2020/21 Richarlison

[BigDuncTributeBand]

He's really not very good on the wing though. That's been a big part of the problem this year for me, he's been stuck out wide and playing deep because of the set up, and he just doesn't have enough to his game to have an impact there. He's not a gifted footballer really, he's very much in the Tim Cahill mould - works hard, good in the air, good finisher, good movement but not a great dribbler or passer etc - and the deeper he is the less chance he gets to utilise the attributes he's got. I'd say his best position is probably wide in a front 3, and if that's not a system we're going to use then frankly it's not really worth keeping hold of him. And I say that as a big fan of his.

Totally. A lot depends on how Carlo is planning on setting up next season. If it’s 3 upfront then signing a good right winger could give us a tasty front three. Agree his best position seems wide left in a front three.

He’s been wasted playing as a left midfielder, often deep and doing the majority of his work in a defensive shape. We can’t play him there again, it’s a waste.

Carlo’s mentioned he wants to sign a winger so might be he is planning going 433 again next season. If not, you do wonder how we’ll get the best out of Richarlison.

 

[everton1953]

Not on my long long list of players it is essential to get rid of asap. That list is big enough without adding one of our better players to it. Start at the bottom and work upwards. Maybe Rich's turn for the chop will in in 12 months time when we are battling for top spot.

 

[Lanolin]

Team targets, and he barely breaks double figures in goals.

Doubt we have agreed to give them money for a 12th / 10th place finishes.

I obviously don't know the terms of the deal but i'd be surprised if Watford agreed to clauses that would only see them get money if a team with no recent history of finishing above 7th won the CL or if a player who was uncapped at the time went on to win the ballon d'or. Likelihood is that some of the clauses were related to how many games he played, how many goals he scored etc and he's probably hit some of them already.

I'm a big fan of him but realistically i'm not sure we'd get much more than £45m for him now. That could obviously go up again if he does well next year, but at this moment i'd see £50m as pretty much the most anyone would be likely to pay.

 

[Toffe3m4n]

I think he is technically quite poor. Agree he is quite good at heading. Too many horrible mis-controls, poor passes, wrong options for me. Maybe some competition for his place would help. He is not a decent finisher - he is an erratic finisher at best. Not my type of player ie he has the pain threshold of a toddler, he is on the ground when blown upon and his countenance is dreadful.

He never used to be before this season though, which is the really weird thing. He'd always been strong and confident on the ball was wasn't afraid to run with it and was actually capable of taking a player on. That all seems to have inexplicably gone out the window.

 

[Toff33Blues99]

He is no central striker. Why Carlo persisted with this all 2nd half of the season contributed to our downfall. He is most effective coming in from a wide position

 

[Pabbers]

I obviously don't know the terms of the deal but i'd be surprised if Watford agreed to clauses that would only see them get money if a team with no recent history of finishing above 7th won the CL or if a player who was uncapped at the time went on to win the ballon d'or. Likelihood is that some of the clauses were related to how many games he played, how many goals he scored etc and he's probably hit some of them already.

I'm a big fan of him but realistically i'm not sure we'd get much more than £45m for him now. That could obviously go up again if he does well next year, but at this moment i'd see £50m as pretty much the most anyone would be likely to pay.

See what you are saying mate, but ive seen many of our transfer deals linked with Top 4 finishing, and/or winning Cups, and like Lukaku at United goal-scoring targets.

Im sure we have paid some of them, maybe apperance triggers and International caps like you say.

Even £35 million at the time for him was a lot of money, he had scored 5 goals that season.

Transfermarkt is a very good site for valuations imo, and currently has him at £54 million. When we signed him, his value on that site was £22.5 million.

His age / standing in the National team is quite big, and im not sure his value goes down too much on the back of 1 average season.

 

[Jonte]

Very much an average player and I saw nothing at Fulham or Watford or wherever it was we got him from, to convince me that he was the missing link. Whilst I can tolerate this to a point, as with the best coaching ALL players can be improved, I’m sick to the back teeth of the Man-child antics (to coin a modern phrase) and the unsavoury incident with Holgate at the weekend was the camel that, for me, broke the proverbial camel’s back. I never want to see him in Royal Blue again.

 

[Lanolin]

See what you are saying mate, but ive seen many of our transfer deals linked with Top 4 finishing, and/or winning Cups, and like Lukaku at United goal-scoring targets.

Im sure we have paid some of them, maybe apperance triggers and International caps like you say.

Even £35 million at the time for him was a lot of money, he had scored 5 goals that season.

