2025/26 Seamus Coleman

[Number_25]

 

[Hinchcliffe's Corner]

We failed to solve the RB issue this summer primarily because Patterson wouldn't go anywhere. He's clearly running his contract down.

You literally said yesterday that the Seville rumors weren't true though, which is it.

 

[davek]

You literally said yesterday that the Seville rumors weren't true though, which is it.

Yes, SEVILLE. That doesn't mean a lesser club weren't in for him.

*sigh*

 

[Hinchcliffe's Corner]

Yes, SEVILLE. That doesn't mean a lesser club weren't in for him.

*sigh*

I believe you Dave.

 

[b-rad]

We failed to solve the RB issue this summer primarily because Patterson wouldn't go anywhere. He's clearly running his contract down.

Wait, so we have two RBs who aren't good enough (either old or just not up to the level)
One has a contract which runs for another two years, but who doesn't want to leave.
The other's contract is expiring.

If you are forced to keep the first one, it doesn't make sense to extend the contract of the second one as well.

 

[davek]

Wait, so we have two RBs who aren't good enough (either old or just not up to the level)
One has a contract which runs for another two years, but who doesn't want to leave.
The other's contract is expiring.

If you are forced to keep the first one, it doesn't make sense to extend the contract of the second one as well.

One, theoretically, could get a fee to be used on his replacement. The other - if retained - has value to the squad / club in the ways outlined above.

Of course the priority would be to shift the useless younger player.

 

[Toffe3m4n]

Says an awful lot about that current ROI setup that they're STILL calling him up at this point. An absolute farce all around.

 

[Curtis]

Yes, SEVILLE. That doesn't mean a lesser club weren't in for him.

*sigh*

They might have some reputable history Dave , but they finished 17th last season so it's not that implausible that Seville would be opening to enlisting one of your countless football related adversaries

 

[b-rad]

One, theoretically, could get a fee to be used on his replacement. The other - if retained - has value to the squad / club in the ways outlined above.

Of course the priority would be to shift the useless younger player.

Yes, and when you can't shift them, the priority should be to replace the older player who can no longer hack it rather than panic and give him another year. Spend the wages that should be freed up on someone who can contribute to the club by playing regularly.

I have no objection to being in and around the club, but it was a very strange decision to extend his contract rather than go out and find a half-decent RB.

Whether Patterson stayed or went in the summer, replacing Coleman should have been done too. I don't accept that we had to keep Coleman because we couldn't get rid of Patterson.

 

[COYBL25]

Yes, and when you can't shift them, the priority should be to replace the older player who can no longer hack it rather than panic and give him another year. Spend the wages that should be freed up on someone who can contribute to the club by playing regularly.

I have no objection to being in and around the club, but it was a very strange decision to extend his contract rather than go out and find a half-decent RB.

Whether Patterson stayed or went in the summer, replacing Coleman should have been done too. I don't accept that we had to keep Coleman because we couldn't get rid of Patterson.

Spot on.

Nobody at all would`ve had any objections to him being kept on in some kind of coaching capacity, but giving him a squad number and another years contract was just lunacy.

I`m pretty sure for his wages, we could`ve got another right back, who was possibly coming to the end of his career, who still had at least one year left in his tank - Kyle Walker for instance ?

It just makes no sense at all, is a colossal waste of money and a squad number, all for a player who is clearly finished and who`s only purpose seems to be a cheerleader for the team.

( I love Coleman and I know it`s not his fault )

 

[Vaughan]

….no, it shows Aznou is nowhere near good enough, as it is with Patterson on the other flank.

when a player fails to get game time, it’s usually down to the player.

i remember tony hibbert and phil neville being preferred to seamus coleman, one year later he’s in the team of the season

same year barkley couldnt buy a game. the following he’s in the world cup squad and being heralded as the biggest talent in england

jake obrien couldnt get a game last year

i could go on

 

[davek]

Yes, and when you can't shift them, the priority should be to replace the older player who can no longer hack it rather than panic and give him another year. Spend the wages that should be freed up on someone who can contribute to the club by playing regularly.

I have no objection to being in and around the club, but it was a very strange decision to extend his contract rather than go out and find a half-decent RB.

Whether Patterson stayed or went in the summer, replacing Coleman should have been done too. I don't accept that we had to keep Coleman because we couldn't get rid of Patterson.

The reason some people are bleating about Coleman is that the club were powerless to shift Patterson out against his will. So they had a choice to make: go and spend more cash to have 3 RBs on the books plus O'Brien and Garner who can do that job to decent effect, or not. They chose not to.

That's not Coleman's doing.

Anyone having a go at Coleman quite simply are best left to their own devices. They're the same type of ingrates who hounded Peter Reid out of the club at the end of his career.

 

[Rita_Poon]

It's sad and pathetic that Coleman is still playing first team football for us

You can blame Moyes for giving him the contract extension and picking him ( I do ) but Coleman should have had the self awareness and self respect to know that he can no longer do it and retire gracefully..

G. Neville who I can't stand , admitted that during a game he realized that he no longer had it and the next day went to SAF and retired there and then.

Stoke, he should have given a penalty away iirc and it got waved off because of the man utd bias but he knew his legs were done there and then. I suppose it's a lot easier being a one club player at man utd and having the good grace to call it a day with man utd money in the bank than it is as a lifelong player for say devon afc. Being mildly more eloquent than merson and carragher meant he could stay on the sky gravy train all the same.

 

[b-rad]

The reason some people are bleating about Coleman is that the club were powerless to shift Patterson out against his will. So they had a choice to make: go and spend more cash to have 3 RBs on the books plus O'Brien and Garner who can do that job to decent effect, or not. They chose not to.

That's not Coleman's doing.

Anyone having a go at Coleman quite simply are best left to their own devices. They're the same type of ingrates who hounded Peter Reid out of the club at the end of his career.

Firstly, I'm not having a go at Coleman, nor hounding him out of the club. The choice wasn't
"go and spend more cash to have 3 RBs on the books plus O'Brien and Garner who can do that job to decent effect, or not"

it was
"go and spend more cash to have 2 RBs on the books plus O'Brien and Garner who can do that job to decent effect, or give another year to a player who really can't contribute much on the pitch"

People (myself included) think the wrong choice was made.

 

[Drico]

Says an awful lot about that current ROI setup that they're STILL calling him up at this point. An absolute farce all around.

Oh, a complete and utter binfire.

All goes back to John Delaney, the FAI Chief Executive. A corrupt spoofer. People were warned about this, but in the classic Irish style, a coterie of fans decided he was "yer only man" and drank booze from his shoes on a trip to the Czech Republic. The Bertie Ahern of Irish football politics. The same outcomes...