Jump to content

Reuben Hazell signs


Recommended Posts

Guest oa_exile
Released by Chesterfield :shock: that doesn't sound to promising.

 

Had played regularly for Chesterfield before he was released , including against us last season.....not a reference of course :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Released by Chesterfield :shock: that doesn't sound to promising.

 

I think Chesterfield had to drastically reduce their wage bill after dropping into League Two which is why they released Paul Hall and had to sell Allott. I think Hazell fell into the same "too expensive" category and so was released.

 

MK Dons have Dean Lewington at LB and he is very highly rated with much speculation this summer that he would move onwards and upwards. The fact he stayed may have meant there was no call for Hazell at Franchise FC.

 

Can't honestly remember what he is like on the pitch but I am sure he was linked with us previously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest oa_exile
......... brought in a player released by Chesterfield and deemed not good enough for a league two side?

 

Dont jump to conclusions , maybe they could not afford his wages ? , bit like rat boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sums up most of the players who play at League 1 level I guess.

 

One of these days, sooner rather than later, our strikers are going to take advantage of opposing defenders' moments of immense stupidity. We can look forward to some high-scoring games, like in Big Joe's days, or like the 5-4 scorelines at Boro under the much criticised Steve McClaren.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why send out lomax to dale ,then bring in a loan player( hazell ) a bit nuts too me

Hes not on loan bob he has signed for a month with a view to permanent. It is allowed even though the transfer window has closed because he wasnt on a permanent contract with anyone at he start of the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why send out lomax to dale ,then bring in a loan player( hazell ) a bit nuts too me

 

 

I too was a bit puzzled with Lomax going out on loan to the Pub team down the road, but then to see that we have signed this geezer makes it all clear.

 

There were a number of posts last night about Lomax being inexperienced and not ready for the first team. We then sign someone more experienced on an initial months contract. I think that the above question answers itself. Clearly, Shez doesn't believe that Lomax is ready to give us what our defence needs at the moment - experience.

 

I did like the Hazell Nuts reference though Bob :grin:

 

In Shez we trust !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...