Mooney set for exit

[Snowball]

Could be.

Maybe we were warned off by the boys in balaclavas

[andrew1957]

I too really wonder why on earth we have never given Mooney at least a chance. If we have let him go now and we rely on 3 strikers for the rest of the season, then that would be taking a criminal risk. We have been relatively lucky with injuries and suspensions to the strikers so far - with none of each as far as I can recall.

I can only assume that letting him go "does" mean that we "are" going to bring in an even better striker - rather than this being just another cost cutting exercise. If not it really is insanity as Mooney could have at least stayed to provide relatively cheapo cover until the end of the season.

[Hoop Blah]

If we're not bringing anyone else in we get an injury etc then we'll dip into the loan market ourselves.

Mooney wasn't in the frame so we've got rid. Don't see any problem there, largely because he didn't look up to it in my eyes.

[Snowball]

I suppose there is Bignall, and HRK can play there, Jake Taylor, Antonio,

None probably "ready" but all not terrible as third/fourth choices.

and there's always the fall-back of 451

[Hoop Blah]

It's no different to when Mooney was still on the books as we was never going to be involved.

We're still too light upfront and could do with a new forward as soon as possible, but losing Mooney is irrelevant.

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

Is his contract up in the summer???

[Ian Royal]

Surprised he didn't ever even get bench time, but obviously its because he wasn't considered close enough to as good as Long, Church, Hunt & Rasiak etc. We were obviously never going to play him, so there's clearly no point in trying to keep him on the wage bill. Chances are if we get desperate for a striker because of injury we'll just bring in a loanee. And there's still the chance we'll sign one permanently.

[andrew1957]

The more I think about the Mooney saga the more bizarre I think it is.

2.5 years ago we buy an unknown from Ireland who has scored lots of goals - for £200K or so. I doubt we agreed to pay him loads of wages as he was unproven.

We then send him out on loan several times to Championship and League 1 sides. He generally does well and scores goals at each club.

When we give him a chance in LC games he scores a couple. His strike rate in the 2.5 years is actually respectable and according to Colchester fans his link up play is superb.

Now we make no attempt to sell him - or use him as a part ex for say Austin - even though his contract is up in the summer and he will leave for nothing. We send him out on loan again.

So we have never given him a chance and lost £200K plus some wages in the bargain.

Why on earth did we buy him. Was it a favour to his club or to him?

[Ian Royal]

Why do people persist in thinking that a player can't have had a chance if he hasn't had a league appearance? Or do you expect everyone we sign to get a minimum of 5 league games with no exception?

He obviously hasn't shown enough in training or at other clubs to be in either of the last two manager's plans, despite us being down to one striker at one point. And Coppell was well known for taking cheap punts on players who may or may not be good enough. Bennett, Sodje etc.

He was a gamble, no one thought he worked, now he's gone. There really is no need for all this suspicion and consipracy theory nonsense.

[andrew1957]

Why do people persist in thinking that a player can't have had a chance if he hasn't had a league appearance? Or do you expect everyone we sign to get a minimum of 5 league games with no exception?

He obviously hasn't shown enough in training or at other clubs to be in either of the last two manager's plans, despite us being down to one striker at one point. And Coppell was well known for taking cheap punts on players who may or may not be good enough. Bennett, Sodje etc.

He was a gamble, no one thought he worked, now he's gone. There really is no need for all this suspicion and consipracy theory nonsense.

But the difference is that Sodje had a chance at RFC and has never really been very good anywhere - and Bennett much the same. Mooney is well thought of when he goes on loan, so yes I do think he should have been given a chance. Surely 4 or 5 games coming off the bench in league games would have let us all know one way or another. I am not suggesting any conspiracy - I just find the whole saga very odd. Perhaps he is just a horrible bloke and no one wants him around the club?

[Ian Royal]

Who cares about proving it to the supporters!? I only care about the manager and coach's opinion on him.

[andrew1957]

Who cares about proving it to the supporters!? I only care about the manager and coach's opinion on him.

Well they obviously thought he was worth buying in the first place. We have seen with other players how playing games improves them. Look at Pearce, Cummings, Karacan etc etc. All relatively poor to start with and getting better and better as they have played. You cannot just judge players in training - its on the pitch that counts.

