The Wish List and General Discussion Thread (48 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zacheryah

Senior Member
Aug 29, 2010
42,251
None of those players were known for their defensive work. Since Pirlo had Gattuso next to him, he didn't need to do much defensively either, so he roamed around and came back to defend when under pressure. Kaka basically had a free role. None of those players were purchased because some fan was worried about the defense.

Even good technical wingers can come back to defend. Did you watch Hazard yesterday? He stole the ball from your left-winger Goucruff at least twice, and completely out-played him.

There's nothing to say you can't teach a good player to come back and defend when needed. Your deluded, polarized view of what a winger should be is clearly 20th century.
They still did their work, mostly putting pressure on the opponent midfield, offcourse supported by tenacious gattuso. i kinda hoped melo would become a new gattuso, but seems he isnt.

Not all players can be taught to track back, for a long time, it has been a serious issue with del piero and totti when they were considered "midfielders". only 1 could be fielded at once, cause they didnt track back. hated it back then, kinda see the sense of it now.

hazard outplaying gourcuff is something i relish, beeing belgian. i'm happy he's doing well, and seems to progress quite nice. He is setting the example of what giovinco should have done.
If he really is gonna put this defensive work, even against the small teams, for years to come, he can definatly come solve our leftwing problem
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

C4ISR

Senior Member
Dec 18, 2005
2,362
50m net spend? Wouldn't be too bad. 2 WC players with that sum. That's supposing the loan fees for players we might keep is accounted for separately...
It's not imo, and here is why.

http://www.juventus.com/site/filesi...sitive/comunicato_28022011_semestrale_eng.pdf

This was just released today. On page 4 it states this in regards to our options on our loaned players:

"...which could, if exercised, entail an overall investment of €58.3m in the 2011/2012 financial year".

Another 50m on top of that would mean €108.3m invested this summer for the 2011/2012 season, which is a pipe dream, especially considering our financial situation for this season (which is gloomy, if you read the rest of the report).

Imo, those options were placed because we intended to spend that amount in the future, meaning this summer's transfer budget is 58.3m. If the options on Quag, Aquilani and Matri are used, it will cost us €42m, meaning we have €16.3m plus sales to spend this summer.

However, it is also possible this strategy of deferring player purchases was dependent on us reaching CL football for the season those expensive loan options were exercised. In other words, we would only spend the money needed to sign them if we could count on the extra CL revenue. I refuse to accept this though as it would truly mean we are fucked.
 

Albo

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2009
11,463
Sanchez for sure is worth 20-25 mln E , why not to spend 25 mln E on him .

Lets use Giovinco,Ekdal on his deal and offer some money , with rest of money lets spend on Pastore .

Pastore+Sanchez would be extremly good !
 

Badass J Elkann

It's time to go!!
Feb 12, 2006
68,899
This thread is so funny. You Juve fans are so deluded, thinking you can get so many high class players, to a club which won't play CL and doesn't have a lot of money. Chester is the only person here, that has realised facts.

Well, keep dreamin'!
i heard your mum was whoring herself to help raise funds, well chop chop, we got players to buy!
 

Suns

Release clause?
May 22, 2009
22,084
This thread is so funny. You Juve fans are so deluded, thinking you can get so many high class players, to a club which won't play CL and doesn't have a lot of money. Chester is the only person here, that has realised facts.

Well, keep dreamin'!
I like this post actually, sometimes we really do need a reality check.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 48)