Jump to content

Cornell, Dilo & Dillon Sign - Confirmed


Recommended Posts

Sure.

We should have 1 senior keeper (yet to be signed) 1 ready for first team football and capable of seriously challenging the senior keeper for the number 1 spot (Cornell) and 1 youth keeper capable of being used in emergencies (Dilo).

We lost 3 keepers in May, we have so far signed 2. Cornell has replaced Adam and Dilo has replaced Smith, i'm looking forward to seeing who replaces Samson.

Sure.

We should have 1 senior keeper (yet to be signed) 1 ready for first team football and capable of seriously challenging the senior keeper for the number 1 spot (Cornell) and 1 youth keeper capable of being used in emergencies (Dilo).

We lost 3 keepers in May, we have so far signed 2. Cornell has replaced Adam and Dilo has replaced Smith, i'm looking forward to seeing who replaces Samson.

We will be poorer next season(goalkeeper) ....Samson was better than we thought .......We just need to live with that fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


We will be poorer next season(goalkeeper) ....Samson was better than we thought .......We just need to live with that fact.

Better than who thought?

His position was very poor, got his angles all wrong when coming off his line and was dreadful at deep crosses.

He was ok at this level but most reserve keepers in the SPL would do much the same job IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dilo is a youth keeper, he is 19 and will play for the U20's. I would be astounded if we never signed another goalkeeper.

As I have mentioned before, back in 78 our 2 keepers were aged 17 & 20 and didn't have a single league appearance to their names at the start of the season.

They were arguably the greatest ever keepers we've ever had... and we finished top 6!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one reading "Dilo" and actually seeing "Dildo"?

At first glance I genuinely thought we'd signed a guy called Dildo.

f**k me I need to go and have a word with myself.

SO....

Let me get this right.

You see the word "dildo" and immediately think "F**K ME"?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!lol.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one reading "Dilo" and actually seeing "Dildo"?

At first glance I genuinely thought we'd signed a guy called Dildo.

f**k me I need to go and have a word with myself.

Ha! Was just about to post something similar. I was going to say, anyone want to hazard a guess at what he will become known as if he turns out to be crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will be poorer next season(goalkeeper) ....Samson was better than we thought .......We just need to live with that fact.

I accept that. We still need two senior goal keepers and one youth keeper though, we have two out of three. There's plenty of senior goalkeepers on the market, i wonder which one will sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't see any logic (from a Swansea perspective) in loaning out Cornell if it isn't for 1st team action. Surely they would prefer that he have 1st team action at some level, even a lower league in England, first team action is generally the idea of leaving the immediate supervision of his parent club after all.

Edited by ss39Lavety
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't see any logic (from a Swansea perspective) in loaning out Cornell if it isn't for 1st team action. Surely they would prefer that he have 1st team action at some level, even a lower league in England, first team action is generally the idea of leaving the immediate supervision of his parent club after all.

I'm not a fan of this rhetoric. Who are we? Are we here to develop players for Swansea?

No, we are St Mirren. David Cornell is on loan at our club and he needs to fight for his place like any other player would. If he's not good enough he shouldn't play. If Swansea don't like it, f**k them, they can have him back.

We should not be basing any team selections on the wishes of any other club, i don't care who they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of this rhetoric. Who are we? Are we here to develop players for Swansea?

No, we are St Mirren. David Cornell is on loan at our club and he needs to fight for his place like any other player would. If he's not good enough he shouldn't play. If Swansea don't like it, f**k them, they can have him back.

We should not be basing any team selections on the wishes of any other club, i don't care who they are.

I'm afraid that's where we and many other SPL clubs are now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of this rhetoric. Who are we? Are we here to develop players for Swansea?

No, we are St Mirren. David Cornell is on loan at our club and he needs to fight for his place like any other player would. If he's not good enough he shouldn't play. If Swansea don't like it, f**k them, they can have him back.

We should not be basing any team selections on the wishes of any other club, i don't care who they are.

"I'm not a fan of this rhetoric" - This is hardly relevant

"Are we here to develop players for Swansea?" - As it happens...yes

Unfortunately...as much as you disagree...this is exactly where we are...if Cornell is going to sit on any bench next year...why not a Welsh one?...what possible benefit could there be to him coming here and warming a bench in Paisley?...We don't own this player...as we can't afford to own him...his parent club will probably be looking for something out of this whole transaction...namely...player development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I'm not a fan of this rhetoric" - This is hardly relevant

"Are we here to develop players for Swansea?" - As it happens...yes

Unfortunately...as much as you disagree...this is exactly where we are...if Cornell is going to sit on any bench next year...why not a Welsh one?...what possible benefit could there be to him coming here and warming a bench in Paisley?...We don't own this player...as we can't afford to own him...his parent club will probably be looking for something out of this whole transaction...namely...player development.

What normally happens is that the parent club pays the players wages PROVIDED he plays in the first team. So, let's put it this way, Saints will not want to spend money.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What normally happens is that the parent club pays the players wages PROVIDED he plays in the first team. So, let's put it this way, Saints will not want to spend money.

True, but it really isn't a case of being forced against our will to any extent, the fact is that by turning to loan deals we are able to have a (theoretically) better quality of goalkeeper between the sticks than if we were to simply search within our budget for a full time recruit.

From a St. Mirren perspective, one shared with most of the SPL actually, a loan signing from Swansea is a mutually beneficial agreement. I have no problem with loan signings...

