Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Sly

Random / Semi Unheard of Players you’ve spotted that we should look at

By Sly, in Transfer Talk

Recommended Posts

MPH

MPH

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 15/08/2023 at 14:36, lanefox said:

 

Screenshot_20230815-193515.png


interestingly, there is an area of Argentina ( Patagonia) that had a lot of Welsh settlers go over there and in fact the Welsh language is still one of the official languages of the region..

 

 

The history of Patagonian Welsh across the generations has created a linguistic mosaic. It is mutually intelligible with the modern Welsh spoken in Wales, but is also distinct from it. Most Patagonians born before 1950 speak Welsh as a first language.

 

 

 

( in fact,  I think that  might have something to why Argentina  have a random affection for Rugby which IS a bit odd for a South American Country)

Edited by MPH
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sacreblueits442

sacreblueits442

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 15/08/2023 at 19:26, CaliFOXnia said:

Barco and Thiago Almada are both fantastic talents and should be stars. Had we remained a Premier League outfit Barco was one that we should have had a good look at. We've zero chance in the Championship unfortunately.

On repeat for the entirety of the window.. :(

...we were not looking at these players whilst in the Premier League!!!

  We were looking to spend £40m on players to bring them in, the places that we are looking now would never had been a consideration. 

  Just take a look at the Harrison deal, we were going to pay a Kings ransom, with a heft salary to go along with our crazy policy.

  I would think that the only question that Rudkin should be asking is, is this player a value for money, but as he has little knowledge of the market, he wouldn't know.

Edited by sacreblueits442
Spelling error.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CaliFOXnia

CaliFOXnia

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...we were not looking at these players whilst in the Premier League!!!

  We were looking to spend £40m on players to bring them in, the places that we are looking now would never had been a consideration. 

  Just take a look at the Harrison deal, we were going to pay a Kings ransom, with a heft salary to go along with our crazy policy.

  I would think that the only question that Rudkin should be asking is, is this player a value for money, but as he has little knowledge of the market, he wouldn't know.

Unfortunately pal, you’re absolutely bang on. There’s something to be said for “Premiership Proven” and then there’s the Ryan Bertrand, Jannik Vestegaard, Ayoze Perez deals, plus what we were close to with Harrison. 
 

The way our scouting and general recruitment model did a 180 is possibly the biggest travesty of it all. There’s a vast difference between getting it wrong on a 30 year old you’re paying 80 grand a week to sit on the treatment table and a 20ish year old who might not adapt, but you’ll still recoup on. Take Soumare for instance, hasn’t worked out but we should get a fee for him. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CosbehFox

CosbehFox

Posted
Posted
On 17/08/2023 at 02:13, MPH said:


interestingly, there is an area of Argentina ( Patagonia) that had a lot of Welsh settlers go over there and in fact the Welsh language is still one of the official languages of the region..

 

 

The history of Patagonian Welsh across the generations has created a linguistic mosaic. It is mutually intelligible with the modern Welsh spoken in Wales, but is also distinct from it. Most Patagonians born before 1950 speak Welsh as a first language.

 

 

 

( in fact,  I think that  might have something to why Argentina  have a random affection for Rugby which IS a bit odd for a South American Country)

A lot is bit of an exaggeration. Only 150 went over originally. It’s grew at its highest to 70k. It’s incredibly rural
 

Rugby in Argentina is more to do with the British generally coming over to build railways etc. Until 1903, all the rugby clubs of Argentina were found by Englishmen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MPH

MPH

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, CosbehFox said:

A lot is bit of an exaggeration. Only 150 went over originally. It’s grew at its highest to 70k. It’s incredibly rural
 

Rugby in Argentina is more to do with the British generally coming over to build railways etc. Until 1903, all the rugby clubs of Argentina were found by Englishmen. 


 

well, it doesn’t matter how many  went over on the first couple of boats does it.. and I’d say 70k is quite a lot especially when you concosdered they all had several kids in each family and they had kids,  grandkids, ect.. it wasn’t really until the late 40s/ 50s until we had people being born   From settlers in the area where welsh  was NOT their first language. I wouldn’t say I have over exaggerated anything at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CosbehFox

CosbehFox

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, MPH said:


 

well, it doesn’t matter how many  went over on the first couple of boats does it.. and I’d say 70k is quite a lot especially when you concosdered they all had several kids in each family and they had kids,  grandkids, ect.. it wasn’t really until the late 40s/ 50s until we had people being born   From settlers in the area where welsh  was NOT their first language. I wouldn’t say I have over exaggerated anything at all.


You use the language ‘had quite a lot of Welsh Settlers go over there’ 

 

Can debate until the cows come home. Either way, this podcast is good on the subject. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MPH

MPH

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, CosbehFox said:


You use the language ‘had quite a lot of Welsh Settlers go over there’ 

 

Can debate until the cows come home. Either way, this podcast is good on the subject. 

 

 


 

wel in the context of Argentina having a population of 11 million in the 1930s, that many moving to a rural area is a lot , definitely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Earle

Steve Earle

Posted
Posted
On 17/08/2023 at 02:13, MPH said:


interestingly, there is an area of Argentina ( Patagonia) that had a lot of Welsh settlers go over there and in fact the Welsh language is still one of the official languages of the region..

 

 

The history of Patagonian Welsh across the generations has created a linguistic mosaic. It is mutually intelligible with the modern Welsh spoken in Wales, but is also distinct from it. Most Patagonians born before 1950 speak Welsh as a first language.

 

 

 

( in fact,  I think that  might have something to why Argentina  have a random affection for Rugby which IS a bit odd for a South American Country)

Point of order?

 

Patagonia is not a region of Argentina. It’s a region of South America that straddles Argentina and Chile. 

 

And it’s bigger than most European countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ric Flair

Ric Flair

Posted
Posted
Just now, Steve Earle said:

Point of order?

 

Patagonia is not a region of Argentina. It’s a region of South America that straddles Argentina and Chile. 

 

And it’s bigger than most European countries.

Around the World With Steve Earle

 

I'd tune in

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MPH

MPH

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, Steve Earle said:

Point of order?

 

Patagonia is not a region of Argentina. It’s a region of South America that straddles Argentina and Chile. 

 

And it’s bigger than most European countries.


 

well technically  it’s part of both Chile AND Argentina - but we were talking king about where the welsh Settlers went and that was of course the eastern coast which is of course the Argentinian part..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Earle

Steve Earle

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, MPH said:


 

well technically  it’s part of both Chile AND Argentina - but we were talking king about where the welsh Settlers went and that was of course the eastern coast which is of course the Argentinian part..

Erm. The east coast of S America features just shy of 3000 miles of Chile. 
 

And none at all of Argentina 🤷🏽

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MPH

MPH

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Steve Earle said:

Erm. The east coast of S America features just shy of 3000 miles of Chile. 
 

And none at all of Argentina 🤷🏽


 


 

im fairly certain the east coast is pretty much Argentinian in that area…

IMG_4600.png

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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...