Cardiff City Forum



A forum for all things Cardiff City

' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 9:55 am

MY VIEW: Jury totally out, massive jump for the lad, just glad we only paid £200,000 not the £1million the media made up. We are not talking about just a Championship striker City need a striker that is a high class promotion striker, thankfully we have Kieffer Moore, but he needs back up.

I think 3-4 or 4 games in the U23’s will help him and hopefully we will all be able to see how he performs there :thumbright: :bluebird:

I really hope Watters proves me wrong :thumbright:






' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

When Max Watters was bought for £200,000 from Crawley Town back in January by Neil Harris and with the advice from the CCFC Committee, it was expected he might have a little more involvement than he has.


Max Watters came from Crawley Town - £200,000, with a deal worth up to £500,000 with add ons, if Watters scores so many goals, appearances and promotion.

He played in Harris' last match and was hooked after 55 minutes, but has not featured since.

He had an incredible start to the season with Crawley, scoring 16 goals in 19 games (after being turned away from Doncaster Rovers and starting back up in the 7th league).

Watters after leaving Doncaster without scoring a goal, went to Grantham, then Gainsborough, then Mickleover Sports, then Maidstone, before having a great season at Crawley Town last year,but as we all know it's a sizeable jump up to the Championship.

Moore is always going to be first-choice striker and rightly so. However, McCarthy's system change has seen wingers Murphy and Ojo turn into second strikers, while Mark Harris has been the preferred option off the bench.

It means Watters has seemingly dropped down the pecking order, given Ojo and Murphy have now become his direct competition, and minutes are hard to come by.

He is still just 21 and his time will no doubt come, but, for now, he has a battle on his hands to break into the fold.



MICK McCARTHY:

"It's selection. He hasn't had a game since QPR, when he was taken off after 55 minutes," McCarthy explained.


"Watters trained much harder on Friday, a much tougher session, he will be in tomorrow with us and will play on Monday in the under-23s."

"I need to see him play. I think he needs 90 minutes and that's my decision."

"I've got more than adequate cover without him, so he will be playing on Monday."






That would suggest it is unlikely he will be involved against Derby County on Tuesday.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 10:09 am

How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 10:17 am

aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



We can all have our opinions and surely that’s what this forum is for, not a dictatorship and yes I do have my doubts if that’s alright with you.
So your saying we are not allowed our opinions or doubts?? :roll:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 10:19 am

Forever Blue wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



We can all have our opinions and surely that’s what this forum is for, not a dictatorship and yes I do have my doubts if that’s alright with you.
So your saying we are not allowed our opinions or doubts?? :roll:



I think youve got a bit of a contriol freak like Tan there Annis, no one must say what they really feel :lol: :lol:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 10:23 am

aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more


Mate, every player should be given a chance, run of games, but you cant silence other fans opinions and think only yours is right?

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 10:32 am

Thrown in at the deepend in an under performing team after being injured. Lets give him a chance before writing him off. We really do need cover for Moore but not every signing is made to go straight into the first team. For 200k this could be one for the future.

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 10:39 am

Maybe he should be loaned back to Crawley next season if they want him or any other team but in fairness he hasn’t been given a chance here yet so it doesn’t mean he is not good enough. I respect everyone’s opinion always and usually see it through my own eyes then make my own opinion. MM said he wants to see Watters for 90 mins before assessing him properly, and rightly so. It’s a shame really we didn’t get Jerome as back up to Moore and loan Watters straight back to Crawley but it is what it is. I hope the lad makes it here, afterall he’s still only 21. :ayatollah:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 10:56 am

Forever Blue wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



We can all have our opinions and surely that’s what this forum is for, not a dictatorship and yes I do have my doubts if that’s alright with you.
So your saying we are not allowed our opinions or doubts?? :roll:


To be fair he was just saying how can anyone have doubts about the lad at the moment when we haven't really seen him in action very much.
Of course this forum is all about opinions but it seems that every time someone has a different opinion to you, you say things like "so you're saying we are not allowed our opinions".
Just because someone has a different opinion to you they are not saying that you ,or anyone else, is not allowed an opinion. Chill mun :lol: :thumbup:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 10:58 am

The lad needs a few games nothing wrong with that. Hope he scores a couple on Monday which will boost his confidence.

