The Footie Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
I doubt West Ham could compete with the wages on offer. No slight on West Ham, not many can.

Saying that, at 29 he has gone early. You watch him, is he slowing up, does he have injury issues? I'd have thought he could have gone to another top European team, unless there are reasons?

Helps you guys balance your books again, only spending what you have ;)
Just one other thing. City having a good transfer window re money. 20% of sell on fee for Lavia . Blood money for Laporte and Mahrez. Tons of winners money for the treble. Happy days.
Back to City and West Ham. City are after Paquata. Am gobsmacked West Ham never asked for Cole Palmer and Laporte as part of that deal. That would have been monster for both clubs.
Hey ho. It is what it is.
 
Just thought I'd revisit this? Have you officially stopped watching Spurs?

If anything, if I was a Spurs fan, although I'd be sad to see Kane go, I think I'd be relieved the saga is behind me. He was going to go one day, so at least you got a bit of money out of it. I'd be excited to see what new players, especially strikers Spurs can get through the door in the future. I'd suspect Spurs would be able to attract even better strikers, now they know they'd be number 1, instead of an understudy to Kane. And I'd be hopeful the new manager can find a system that, even if one player doesn't score as many as Kane, the team as a whole score more goals.
I didn't watch Sunday's game, I was busy. I only watch the games if I'm not doing anything and I'm at home.

I've come to acceptance with Kane, I was surprised he went to Germany, but nobody begrudges him for it. Could easily win three or four trophies in two-three years and come back to the Prem for another crack at the Premier League record anyway. And he probably wanted Spurs to get some decent money for him rather than disappearing on a free. I don't think we'll sign any great striker this late in the day. Yes they'll be first choice but no European football, and we're still not paying the biggest wages out there, so the very top strikers won't be interested. I do think Son will be better this season, apparently he was carrying an injury for most of last season which has now been operated on and fixed - plus he's the skipper so extra incentive to lead the line. If Richarlison is starting striker every week then surely he will score a few goals, but he's never been prolific anyway. Can't see him getting more than 12.
 
He is a very good centre half. It has been on the cards for some time re him going as soon as City were in the hunt for Gvardiol. That transfer has been in the cards for over a month. Gobsmacked West Ham looked at Maguire and not Laporte.

I guess that once you have played at the very top and are used to challenging for the top honours, the decision is different. I know that in any case we are talking obscene amounts of money but if you were at that level, I just cannot see the draw of being at a lower club. If one of the top European clubs were in the running then that may be different but, if not, I can see the attraction of taking the massive pay cheque if the only other offers are from clubs that are not at the top table.

Maguire is different in that he needs to re-build his career and still sees an international future as well as perhaps another move later on to a top table club (whether that it realistic or not is another matter)
 
If Richarlison is starting striker every week then surely he will score a few goals, but he's never been prolific anyway. Can't see him getting more than 12.
I've said it loads of times, he is not good playing as a central striker. He will not score many goals from there. He is probably best in Son's position but that isn't going to happen. He really is not the answer for you in that role.
 
Maguire is different in that he needs to re-build his career and still sees an international future as well as perhaps another move later on to a top table club (whether that it realistic or not is another matter)
The sad fact is, he probably feels like he's more likely to stay in the England team via Utd's bench than he is in West Ham's first team.
 
I've said it loads of times, he is not good playing as a central striker. He will not score many goals from there. He is probably best in Son's position but that isn't going to happen. He really is not the answer for you in that role.
He does it well enough for Brazil! But otherwise I agree with you.
 
He does it well enough for Brazil! But otherwise I agree with you.
He doesn't get roughed up as much at international level. He also has better attackers around him distracting the defenders, giving him support. I suspect there is also an element of fluidity about his role there that helps him

I've seen him do this role lots for Everton, I saw him live v Barcelona the other week and then for a chunk of your game v Brentford. He gets bullied too easily with his back to a defender, he looks disinterested. He needs to face a defender, he needs a bit of room to run with the ball or to make his runs. Playing out wide, ghosting in etc gives him the chance to do that. You absolutely will not get the best out of him going through the middle.
 
