Trialist Charlie Austin

[Barry Scott]

I doubt it.

These things are usually already agreed. Can anyone think of a 'loan with a view to move' where the play didnt actually move?

Yeah, I know what you mean and i certainly know of none.

I just wonder whether playing contracts can actually be signed outside the window, or whether the loan contract states we will agree to sign contracts in Jan? What i'm trying to say is, did we sign him, permanently, outside of the window first, meaning he's still Southend's until Jan, so we loan him until that point, or did we sign him on loan until Jan with an agreement that contracts will be signed once the window reopens? You know?

Because if it was the later, surely we can just shrug and renege on any deal. I'm of course being a prick about the whole thing, but it could be amusing for The Chavs.

[STFC Bart]

Well lets hope we can send him back- he looks a very poor centre forward. As everyone has said him and Paynter are too alike.

One good thing- Odabeyi looks to be getting better every game- time to put him up front versus Exeter me thinks.

[THE FLASH]

Well lets hope we can send him back- he looks a very poor centre forward. As everyone has said him and Paynter are too alike.

One good thing- Odabeyi looks to be getting better every game- time to put him up front versus Exeter me thinks.

Hes been shit every time i have seen him.......looking forward to Exeter..

[jonny72]

I don't think Revell is that bad, just very similar to Paynter. He looks better than the reserve strikers we had last season and bearing in mind we've only really got Paynter at the moment I don't see any reason why we wouldn't want to keep Revell.

[STFC Bart]

Because his goalscoring record is dire.

Give him until Jan and if he does not start scoring send him back. No point whatsoever having hard working forwards who dont score- goals equal points.

[herthab]

Revell's first game (When Paynter was rested) he looked ok. The problem is that we've got two lumps upfront, instead of one lump and one quick thinking goal machine.

The Paynter-Cox partnership last season worked well, Cox was even quoted as saying without Billy he wouldn't have got the amount of goals he did. Revell is too similar to BP; he's fine as a replacement/cover for Paynter but as a partnership it just doesn't work.

Either of them upfront with Tope (Or even Macklin) would be more productive imo.

Don't think they're bad players, just think they can't play together.

[pauld]

What hertha said. Although they were neither of them great yesterday, they could still be playing now and still wouldn't have scored

[Dozno9]

Wilson in the Adver this morning says that Charlie could be challenging in the next few weeks, can he actually play then, I thought with the transfer window and all?

[Rich Pullen]

I honestly think that Exeter City is a perfect place to give him a 10-15 minute debut.

Obviously this won't happen but he's been playing football and we fielded Hamdi Razak pretty quickly (all be it in desperate circumstances).

[DV]

...we've got a piss poor paint pot game against Exeter next week. Might as well give him a go then. Nothing to lose.

[Rich Pullen]

Fair point Dave.

Has this chap even signed yet?

[DV]

word on the street was he was having a medical today.

[Power to people]

I'm not so sure any of the strikers we have at the moment can form a decent partnership to complement each other, and perhaps Wilson knows that and that is why he persists with the 4-3-3 / 4-5-1

[Iffy's Onion Bhaji]

...we've got a piss poor paint pot game against Exeter next week. Might as well give him a go then. Nothing to lose.

Good shout that actually.

[Tails]

I think I saw him in a car around the ground earlier. I don't have a clue what he looks like, but it was someone I didn't recognise so of course it must be him!