Ronald Koeman discussion

[nsno-chris]

I'm still not seeing how he gets the blame for transfers - he doesn't even have the final say over who we sell or sign.

As happened with Belfodil, he can make clear he doesn't want a particular player and that may influence whether we do end up signing someone or not

But as for him getting the blame about selling Lukaku or not signing a striker? Nah, not seeing it at all.

EDIT - Quick Google, but Raiola makes reference to the "promise" here...

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/foot...Mino-Raiola-latest-gossip-Chelsea-Real-Madrid

And Raiola is the biggest snake of them all, the power he has in the football world is ridiculous. He played the club and the fans by giving his "99.9% signed" claim, knowing full well that he was in the strongest position whichever way it went. I wouldn't overlook his influence in forcing our hand to sell his pet reptile.

 

[R934]

I'm still not seeing how he gets the blame for transfers - he doesn't even have the final say over who we sell or sign.

As happened with Belfodil, he can make clear he doesn't want a particular player and that may influence whether we do end up signing someone or not

But as for him getting the blame about selling Lukaku or not signing a striker? Nah, not seeing it at all.

So we sold Lukaku over his head?

May be making things up here but I'm sure Moshiri said in an early interview:
If the manager whats a player we'll sign/keep him.

Obviously my one sentence summary isn't much help to anyone so I'll have a nose for a link. End of the day, Koeman is clearly part of signing/selling players however which way you mask it up.

How can he be blamed, simple really, don't okay the sale of your only senior striker without a replacement coming in first.

 

[BlueToff]

So we're just going to brush aside the fact Koeman is part of the process - signing, selling, and identifying players.

Officially he may not be the figurehead of this new DOF system, but he's quite clearly got influence in what happens.
With that in mind, why did he okay the sale of Lukaku without a replacement coming in first? Yes it's easy to be Mr Hindsight, but that failing lies with the manager - unless were going down the route the board have sold over the managers head?

You can also throw the fact Lukaku wanted out, he's wanted out for a good few years it doesn't stop him performing. Nor should we overlook it being a World Cup year, so if he was 'forced' to stay he'd have to perform regardless.

I also won't buy the excuse that Giroud was are main man and we were confident of signing him. Get the player through the door first, then okay the sale of your only centre forward.

He had 2 years on his contract, the ball was well an truely in our court.

No we aren't. That wasn't my point. But the manager asked publicly for certain players and in the main was backed, which is great, but in two key areas right at the end of the window (after months of saying we wanted these players) the moves didn't come to fruition. We knew Rom was going, and we should have replaced him with another player to share the load.

And we had to get the Lukaku deal done early. It was best for all parties. We got a huge fee, Rom got his move and we didn't have an entire summer of more speculation than was required. He was never ever going to stay. Everybody knew that.

 

[BlueToff]

So we sold Lukaku over his head?

May be making things up here but I'm sure Moshiri said in an early interview:
If the manager whats a player we'll sign/keep him.

Obviously my one sentence summary isn't much help to anyone so I'll have a nose for a link. End of the day, Koeman is clearly part of signing/selling players however which way you mask it up.

How can he be blamed, simple really, don't okay the sale of your only senior striker without a replacement coming in first.

He said we'll do our best.

Evidently he wanted a striker and was promised a striker. That didn't happen. It undermined what had been an excellent window.

 

[toffeeblue9]

And Raiola is the biggest snake of them all, the power he has in the football world is ridiculous. He played the club and the fans by giving his "99.9% signed" claim, knowing full well that he was in the strongest position whichever way it went. I wouldn't overlook his influence in forcing our hand to sell his pet reptile.

I can't remember who it was (probably Raiola) but even in the midst of the contract stuff, he did say that it didn't mean Lukaku wouldn't move in the summer

 

[R934]

He said we'll do our best.

Evidently he wanted a striker and was promised a striker. That didn't happen. It undermined what had been an excellent window.

https://talksport.com/football/farh...w-stadium-star-manager-ronald-koeman-and-more

Can find a more recent interview but this is clearly relevant.

Edit: I was paraphrasing an interview into a sentence, I'd think it obvious we couldn't sign every player Koeman wanted, but the point I'm making he is part of the process, and has final sale over player sales/signings as per link above.

