi posts - IT glitch……
0

ArmaghBlue added 12:33 - Aug 14 Cup Tied = Lower Valuation
0

tractorboy2421 added 12:42 - Aug 14 Standard procedure to hike up the price of a player whenever anyone shows interest in them, is he worth it ... how bad do we want him ?
0

Linkboy13 added 16:37 - Aug 14 A player is very rarely worth his asking price and you nearly always pay over the odds. For instance we paid 20 million for Hutchinson who is a very good player but has never played in the premier league. 15 million for a goal keeper although very good hardly pulled up any trees last season. The Smozdics debacle has been handled very badly by us if Blackburn were not going to accept our offer we should have moved on very quickly or paid the money they wanted if we wanted him that badly.

1

blueboy1981 added 12:48 - Aug 15 I think some Supporters need to ‘Shake their Heads’ and are still in League 1 Mode …. !! THIS IS THE PREMIERSHIP NOW !! - Points on the Board required from the Off - this time round !!!
0

Blogs 298 bloggers

Ipswich Town Polls