Fair points

There is obviously a part of it that as Sutton is a former player - who was a bit of a star for us - that everyone is making such a fuss. But let us not forget that he was pretty much a resounding success after he left too (bar his year at Chelsea) - he is a winner - has great experience - and is a great talent.

The flip side is he is ageing and injury prone and may want too much money. Ignoring the money issue at the moment, yes he is ageing, but with the possible exception of Ryan Jarvis, I don't think Sutton will block the progress of any of our younger players as none of them are strikers (or target men). And besides - I'd rather bring Ryan Jarvis through in a squad rotation role this year to see if he can produce the goods, rather than throw him in at the deep end and put lots of pressure on him from the word go.

As for the injury factor - yes it is very true - but we have McKenzie and Ryan Jarvis to step up to the plate if such an eventuality occurred, and if we can get him a pay as you play deal - then it will be less of a risk for us financially. I don't necessarily see the retirement fund issue as a big problem although I accept it has been on occassions (Peter Thorne anyone?!), Martin Peters saw his career out here brilliantly - even Flecky did a decent job for us during a difficult period.

I think we should at least talk to him, and see what kind of deal he is interested in. If he wants us to take financial risks on him (injuries etc) then fair do's - we say no - but if he is genuinely willing to take the risk - then we should sign him. If he doesn't deliver - then bench him for McKenzie or Jarvis. I see him as a short term answer to partner Earnshaw and to take some pressure off Jarvis so he can eventually take over from him.

Posted By: Poirot, Aug 2, 21:07:41