A few of the signings we’ve made look good and getting game time will make them better. We need a squad not just 11 players.

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:00 am

Always City wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more


Mate, every player should be given a chance, run of games, but you cant silence other fans opinions and think only yours is right?

Where exactly is he silencing other opinions? He's just stating his own. We all think our own opinion is right otherwise we wouldn't express them. :ayatollah:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:01 am

Reply FB:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:06 am

moonboots wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



We can all have our opinions and surely that’s what this forum is for, not a dictatorship and yes I do have my doubts if that’s alright with you.
So your saying we are not allowed our opinions or doubts?? :roll:


To be fair he was just saying how can anyone have doubts about the lad at the moment when we haven't really seen him in action very much.
Of course this forum is all about opinions but it seems that every time someone has a different opinion to you, you say things like "so you're saying we are not allowed our opinions".
Just because someone has a different opinion to you they are not saying that you ,or anyone else, is not allowed an opinion. Chill mun :lol: :thumbup:



No he never, he said. “How can anyone have their doubts.”

Well of course we can going by his past or what we’ve heard in trying etc etc

He was stating we can’t have an opinion, when we can and that’s how life should be and that’s what makes football a forum great debates :thumbright: :bluebird:

I have NO respect for a person when he stops you having your say, even if it’s diffent , you should be allowed it and respected for it and just give your view why yours is different :thumbright: :bluebird:

He must be your mate as your clambering over everyone’s posts to stick up for him :lol:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:09 am

Reply Twitter:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:21 am

Forever Blue wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



We can all have our opinions and surely that’s what this forum is for, not a dictatorship and yes I do have my doubts if that’s alright with you.
So your saying we are not allowed our opinions or doubts?? :roll:


Where did I say that you can't, I just stated its odd cos you've only seen him play for 55mins. Where am I dictating what you should think. Just seems to be written off before even doing anything :roll:
But there we are just my comment on it I find it odd as you've not seen him play :lol:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:28 am

Forever Blue wrote:
moonboots wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



We can all have our opinions and surely that’s what this forum is for, not a dictatorship and yes I do have my doubts if that’s alright with you.
So your saying we are not allowed our opinions or doubts?? :roll:


To be fair he was just saying how can anyone have doubts about the lad at the moment when we haven't really seen him in action very much.
Of course this forum is all about opinions but it seems that every time someone has a different opinion to you, you say things like "so you're saying we are not allowed our opinions".
Just because someone has a different opinion to you they are not saying that you ,or anyone else, is not allowed an opinion. Chill mun :lol: :thumbup:



No he never, he said. “How can anyone have their doubts.”

Well of course we can going by his past or what we’ve heard in trying etc etc

He was stating we can’t have an opinion, when we can and that’s how life should be and that’s what makes football a forum great debates :thumbright: :bluebird:

I have NO respect for a person when he stops you having your say, even if it’s diffent , you should be allowed it and respected for it and just give your view why yours is different :thumbright: :bluebird:

He must be your mate as your clambering over everyone’s posts to stick up for him :lol:


If you think I said you can't have an opinion that's what you want to think, I stated I was odd, so you read into that how you want to :roll:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:29 am

aberdare-blue wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



We can all have our opinions and surely that’s what this forum is for, not a dictatorship and yes I do have my doubts if that’s alright with you.
So your saying we are not allowed our opinions or doubts?? :roll:


Where did I say that you can't, I just stated its odd cos you've only seen him play for 55mins. Where am I dictating what you should think. Just seems to be written off before even doing anything :roll:
But there we are just my comment on it I find it odd as you've not seen him play :lol:



You’ve said “How anyone can say they have their doubts”

Well I have my doubts and your saying I cant ?