He doesn't get roughed up as much at international level. He also has better attackers around him distracting the defenders, giving him support. I suspect there is also an element of fluidity about his role there that helps him

I've seen him do this role lots for Everton, I saw him live v Barcelona the other week and then for a chunk of your game v Brentford. He gets bullied too easily with his back to a defender, he looks disinterested. He needs to face a defender, he needs a bit of room to run with the ball or to make his runs. Playing out wide, ghosting in etc gives him the chance to do that. You absolutely will not get the best out of him going through the middle.
Also, at international level, how often do Brazil play against teams that are worse than them, sometimes a fair bit worse than them? They probably get a lot of time on the ball, and gives him better chances to shine.

Spurs are a good team generally, but I suspect every PL team will give Spurs a competitive game, and so he is bound to get less time on the ball, and less space, that he often would get for Brazil.

Also, he was under more pressure at Spurs just to get in the team, and maybe that was demoralising. He was never getting ahead of Kane. Perhaps he might be a bit more enthusiastic this season?
 
Also, he was under more pressure at Spurs just to get in the team, and maybe that was demoralising. He was never getting ahead of Kane. Perhaps he might be a bit more enthusiastic this season?
Have you seen him play? I'm not sure he does enthusiastic :ROFLMAO: . Considering he plays football professionally, earns a fortune, lives a privileged life, he really could cheer up a bit, couldn't he?
 
We've been linked to a young striker named Gift Orban who's on a goal a game in Belgium. That's the sort of player we're restricted to really - bit of a gamble. Sort of player you'd expect Brighton to sign.

Have seen half-arsed links to Lukaku but nothing concrete. I think he would be a decent shout. He'd certainly score more than Richarlison with our current Ange-ball style.
 
We've been linked to a young striker named Gift Orban who's on a goal a game in Belgium. That's the sort of player we're restricted to really - bit of a gamble. Sort of player you'd expect Brighton to sign.
I think we would all love to buy players that Brighton would sign. Do it now, save you £60-110m in the process :LOL:
 
Yeah exactly. Unlike the Chelseas and Liverpools of this world we can't afford to let Brighton sign them first and chuck 100 mil over in two years time.
We desperately need a striker, just for the last 2 years :rolleyes: , and last week we bought a 19yr old from Sporting Lisbon. He could be another Moises Keane, remember him, or he could solve our problems. It's gamble territory, we are not able to buy dead certs right now. You just have to hope that your scouts have done their homework properly.
 
Watching England v Aus WC semi and the ref did something I've never seen in Men's football, but wish I would. Ref blew to send the throw in back to where it should have been taken and not the 15 yards further up the field that the player had crept while deciding who to send the ball to. Sure, it's pretty harmless and both,all sides do it, so no nett advantage, but it irks me that they insist on precision on free kicks even when play is static, yet allow so much cheating leeway with throw-ins.
 
Watching England v Aus WC semi and the ref did something I've never seen in Men's football, but wish I would. Ref blew to send the throw in back to where it should have been taken and not the 15 yards further up the field that the player had crept while deciding who to send the ball to. Sure, it's pretty harmless and both,all sides do it, so no nett advantage, but it irks me that they insist on precision on free kicks even when play is static, yet allow so much cheating leeway with throw-ins.
I've seen refs do that hundreds of times in the mens game. Both before and after the player actually throws the ball.

Great goal by England btw
 
Watching England v Aus WC semi and the ref did something I've never seen in Men's football, but wish I would. Ref blew to send the throw in back to where it should have been taken and not the 15 yards further up the field that the player had crept while deciding who to send the ball to. Sure, it's pretty harmless and both,all sides do it, so no nett advantage, but it irks me that they insist on precision on free kicks even when play is static, yet allow so much cheating leeway with throw-ins.
…especially as you can’t be offside from a throw (well unless that’s changed)…the stolen yards can make a difference and refs need to be consistent about it no matter where on the pitch you are.
 
Top