NB As readers have spotted, The Observer messed it up and used a Crystal Palace review under Pete’s name, certainly in the online version seen here
A tale of two old codgers and their looks through the transfer window. Pete Sixsmith did it more succinctly, for The Observer and doubtless for nowt; Monsieur Salut was tasked to make it a bit longer for ESPN. Old Pete gave Sunderland seven out of 10, his even older pal downgraded his original seven to six at 11pm on Monday …
Reminds me of childhood Christmases; you never got everything you wished for but the pillow case was still full, with some presents you never expected.
Gus Poyet now has his own squad and the scattergun approach of the previous regime is but a dim and distant memory.
We look reasonably well covered in all positions and players like Jack Rodwell, Will Buckley and Ricardo Alvarez should be a real asset for us. The Borini saga dragged on and on and it seemed clear by mid-August that he wasn’t coming. Shame.
The players who have left had little to offer with the exception of Jack Colback so no disappointments there.
I would give it a 7/10.
M Salut (see it in full at http://www.espnfc.com/club/sunderland/366/blog/post/2001599/transfer-assessment-sunderland):
The protracted quest for Fabio Borini’s return, permanently or on loan again, was a distracting irritant. He never, in truth, looked remotely interested in the move, except as a last resort, and I am not sure that level of commitment justified the chase. But the need for a proven goal scorer is still there. At least Steven Fletcher, Jozy Altidore and Wickham have all stayed, but each, with the exception of Wickham in last season’s finale, has been low scoring and would have benefited from competition. 6/10.
8 thoughts on “Sixer Says: our transfer window Observed in just 100 words”
Unbelievably, they still haven’t corrected it online. They still have Pete waffling on about Palace
He is Jeremy, he is.
The thought of Mr Sixsmith being associated with Crystal Palace is quite nauseating. Being aware of Pete’s “fondness” for Palace I can imagine how he must be squirming at the thought of it.
The Guardian/Observer are infamous for typos and printing mistakes. Transposing Palace and Sunderland takes some doing.
See my note at the top of the page. I haven’t seen the paper yet so do not know if it is the same in print
In the paper as it should be. Print rules
Exactly my question. Someone Who Can needs to contact The Powers That Be and get that fixed.
Just read the transfer window appraisal acredited to the Sixer. Why is it all about Crystal Palace? Journalistic/ editorial rickett?t
Comments are closed.