The Weekend ITK Discussion Thread - 23/24 July 2011

gibbospurs · Jul 23, 2011

spurslenny said:
Personally, I'd get by quite happily with no cryptic ITK.

They achieve nothing, because ultimately someone, somewhere will solve the clue, so the actual ITK may as well been posted in the first place.

All we end up with is 45 pages of half baked answers and a load of spamming.

Get rid is what I say.

Me too! get rid, its pointless. or have a different thread where people can sit on the computers thinking of random transfers. jesus, why did peole moan about adeipf info? The whole cryptic is just football manager shit! think of a name then find a position for them. BRING BACK ADEIPF.

JerryGarcia · Jul 23, 2011

Rob said:
Most of the ITK that was posted was quite clear, Vucinic not as close as some are saying, Adebayor even further away and Marin not looking likely either.

With the cryptic bits, it's more about letting people know something is going on without being able to say who it's about. We can either say nothing or hint at stuff which keeps people talking without risking any sources.

If people would prefer an "absolutely no cryptics" policy then that's cool with us but would also mean we'd sit on a lot of stuff that wouldn't see the light of day...?

I think the way we have it now is probably favourable to most people but happy to be corrected.

I want all the ITK that you can give us in every form possible!

It's not as if we are being forced to read it and believe it at gun point (hopefully we don't have any Austrian mods with big basements).

jimbo · Jul 23, 2011

rebrab said:
We should keep cryptics, definitely.

Just ignore it if you like it. Personally I think it's good of the mods to share it.

I tend to agree, though I wonder if people would be less likely to work themselves up into a frenzy of ecstacy and dissapointment if instead of a cryptic the ITK update were to be something like 'We're definitely pursuing interest in a player - we can't say who it is because we don't want to jeopardise any potential deal.'

That way people can still discuss who it might be without the element of their being a right answer. I would have thought that approach would protect the deal/source better to boot.

gibbospurs · Jul 23, 2011

rebrab said:
We should keep cryptics, definitely.

Just ignore it if you dont like it. Personally I think it's good of the mods to share it when they just get grief for it

But how do you ignore it when you get 30/40 pages of people ranting about who it might be? it takes 20 mins every day to sift thro. pointless imo.

Matt C · Jul 23, 2011

jimbo said:
I tend to agree, though I wonder if people would be less likely to work themselves up into a frenzy of ecstacy and dissapointment if instead of a cryptic the ITK update were to be something like 'We're definitely pursuing interest in a player - we can't say who it is because we don't want to jeopardise any potential deal.'

That way people can still discuss who it might be without the element of their being a right answer. I would have thought that approach would protect the deal/source better to boot.

It doesn't happen like that, any agent that is dealing with us would contact City/Arse/Chelsea etc to see if they are interested as they would pay higher wages so I don't subscribe to the idea that a deal could be damaged by posting on a message board

kyle · Jul 23, 2011

Has anyone mentioned Mario MANdzukic of Wolfsburg & Croatia? We've definitely been linked with him in previous windows. Can't say I know enough about him to say he'd be a target for us now though.

jimbo · Jul 23, 2011

Matt C said:
It doesn't happen like that, any agent that is dealing with us would contact City/Arse/Chelsea etc to see if they are interested as they would pay higher wages so I don't subscribe to the idea that a deal could be damaged by posting on a message board

Do you subscribe to the idea that a source might stop sharing information with a poster because they found out it was being spread across the internet?

Matt C · Jul 23, 2011

jimbo said:
Do you subscribe to the idea that a source might stop sharing information with a poster because they found out it was being spread across the internet?

yes, but that is what the goat is there for, to protect sources.

gibbospurs · Jul 23, 2011

Matt C said:
It doesn't happen like that, any agent that is dealing with us would contact City/Arse/Chelsea etc to see if they are interested as they would pay higher wages so I don't subscribe to the idea that a deal could be damaged by posting on a message board

This... Just say the bloody name. and say we are looking at them!

Snuzzy · Jul 23, 2011

kyle said:
Has anyone mentioned Mario MANdzukic of Wolfsburg & Croatia? We've definitely been linked with him in previous windows. Can't say I know enough about him to say he'd be a target for us now though.

good shout that man

Beni · Jul 23, 2011

gibbospurs said:
But how do you ignore it when you get 30/40 pages of people ranting about who it might be? it takes 20 mins every day to sift thro. pointless imo.

I can understand if you were trying to go through 30 to 40 pages to see the ITK that isnt criptic, but we have an ITK Read only section which you can view all the cryptic and non cryptic ITK there.
Don't like cryptic ITK, then ignore it and just stick to the read only section.

jimbo · Jul 23, 2011

Matt C said:
yes, but that is what the goat is there for, to protect sources.

I don't think it works like that. If information is posted through The Goat it could still raise suspicions with the originator as to where the leak has sprung from.

Anyway, that wasn't really what I was getting at. What I was trying to say was that rather than have clues to a players identity it would be sufficient to know that we were pursuing interest in an unknown player.

rebrab · Jul 23, 2011

So some people would genuinely rather hear stuff that is clearly bullsh*t than genuine information told cryptically?

kyle · Jul 23, 2011

Snuzzy said:
good shout that man

Actually reading back the ITK I'm convinced its gotta be Gomez, haha.

Spurvert · Jul 23, 2011

So, do we know who it is yet?

I'm all for cryptics, providing we can solve them

gibbospurs · Jul 23, 2011

Beni said:
I can understand if you were trying to go through 30 to 40 pages to see the ITK that isnt criptic, but we have an ITK Read only section which you can view all the cryptic and non cryptic ITK there.
Don't like cryptic ITK, then ignore it and just stick to the read only section.

But how can you discuss the itk on a player when you dont even know the player?? Maybe its frustration buddy, i feel the club does everything wrong on trnsfers. I wouldnt be so stressed if we actually bid for a player.

Snuzzy · Jul 23, 2011

but how could we possibly be actually chasing after Gomez?

gibbospurs · Jul 23, 2011

rebrab said:
So some people would genuinely rather hear stuff that is clearly bullsh*t than genuine information told cryptically?

But nobody ever says if the names are right or not? its a pointless exercise.

steve71075 · Jul 23, 2011

And in GeRmAn, if yOU pleasE

aguero

ChristianBaler · Jul 23, 2011

Could someone explain what exactly the goat means. Are we seriously going after Gomez (if it is indeed Gomez) or are we just "interested".

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

The Weekend ITK Discussion Thread - 23/24 July 2011

SC Supporter

Dark star crashes...

Cabbages

SC Supporter

Banned

Perennial Underachiever

Cabbages

Banned

SC Supporter

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Cabbages

Harry Cool

Perennial Underachiever

Huge Member

SC Supporter

Well-Known Member

SC Supporter

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads