CONFIMRED - Glenn Murray on loan

[linkenholtroyal]

For some reason I'd feel a lot happier at 1.5 million than 2 and maybe we will finally offload the pog if he comes

[Ian Royal]

Firstly we're so close to shit creek regardless of the Thai pocket depth you simply haveto assume we've got it if we spend it under ffp.

Secondly murray is a good striker who'll vastly increase our attack. Not only that but when he was here we got better from cox too.

[WoodleyRoyal]

but surely another loan could be possible? which may work out well for all parties

[urz13]

If we can get him in on loan, even with a loan fee - great, if not, sign someone from L1. And get Kebe back, he's miles better than HRK and Blackman

[Gilksy]

£2m is very steep for a 31 year old. Maybe that's with add-ons based on a future promotion. I'll be stunned if we spend even £1.5m on one player at the moment though.

[Ian Royal]

£2m is very steep for a 31 year old. Maybe that's with add-ons based on a future promotion. I'll be stunned if we spend even £1.5m on one player at the moment though.

£2m does sound high, so I think you're probably right that it's going to include add ons.

£1m + £500k after 30 appearances + £500k after promotion would be more realistic.

[Lacoste]

Be a ridiculously stupid signing at that price. Would rather go without and get some up and coming talent in other positions if we need to or save it for the summer. 2m for GM is far far to much. SC needs to show he's his own man and say no to this transfer and get others in if possible.

[andrew1957]

If we could get Murray for say 1M it might be worth the risk but I think 2M is too much. This could easily be a repeat of the Roberts situation where we sign him for 2.5 years and he then gets injured and we have him on the books preventing us signing a young and up and coming player because of FFP.

Only the most pessimistic hobnobbers will seriously think we will get relegated if we don't sign Murray. And only the deluded would think we still have a chance of play offs and so I would go with what we have and rethink in the summer.

[P!ssed Off]

No, no, no, no, no.

There is no justification for paying out transfer fees for players the wrong side of 30.
This rumoured transfer fee would make Nick Blackman look like a oxf*rd bargain.

Where is the logic in this transfer?
We will not be relegated this season without Murray.
We will not be promoted this season with Murray.
Therefore what is the point of signing Murray?

Is it a signing for the long term?
Of course it isn't.

[marlowuk]

WE need a forward Please Reading fc Make Murray Return

We certainly need a forward but Murray isn't going to leave Palace! Pardew obviously rates him. Sorry D-R

[Royal Ginger]

No, no, no, no, no.

There is no justification for paying out transfer fees for players the wrong side of 30.
This rumoured transfer fee would make Nick Blackman look like a oxf*rd bargain.

Where is the logic in this transfer?
We will not be relegated this season without Murray.
We will not be promoted this season with Murray.
Therefore what is the point of signing Murray?

Is it a signing for the long term?
Of course it isn't.

There's definitely a certain logic to your points, but i think that a mitigating factor is that Murray's game isn't based on pace. If he stays clear of injury he could be a top championship player for another couple of years. Jason Roberts (highlighting the injury risk) Andy Griffin, Ian Harte, did a job for us in recent years whilst in his age range or older.

Strikers who are still scoring goals come at a premium, even more so when they can lead the line as Murray does. In this age of football, £2m for a decent striker? Top end, but i'd not be unhappy if he returned.

[RoyalBlue]

No, no, no, no, no.

There is no justification for paying out transfer fees for players the wrong side of 30.
This rumoured transfer fee would make Nick Blackman look like a oxf*rd bargain.

Where is the logic in this transfer?
We will not be relegated this season without Murray.
We will not be promoted this season with Murray.
Therefore what is the point of signing Murray?

Is it a signing for the long term?
Of course it isn't.

And Blackman is so far the perfect illustration of how buying young, not particularly cheap, players isn't always the answer. Three points tossed away on Saturday because he failed to convert a simple chance that the 'old' 'expensive' Murray would have buried, along with a couple of others that afternoon.

And our failure to score enough goals could well lead to us facing relegation without Murray. We are dropping too many points because our existing striking options are not converting enough of the chances that they are being presented with.