I have watched videos of him and heard reports from the coaching staff.

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:30 am

Ninian27 wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



We can all have our opinions and surely that’s what this forum is for, not a dictatorship and yes I do have my doubts if that’s alright with you.
So your saying we are not allowed our opinions or doubts?? :roll:



I think youve got a bit of a contriol freak like Tan there Annis, no one must say what they really feel :lol: :lol:


Relate something back to Tan cos you know how much he's loved on here :mrgreen:

Said its odd, get over yourself :lol:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:32 am

Always City wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more


Mate, every player should be given a chance, run of games, but you cant silence other fans opinions and think only yours is right?


Where have I stated you can't have an opinion, I said its odd. Which based on 55mins in a crap side on no confidence, under Harris, I do find it odd :thumbup:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:41 am

Forever Blue wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



We can all have our opinions and surely that’s what this forum is for, not a dictatorship and yes I do have my doubts if that’s alright with you.
So your saying we are not allowed our opinions or doubts?? :roll:


Where did I say that you can't, I just stated its odd cos you've only seen him play for 55mins. Where am I dictating what you should think. Just seems to be written off before even doing anything :roll:
But there we are just my comment on it I find it odd as you've not seen him play :lol:



You’ve said “How anyone can say they have their doubts”

Well I have my doubts and your saying I cant ?

I have watched videos of him and heard reports from the coaching staff.


Your just taking half of my sentence and running with it,

How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. Is what I said, nowhere have I said you can't have an opinion,

I stated its odd cos none of us have seen him play and only bits on what we've seen from Crawley, I find it difficult that we can make a judgement on him already, instead if giving him a chance

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:46 am

moonboots wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



We can all have our opinions and surely that’s what this forum is for, not a dictatorship and yes I do have my doubts if that’s alright with you.
So your saying we are not allowed our opinions or doubts?? :roll:


To be fair he was just saying how can anyone have doubts about the lad at the moment when we haven't really seen him in action very much.
Of course this forum is all about opinions but it seems that every time someone has a different opinion to you, you say things like "so you're saying we are not allowed our opinions".
Just because someone has a different opinion to you they are not saying that you ,or anyone else, is not allowed an opinion. Chill mun :lol: :thumbup:


:thumbup:
They must be agitated and hungover from having a few to many watching the egg chasing yesterday :laughing5:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:50 am

aberdare-blue wrote:
moonboots wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



We can all have our opinions and surely that’s what this forum is for, not a dictatorship and yes I do have my doubts if that’s alright with you.
So your saying we are not allowed our opinions or doubts?? :roll:


To be fair he was just saying how can anyone have doubts about the lad at the moment when we haven't really seen him in action very much.
Of course this forum is all about opinions but it seems that every time someone has a different opinion to you, you say things like "so you're saying we are not allowed our opinions".
Just because someone has a different opinion to you they are not saying that you ,or anyone else, is not allowed an opinion. Chill mun :lol: :thumbup:


:thumbup:
They must be agitated and hungover from having a few to many watching the egg chasing yesterday :laughing5:



And sarcastic :lol:

You would never get me watching that it must be you two as you must either be mates or a multi


Hmmmmmm


I will look now :thumbup:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 1:58 pm

Reply FB:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 3:38 pm

aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



i dont really see how anyone can not have doubts.... the likelyhood of a player released by Doncaster who then struggled to get hooked up with a deal at a bunch of non league clubs but is then fortunate enough to have a good game in a friendly against Crawley , has a 15 game purple patch being good enough for top end championship is slim...
be nice if it works out but we have taken a few similar punts { williams , meite , healey } that did not....

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 3:46 pm

skidemin wrote:
aberdare-blue wrote:How anyone can say they have their doubts is odd. None of us have really seen him play, so your all just assuming he's crap cos MM hasn't put him on.
Vs QPR he played 20mins in around 6 weeks before signing for us and Harris throwing him in the deep end.
MM isn't gonna throw him in when he had to win games to keep us out of the relegation fight and en to keep us in playoff hunt, can't see many fringe players getting much game time due to the chances of playoffs.