Transfermarkt is a very good site for valuations imo, and currently has him at £54 million. When we signed him, his value on that site was £22.5 million.

His age / standing in the National team is quite big, and im not sure his value goes down too much on the back of 1 average season.

Usually clauses like that are just a way of both teams minimising the chances of them losing out. So Watford say he's great we want £45m and we say no chance, he's only scored 5 PL goals he might be a massive flop, so they structure a deal where we don't pay if he's a flop but they get their money if he isn't. For that reason i'd say the bulk of them are more likely to relate to his individual performance than ours as a club. We may have to pay something if we win a cup or whatever but I can't see it being a large part of the fee. I know in Lukaku's deal they had to pay us £5m if they gave him a new contract, I think that type of thing is more likely to be in Richarlison's deal too.

It's not so much him just having an average season. I've said before, technically he's not really the type of play you see one of the really big clubs going for as a major signing, and he's now 24 so we're moving away from the potential stage and into the territory where what you buy is what you get. He's a really good player, and it's not that I think he isn't good enough to be playing for a top side, more just that if a side like Barcelona - who have the pull to attract pretty much anyone - has £60m+ to spend i'm not sure it's Richarlison they're choosing to spend it on.

 

[Toffe3m4n]

Very much an average player and I saw nothing at Fulham or Watford or wherever it was we got him from, to convince me that he was the missing link. Whilst I can tolerate this to a point, as with the best coaching ALL players can be improved, I’m sick to the back teeth of the Man-child antics (to coin a modern phrase) and the unsavoury incident with Holgate at the weekend was the camel that, for me, broke the proverbial camel’s back. I never want to see him in Royal Blue again.

That's a proper 'Everton da' post if I've seen one that lol

 

[Pabbers]

Usually clauses like that are just a way of both teams minimising the chances of them losing out. So Watford say he's great we want £45m and we say no chance, he's only scored 5 PL goals he might be a massive flop, so they structure a deal where we don't pay if he's a flop but they get their money if he isn't. For that reason i'd say the bulk of them are more likely to relate to his individual performance than ours as a club. We may have to pay something if we win a cup or whatever but I can't see it being a large part of the fee. I know in Lukaku's deal they had to pay us £5m if they gave him a new contract, I think that type of thing is more likely to be in Richarlison's deal too.

It's not so much him just having an average season. I've said before, technically he's not really the type of play you see one of the really big clubs going for as a major signing, and he's now 24 so we're moving away from the potential stage and into the territory where what you buy is what you get. He's a really good player, and it's not that I think he isn't good enough to be playing for a top side, more just that if a side like Barcelona - who have the pull to attract pretty much anyone - has £60m+ to spend i'm not sure it's Richarlison they're choosing to spend it on.

He looks a Atletico player to me, Simone would love him.

I really like him, and we need snides in the time, a player other teams and fans hate...and they all hate him.....small problem is that many of our own fans seem to hate him too.

BTW, just looking around and the fee looks to be £35 millrising to £40 mill - Transfermarkt.

 

[MACCA75]

Wouldn’t lose any sleep if he left at all, but no top team will be looking at him after that dismal season.

 

[bicycleheader]

Very much an average player and I saw nothing at Fulham or Watford or wherever it was we got him from, to convince me that he was the missing link. Whilst I can tolerate this to a point, as with the best coaching ALL players can be improved, I’m sick to the back teeth of the Man-child antics (to coin a modern phrase) and the unsavoury incident with Holgate at the weekend was the camel that, for me, broke the proverbial camel’s back. I never want to see him in Royal Blue again.

lol

 

[Papa Shango]

Not his best season but we would be absolute imbeciles to sell him at this point as he would be at his lowest possible worth.

 

[Bluestar]

He never used to be before this season though, which is the really weird thing. He'd always been strong and confident on the ball was wasn't afraid to run with it and was actually capable of taking a player on. That all seems to have inexplicably gone out the window.

We never attack with pace and that is where he is best. It is all slow laboured build up with no space to run into.

 

[Evri]

I think he is technically quite poor. Agree he is quite good at heading. Too many horrible mis-controls, poor passes, wrong options for me. Maybe some competition for his place would help. He is not a decent finisher - he is an erratic finisher at best. Not my type of player ie he has the pain threshold of a toddler, he is on the ground when blown upon and his countenance is dreadful.

Everything that you described in your post I would say about DCL , I think both of them are overrated and overpaid but at the moment good enough for this team, in year or two if we progress both lads will have to be replace