As for the injury risk, he is not like Roberts. He has had one serious injury that was properly dealt with and which he is proven beyond all doubt that he has fully recovered from. He is now no more prone to that injury than any other player.

Finally Murray is not just about goals, he also does an awful lot of great work for his teammates and creates good openings for his co-strikers - something that MOTD highlighted this weekend just gone when he was playing at a level above us.

So there is your logic.

[sandman]

No, no, no, no, no.

There is no justification for paying out transfer fees for players the wrong side of 30.
This rumoured transfer fee would make Nick Blackman look like a oxf*rd bargain.

Where is the logic in this transfer?
We will not be relegated this season without Murray.
We will not be promoted this season with Murray.
Therefore what is the point of signing Murray?

Is it a signing for the long term?
Of course it isn't.

And Blackman is so far the perfect illustration of how buying young, not particularly cheap, players isn't always the answer. Three points tossed away on Saturday because he failed to convert a simple chance that the 'old' 'expensive' Murray would have buried, along with a couple of others that afternoon.

And our failure to score enough goals could well lead to us facing relegation without Murray. We are dropping too many points because our existing striking options are not converting enough of the chances that they are being presented with.

So there is your logic.

"Three points tossed away on Saturday because he failed to convert a simple chance that the 'old' 'expensive' Murray would have buried", like he did against Spurs in a similar situation a couple of weeks ago for Palace you mean?

[blueroyals]

I don't want another player who doesn't want to be here. We've got plenty of those. Let him rot in their reserves*.

* he can't play for 3 teams within 1 season. He either stays there or comes here.

[Pepe the Horseman]

* he can't play for 3 teams within 1 season. He either stays there or comes here.

That's a good point actually. Surprised more hasn't been made of it. Surely that should help with our bargaining as well.

[Ian Royal]

I'm not going to argue £2m isn't a lot, because I think it is, but then I don't just take rumoured fees as gospel or assume it's all up front.

But age is virtually an irrelevance at this point. Future resale value is way down the list on what must be our priorities. There's no way we should be offering him a long deal, two and a half seasons is pushing it, but would probably be ok.

What we need is what we're traditionally bad at buying. A ready made, experienced player who'll come in and hit the ground running. We've got buckets of youth, we do need some older heads too. Murray ticks all of the boxes for what we want. He's an experienced and proven goalscorer at this level who's already fitted in once and knows the club.

If we've got the money to afford him, he's exactly what we need. If we don't, we simply won't buy him.

And whilst I don't think we're going down. I didn't think we'd go down halfway through two of our last three relegation seasons either. We're certainly not comfortable and you can't win games if you don't score goals. And not scoring goals also puts the defence under unnecessary pressure, which is the last thing we need given that its only just recovering from being a total calamity.

[Lower West]

Difficult to couple criticism of spending money on a (albeit older) goalscorer with the suggestion we 'risk relegation', and the financial implications of that.

Some players come into their prime in their latter years. Teddy Sheringham being a prime example. Reading of the game is what distinguishes them from others. Murray may add that experience to the squad to help bring the younger players along.

[BraisingsteakRoyal]

This is all moot - he won't be coming here.

Its abundantly clear (from his non-committal press interviews, his twitter, his body language whilst playing for us etc), that he feels he can do better than us, and he probably can.

[WoodleyRoyal]

This is all moot - he won't be coming here.

Its abundantly clear (from his non-committal press interviews, his twitter, his body language whilst playing for us etc), that he feels he can do better than us, and he probably can.

but as blueroyal says a few posts above, you can't play for 3 different teams in a season, so he either comes here or stays at palace and probably in the reserves, i think this opens up to another loan move, and i doubt any Reading fan will be against that

[WoodleyRoyal]

actually blueroyal is full of shit - Currently under the FIFA Transfer Regulations a football player is unable to play for more than three teams in one season. This applies whether the player has been transferred or simply is on loan with that club.

This also applies regardless of what country that player has plied his trade in, whether that is in Europe, Africa or South America. As long as a player has represented a club in a league under the adjudication of a FIFA Member Association they will only be able to play for three different clubs.

However, this does mean that a football player is free to represent a total of three different clubs in any league in the world over the course of one season.