This messageboard is for Adults 18 years and over.
If you are under this age please leave the board.
Luton Outlaws accepts no responsibility for the content of this messageboard nor any other
content posted on it.
Luton Outlaws disclaims all liability for such content to the fullest extent permitted by law.
What you read on here is 100% conjecture, fiction, lies, bullshit and complete bollocks.
If you want to be taken seriously, you are in the wrong place.
Any potentially libellous comments that might jeopardise the future of this messageboard will therefore be deleted, and the person posting them will receive a
ban.Enjoy.
Bloomfield
Posted by RandomHatter on 16/8/2025, 16:46:43
Just said no incomings before Tuesday. Doesn't seem like Al-hamadi is coming then.
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by Music Critic on 16/8/2025, 16:50:50, in reply to "Bloomfield"
There's some people moaning about him on here but he's got one arm tied behind his back
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by Sandgrounder on 16/8/2025, 17:03:41, in reply to "Re: Bloomfield"
Yep, but his selection was poor today. Can’t play Andersen and McGuinness in a back 3. Should have had Kodua as RWB and Lonwijk as RCB. Also, why play Lonwijk at LWB when he doesn’t have a left foot and Alli at RWB when he’s better on his left foot. Need natural width from a WB so play them on their natural sides. Fanne isn’t a number 10. Play him as a deeper midfielder or not at all. Nelson should’ve been behind Yates. And none of this is with benefit of hindsight.
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by Music Critic on 16/8/2025, 17:23:17, in reply to "Re: Bloomfield"
Don't disagree but I wonder if he was making a point
All what you say about LWB and RWB just highlights what glaring gaps there are in the squad and the sicknotes that are plaguing (pardon the pun) it. Making do and and mending. In August. In Division 3
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by Sandgrounder on 16/8/2025, 17:27:51, in reply to "Re: Bloomfield"
I really hope he wasn’t ‘making a point’. Yep totally agree about the squad. It’s particularly incredible that we signed an unfit free agent not wanted by Rotherham (or anyone else in the month after he left) to replace probably the most predictable departure of this pre season. Must’ve been option C or D at best (at least I hope he was).
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by Caught Jester on 16/8/2025, 19:12:18, in reply to "Re: Bloomfield"
I was at the game. That option ‘C or D’ was, I thought, our most threatening player when he came on - with Walsh not far behind. He made space for himself and let it be known he wanted the ball.
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by Music Critic on 16/8/2025, 17:39:58, in reply to "Re: Bloomfield"
I have no clue what our recruitment strategy is supposed to be. We don't seem to recruit for a particular style, we don't seem to recruit the personalities that we used to recruit, we don't recruit for balance and we regularly sign injured players
Laughable how bad it now is when it used to be so good. What on earth has happened/changed (apart from not having N Jones anymore)?
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by Hattersman on 16/8/2025, 17:57:25, in reply to "Re: Bloomfield"
Ah NJ was the reason our recruitment was so good. Who’d have thought.
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by Music Critic on 16/8/2025, 18:01:34, in reply to "Re: Bloomfield"
Yep. And that is another indictment of the recruitment team/process/system
That it was so reliant on one bloke is a joke
What a rapid, horrible fall from grace
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by NotaBene on 16/8/2025, 18:44:57, in reply to "Re: Bloomfield"
Just shows how overrated everybody else was, NJ apart.All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by NotaBene on 16/8/2025, 18:44:56, in reply to "Re: Bloomfield"
Just shows how overrated everybody else was, NJ apart.All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by NotaBene on 16/8/2025, 18:44:54, in reply to "Re: Bloomfield"
Just shows how overrated everybody else was, NJ apart.All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by HH on 16/8/2025, 17:56:52, in reply to "Re: Bloomfield"
I do strongly suspect that's it. Without Nathan or a John Still like manager, our recruitment over the years isn’t amazing.
Truth be told, anyone other company which sees well over £100m invested in the team over the last 24 months to end up here......anyone involved in that process would have been sacked long ago.
Our chief scout left to go to Charlton and the others all seemed to get a promotion they ill deserved.
We desperately need a Director of Football or fresh eyes on the recruitment side.
It's not quite working. And hasn't for a very long time.
Re: Bloomfield
Posted by Kbot on 16/8/2025, 16:50:25, in reply to "Bloomfield"
Disappointed but not surprised. Recruitment is bloody awful. Yet another poor window. Says everything about our expectations.
The posts made on this board are the opinions of the people posting them and do not always reflect the opinion of the board
administration.
Luton Outlaws is a totally independent forum, paid for and run by supporters of Luton
Town and is not associated with Luton Town Football Club, lutontown.co.uk, lutonfc.com, Loyal Luton Supporters Club, Trust in Luton, Luton Town Supporters Club or
anyone else for that matter and is declared a 100% Tombola Free Zone.
Luton Outlaws accepts no responsibility for the content of this messageboard nor any
other content posted on it. Luton Outlaws disclaims all liability for such content to the fullest extent permitted by law.
What you read on here is 100% conjecture, fiction, lies, bullshit and complete bollocks. If you want to be taken seriously, you are in the wrong place.
Enjoy. Admin contact - dilligaf.outlaws@gmail.com.
on 16/8/2025, 16:46:43