 

[chicoazul]

Oh well at least he got a few months of goodwill from our fans after moving up the team four places.

Who's next?

 

[nsno-chris]

I can't remember who it was (probably Raiola) but even in the midst of the contract stuff, he did say that it didn't mean Lukaku wouldn't move in the summer

It was Raiola, think it was during one of his TalkSport phone love-in. He had us bent over a barrel; sell him now and chance your luck, or accept the clause and sell him as soon as the contract is signed.

He knew by telling the world it was 99.9% done that the fans would immediately question the club and move the focus from those 2 rats.

 

[Saint Domingo]

Oh well at least he got a few months of goodwill from our fans after moving up the team four places.

Who's next?

Dat De Boer from Inter lad...oh wait....

 

[toffeeblue9]

So we sold Lukaku over his head?

May be making things up here but I'm sure Moshiri said in an early interview:
If the manager whats a player we'll sign/keep him.

Obviously my one sentence summary isn't much help to anyone so I'll have a nose for a link. End of the day, Koeman is clearly part of signing/selling players however which way you mask it up.

How can he be blamed, simple really, don't okay the sale of your only senior striker without a replacement coming in first.

I think that's v simplistic

He wanted another striker, was almost certainly assured we would sign one, yet we didn't

We may even have needed the Lukaku sale before we signed the incoming striker for cash flow purposes, I don't know

It isn't Koeman's role to okay the order in which we sign/sell players in a window. His role is to tell Walsh what sort of player he wants, sign off on the targets presented to him, talk to the targets if necessary and agree which players are surplus to requirements

 

[blue61]

Oh well at least he got a few months of goodwill from our fans after moving up the team four places.

Who's next?

After our next abject league performance at Old Trafford, including the inevitable Lukaku brace and a Rooney red card, Koeman will be binned to give Saint David a good run of games to claim his rightful position at the helm.

 

[R934]

No we aren't. That wasn't my point. But the manager asked publicly for certain players and in the main was backed, which is great, but in two key areas right at the end of the window (after months of saying we wanted these players) the moves didn't come to fruition. We knew Rom was going, and we should have replaced him with another player to share the load.

And we had to get the Lukaku deal done early. It was best for all parties. We got a huge fee, Rom got his move and we didn't have an entire summer of more speculation than was required. He was never ever going to stay. Everybody knew that.

Liverpool: Coutinho
Arsenal: Sanchez
Southampton: VVD

Sell if a replacement is through the door.
We bolted at the first flury of activity from United. He was our player and under contract for 2 years not one - but that still didn't stop Arsenal.

I've little concern for him being sold (I lie I'd have kept him even if we'd signed another striker) but we really should have got a replacement in first.

It was shortsighted and has left us with a massively disjointed team.

 

[chicoazul]

After our next abject league performance at Old Trafford, including the inevitable Lukaku brace and a Rooney red card, Koeman will be binned to give Saint David a good run of games to claim his rightful position at the helm.

I reckon Lukaku 3 and King 2 coming right up. Can't see us winning away in Italy and only a spawns win v Sunderland.

Bournemouth could mark a new Koeman high tide of fume.

 

[R934]

I think that's v simplistic

He wanted another striker, was almost certainly assured we would sign one, yet we didn't

We may even have needed the Lukaku sale before we signed the incoming striker for cash flow purposes, I don't know

It isn't Koeman's role to okay the order in which we sign/sell players in a window. His role is to tell Walsh what sort of player he wants, sign off on the targets presented to him, talk to the targets if necessary and agree which players are surplus to requirements

May be very simplistic in your opinion but why does it have to be complicated.

We've signed x,y,z okay so a,b,c are surplus to requirement either sell or use as squad rotation.

We've got an abundance of squad players that we don't need now, we'll bring through U23 players thus allowing the sale of them.

We haven't got a striker yet, thus we'll not allow the sale of Lukaku until we have.

As you say we may have needed to sell Lukaku for reasons unknown to me and you, but all I've said is Koeman shouldn't be absolved of blame which is seemingly happening.

 

[orly]

I reckon Lukaku 3 and King 2 coming right up. Can't see us winning away in Italy and only a spawns win v Sunderland.

Bournemouth could mark a new Koeman high tide of fume.

Segueing wonderfully into our approach for Howe to become new boss

Yes.