Hopefully he makes the impact in 23s game and get more game time, as I don't see Mark Harris being the answer just cos he runs around bit more



i dont really see how anyone can not have doubts.... the likelyhood of a player released by Doncaster who then struggled to get hooked up with a deal at a bunch of non league clubs but is then fortunate enough to have a good game in a friendly against Crawley , has a 15 game purple patch being good enough for top end championship is slim...
be nice if it works out but we have taken a few similar punts { williams , meite , healey } that did not....



Thank you :thumbright:

That’s part of my reason for saying the Jury is out with me still.
Also in training at the moment he is not making massive impressions.
But apparently for having a different opinion/ view we are drunk.

Let’s hope Watters does well in the U23 games and then Big Mick might decide to give him a chance.
To be fair to Big Mick he has given plenty of players from the U23’s the last 20 mins or so in games.

For me I am glad the Committee did not pay £1mill like Glen Williams put out.

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 4:34 pm

Don't think Watters is going to be crap. You don't score 16 goals in 19 games at league two levels if you are crap. That said he didn't do much in the 55 minutes he was on when he did play for us admittedly it was in a downhearted crap Harris team and the service to him was poor. I suspect he may be one of those players who a lot of the time do very little and frustrate you but regularly pop up with a goal. Not really a McCarthy sort of player. Problem is Moore apart we have bugger all up front and we really do need a good striker. Maybe we can get away with it if Murphy and Wilson weigh in with a few goals.

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 5:35 pm

He's 21 you mentalists! He's not just going to jump up 2 leagues and force his way into the side straight away. Expect to see more of him in the next season or two

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 5:41 pm

ffs wrote:He's 21 you mentalists! He's not just going to jump up 2 leagues and force his way into the side straight away. Expect to see more of him in the next season or two


:lol:

If he is going to make it with us in the Championship it will be in the next six months at the most, we signed him flying
play this season.

And???????

Look at all these 20 year olds in Premier last season
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 5:46 pm

ffs wrote:He's 21 you mentalists! He's not just going to jump up 2 leagues and force his way into the side straight away. Expect to see more of him in the next season or two


Your having a girafe mate, 21 to young for City in the Championship :laughing6: :laughing6: :laughing6:

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 8:05 pm

A 21 year old from L2 straight into a championship team was the action of a desperate man (Harris)

IMO- He was always destined for the U23's this season and if he continued there then sub, then start.

Out of interest when was the last time an L1 striker went straight into a premier league team ? As its the same jump.

Then there is the question of style and class. Keifer is a back to goal 6'6" monster with a high work rate and pace (for his size) and i seriously doubt he'll be with us next season as he is getting better and better. If this happens I doubt Max will be the focal point of our attack unless we start playing it into space and we don't have the passers for that (ask Glatzel)

He is a gamble for 10 weeks of Tomlins wages.....I guess we all hope he does well

Re: ' The £200,000 Max Watters' absence explained '

Sun Feb 28, 2021 8:09 pm

llan bluebird wrote:A 21 year old from L2 straight into a championship team was the action of a desperate man (Harris)

IMO- He was always destined for the U23's this season and if he continued there then sub, then start.

Out of interest when was the last time an L1 striker went straight into a premier league team ? As its the same jump.

Then there is the question of style and class. Keifer is a back to goal 6'6" monster with a high work rate and pace (for his size) and i seriously doubt he'll be with us next season as he is getting better and better. If this happens I doubt Max will be the focal point of our attack unless we start playing it into space and we don't have the passers for that (ask Glatzel)

He is a gamble for 10 weeks of Tomlins wages.....I guess we all hope he does well

Good post mate.
I’m really not sure of him at this level tbh but for the price paid it’s not a huge gamble by any means. Good luck to the lad.