[Ian Royal]

Coppell thought he was worth a punt. It didn't work out, he had his chance and didn't do enough. It's as simple as that.

[andrew1957]

Coppell thought he was worth a punt. It didn't work out, he had his chance and didn't do enough. It's as simple as that.

But the point is he did not get a chance here!!

I am signing off now - you always have to get the last word in. Good night.

[Snowball]

Who cares about proving it to the supporters!? I only care about the manager and coach's opinion on him.

But in the case of Elwood, you're the opposite.

[Snowball]

Who cares about proving it to the supporters!? I only care about the manager and coach's opinion on him.

Well they obviously thought he was worth buying in the first place. We have seen with other players how playing games improves them. Look at Pearce, Cummings, Karacan etc etc. All relatively poor to start with and getting better and better as they have played. You cannot just judge players in training - its on the pitch that counts.

I was only an amateur footballer but I was WAY better in games than tippy-tappy training because I went the extra yard.

The same when I was a club runner. I was say tenth in training but 3-4th in a race because I was prepared to hurt more.


You're right about Mooney. First, in Ireland he scored goals for fun, for Cork 15 in 22 -- much more prolific than than Doyle (25 in 76)

He also scored 26 in 66 appearances while playing for a bottom of the league side. He wins Ireland's player of the year. He once scored 11 goals in 6 games.
That is freakishly good. Fulham, Leeds, Colchester, Palace and reading all scouted him but he turned down a contract from Blackburn.

I posted earlier in the thread. He only started ONCE for RFC and scored two goals in the game. He looked like an instinctive goal-scorer.

This season in 20 (2) he has 9 goals and Colchester are THRILLED to continue the loan.

Which bit of all that suggests he's crap? It makes no sense unless there's a hidden money thing, eg a big payment if he plays X games for RFC, or scores Y goals, or we get promoted.

[super darren caskey]

Who cares about proving it to the supporters!? I only care about the manager and coach's opinion on him.

Well they obviously thought he was worth buying in the first place. We have seen with other players how playing games improves them. Look at Pearce, Cummings, Karacan etc etc. All relatively poor to start with and getting better and better as they have played. You cannot just judge players in training - its on the pitch that counts.

This

[Royalwaster]

Who cares about proving it to the supporters!? I only care about the manager and coach's opinion on him.

Well they obviously thought he was worth buying in the first place. We have seen with other players how playing games improves them. Look at Pearce, Cummings, Karacan etc etc. All relatively poor to start with and getting better and better as they have played. You cannot just judge players in training - its on the pitch that counts.

I was only an amateur footballer but I was WAY better in games than tippy-tappy training because I went the extra yard.

The same when I was a club runner. I was say tenth in training but 3-4th in a race because I was prepared to hurt more.


You're right about Mooney. First, in Ireland he scored goals for fun, for Cork 15 in 22 -- much more prolific than than Doyle (25 in 76)

He also scored 26 in 66 appearances while playing for a bottom of the league side. He wins Ireland's player of the year. He once scored 11 goals in 6 games.
That is freakishly good. Fulham, Leeds, Colchester, Palace and reading all scouted him but he turned down a contract from Blackburn.

I posted earlier in the thread. He only started ONCE for RFC and scored two goals in the game. He looked like an instinctive goal-scorer.

This season in 20 (2) he has 9 goals and Colchester are THRILLED to continue the loan.

Which bit of all that suggests he's crap? It makes no sense unless there's a hidden money thing, eg a big payment if he plays X games for RFC, or scores Y goals, or we get promoted.

Only explanation I can have is that his all round game is thought to be not up to the Reading style of play - i.e. Cureton was (and still is) a good finisher, but he did sod all for the rest of the team. I remember watching games and thinking 'God, Curo has done absolutely nothing today - I've not noticed him at all' and bang he'd score a goal. Now you could argue that as long as they are scoring goals that's OK, but it could be that the assessment is that his scoring the kind of goals you only score in League 1 or 2. The one game you say he started in and scored two goals was not a Championship game was it - it was a League Cup game against a lower league team, no?

[Snowball]

Still odd, RW that he never even got on the bench for a few ten minute trials in the CCC.

HE SCORED IN THE CCC FOR NORWICH (3 IN 9)

[brendywendy]

just not good enough/didnt fit in/personal problems/only bought him to do cork a favour

take your pick

who cares.