Edited by ss39Lavety
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I'm not a fan of this rhetoric" - This is hardly relevant

"Are we here to develop players for Swansea?" - As it happens...yes

Unfortunately...as much as you disagree...this is exactly where we are...if Cornell is going to sit on any bench next year...why not a Welsh one?...what possible benefit could there be to him coming here and warming a bench in Paisley?...We don't own this player...as we can't afford to own him...his parent club will probably be looking for something out of this whole transaction...namely...player development.

What a load of tosh.

Are you seriously saying that the purpose of St Mirren FC is to develop players for Swansea? You're either not a Saints fan or you're talking nonsense.

I'm all for the loan market, it's worked wonders for us in recent years. However if the player is coming to our club with a clause saying he must play x amount of games then i'd rather we didn't have him. Who are other clubs to dictate to our manager who can and can't play? What if Cornell has a nightmare opening 3 games, is our manager forced to pick him regardless?

Utter nonsense, i've read some utter nonsense on this forum before but that's up there with the worst of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a load of tosh.

Are you seriously saying that the purpose of St Mirren FC is to develop players for Swansea? You're either not a Saints fan or you're talking nonsense.

I'm all for the loan market, it's worked wonders for us in recent years. However if the player is coming to our club with a clause saying he must play x amount of games then i'd rather we didn't have him. Who are other clubs to dictate to our manager who can and can't play? What if Cornell has a nightmare opening 3 games, is our manager forced to pick him regardless?

Utter nonsense, i've read some utter nonsense on this forum before but that's up there with the worst of it.

"As it happens" i.e. concerning this specific loan agreement, yes, the purpose of the loan deal from a Swansea perspective is player development. This does not automatically render it a bad thing for St. Mirren. From a St. Mirren perspective the purpose is having the best goalkeeper available in relation to our financial abilities. I don't think I would be speculating too much by saying that Premiership clubs can offer a better quality of player than those from whom we could recruit a set in stone replacement...a replacement who may also have a horror opening 3 games or so...and still be under contract...

Your take on it seems to be that we are being somehow forced against our will to some degree...I think that DL and his team may well have had a fair idea of the lads abilities before taking him on loan and agreeing to the conditions as laid out (quite rightly) by his parent club.

Edited by ss39Lavety
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"As it happens" i.e. concerning this specific loan agreement, yes, the purpose of the loan deal from a Swansea perspective is player development. This does not automatically render it a bad thing for St. Mirren. From a St. Mirren perspective the purpose is having the best goalkeeper available in relation to our financial abilities. I don't think I would be speculating too much my saying that Premiership clubs can offer a better quality of player than those from whom we could recruit a set in stone replacement...a replacement who may also have a horror opening 3 games or so...and still be under contract...

Your take on it seems to be that we are being somehow forced against our will to some degree...I think that DL and his team may well have had a fair idea of the lads abilities before taking him on loan and agreeing to the conditions as laid out (quite rightly) by his parent club.

Are you saying that we should put Swansea before ourselves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow...we are not putting Swansea before ourselves...this is explicitly NOT what I am saying...I am saying that the deal is mutually beneficial to a much greater extent than your "over a barrel" argument suggests.

The fact that loan deals are available to St. Mirren is beneficial as evidenced by a certain piece of silverware in the cabinet from last season...but the parent club has every right to have a say in any agreement made...it is part of the deal I'm afraid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the problem?

If he's good enough then he'll be in the team. If we have another keeper who is better than he won't.

And you can be sure that if Cornell isn't good enough to get a regular game with St. Mirren then he won't be good enough to get a regular game at Swansea! If Cornell doesn't get a regular game with us then Swansea will be looking to get shot!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the parent club has every right to have a say in any agreement made...it is part of the deal I'm afraid.

There won't be any part of his contract that says he must get a game.

If he's good enough then he will play. If he isn't good enough to play then Swansea really won't care. They'll look to get shot of him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There won't be any part of his contract that says he must get a game.

If he's good enough then he will play. If he isn't good enough to play then Swansea really won't care. They'll look to get shot of him.

I'm not suggesting in any way that Swansea will have an iron fisted approach to the whole thing...my point is that he is a Swansea player...and as such they will have an agenda when sending him on loan i.e. development, and St. Mirren will have an agenda in taking him i.e. having a decent goalkeeper.

While there may be no part of his contract which overrides DL and his ability to manage his own team, to say there will be no agreement of sorts concerning game time is illogical. Both sides have ideal scenarios, and both are the same i.e. that he plays regularly, plays well, and develops, both want the same outcome essentially, hence my disagreement that there is any real imposition on St. Mirren.

If he doesn't play well, then we would have to seriously question the integrity of DL and the SMFC board if he continues to play on financial grounds alone i.e. to avoid paying Swansea for having their GK warming our bench. My point is that we took him on loan for a reason...WE took HIM, he was not forced upon us in any way.

If we look at things from a different angle, if we sent a player on loan we would do so for reasons of game time, otherwise he is just as well training under DL as any other manager.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure.

We should have 1 senior keeper (yet to be signed) 1 ready for first team football and capable of seriously challenging the senior keeper for the number 1 spot (Cornell) and 1 youth keeper capable of being used in emergencies (Dilo).

We lost 3 keepers in May, we have so far signed 2. Cornell has replaced Adam and Dilo has replaced Smith, i'm looking forward to seeing who replaces Samson.

Cornell will be our first choice keeper next season, and will have people on here eating their words.
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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...