Islam Slimani to Fenerbahce (Loan)

[norwichfox]

Don't knock his loan....he's keeping the fan boys away from FT.....

[sylofox]

6 minutes ago, norwichfox said:

Don't knock his loan....he's keeping the fan boys away from FT.....

Dont bet on it talk is Fenerbache are to cancel the loan in January. Seems they are already looking for his replacement. 

[turtmcfly]

13 minutes ago, sylofox said:

Dont bet on it talk is Fenerbache are to cancel the loan in January. Seems they are already looking for his replacement. 

At the time he left, the fanboys had a fairly reasonable argument about limited game time/goals per minute. That'll get short shrift if he comes back now.

 

It looks like 'terminal decline' from this point, so it's lucky he has a career as a mid-ranking Bond villain to fall back on.

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, Marshall Cockney Fox said:

He had ability, he showed that in flashes and in the World Cup. But his attitude stinks I think. I get the feeling he isn't prepared to tuff it out and bust a gut to make things work in his favour. He was a big fish in Lisbon, but has been poor ever since.

He's another one of them that has it in him, but just can't get any consistency. At times I thought he looked really good, some great link up, great movement in the box and he made things happen. Then in other games he'd go to control a ball and it would just ricochet off him about 20 ft away or he'd miss virtually a tap in. Another Nacho, Iborra, Silva etc... seemingly incapable of stringing together of a run of 7/10 performances.

Edited 27 November 2018 by Babylon

[Leeds Fox]

I’d imagine we’re paying a chunk of his wages. I think with our lack of goals at the minute he might be worth having as a different option. 

[FoxNotFox]

Slimani didn't really fit before we loaned him out. He most definitely doesn't fit now.

 

He might have been a 'Plan B' option (along with Ulloa) once-upon-a-time but that 'Plan B' would not see the light of day in the Puel era. Even chasing the game with 10 men against BHA, we didn't significantly change nor abandon tactics or formation, we simply upped tempo and work rate. Other managers might have started pumping balls up/in but not Puel. He stuck with it. In short, there's just no place for Slimani in our current squad.

 

Tbh, once I'd seen Slimani play for us, I couldn't quite work out why we'd spent that much on him. Was he competition for Ulloa in the 'Plan B' option? It just didn't make sense to me.  

[Babylon]

33 minutes ago, FoxNotFox said:

Slimani didn't really fit before we loaned him out. He most definitely doesn't fit now.

 

He might have been a 'Plan B' option (along with Ulloa) once-upon-a-time but that 'Plan B' would not see the light of day in the Puel era. Even chasing the game with 10 men against BHA, we didn't significantly change nor abandon tactics or formation, we simply upped tempo and work rate. Other managers might have started pumping balls up/in but not Puel. He stuck with it. In short, there's just no place for Slimani in our current squad.

 

Tbh, once I'd seen Slimani play for us, I couldn't quite work out why we'd spent that much on him. Was he competition for Ulloa in the 'Plan B' option? It just didn't make sense to me.  

We seem to play more crosses into the box now then we ever did. That might not be true statistically, but it feels like it. So he'd probably be better suited now than to a counter attacking team.

[lcfc sheff]

Reminds me somewhat of Mitrovic at Newcastle, has some clear ability he’s shown at times but equally seems to play crap for us and his current loan team. 

 

Reckon he’d do well in the championship for a team playing 442 

[FoxNotFox]

2 minutes ago, Babylon said:

That might not be true statistically, but it feels like it.

You may be right! I seem to recall someone posting a stat that suggested that, not that I really pay attention to stats.

 

Oddly though, my perception is different. I seem to recall that Fuchs and Albrighton used to whip those diagonal balls in quite regularly. It's weird how people remember things differently innit?

[Babylon]

5 minutes ago, FoxNotFox said:

You may be right! I seem to recall someone posting a stat that suggested that, not that I really pay attention to stats.

 

Oddly though, my perception is different. I seem to recall that Fuchs and Albrighton used to whip those diagonal balls in quite regularly. It's weird how people remember things differently innit?

Just found them... only Everton have crossed more than us. A tallish striker who is good with their feet would suit us down to the ground. Title winning season we were 12th in the list. First season up, we were 3rd in the list. So there was definitely a shift away from wide play under Ranieri.

 

Edited 27 November 2018 by Babylon

[lgfualol]

26 minutes ago, Babylon said:

We seem to play more crosses into the box now then we ever did. That might not be true statistically, but it feels like it. So he'd probably be better suited now than to a counter attacking team.

Slim would definitely be useful at home games. How many times do we loft in a cross that nobody can reach.. it is mad, does nobody at the club see it? Or are our players just too thick to drill it low when our strikers are small? 

 

We are just a weird club. Goes back years to when we used to bring on a great crosser for a target man, etc. 

[Babylon]

6 minutes ago, lgfualol said:

Slim would definitely be useful at home games. How many times do we loft in a cross that nobody can reach.. it is mad, does nobody at the club see it? Or are our players just too thick to drill it low when our strikers are small? 

 

We are just a weird club. Goes back years to when we used to bring on a great crosser for a target man, etc. 

We have been linked with that 6ft 3" fella from Nice... but then if Puel wanted a big man, why the hell did he get rid of two and keep Okazaki.

[HighPeakFox]

12 minutes ago, Babylon said:

We have been linked with that 6ft 3" fella from Nice... but then if Puel wanted a big man, why the hell did he get rid of two and keep Okazaki.

In the case of Slimani, I suspect he was highly disruptive. 

[hackneyfox]

3 hours ago, Babylon said:

We have been linked with that 6ft 3" fella from Nice... but then if Puel wanted a big man, why the hell did he get rid of two and keep Okazaki.

Because one was past his sell by date and the other had fallen out with some of his teammates?

[Babylon]

Just now, hackneyfox said:

Because one was past his sell by date and the other had fallen out with some of his teammates?

I think the first thing counts for Okazaki also, so if you think you need a big man it makes sense to keep that one surely? Also, is there actually any substance to this Slimani stuff?

[UpTheLeagueFox]

From what I've been told, it was Ranieri specifically who pushed the boat out for Slimani.

Some of the recruitment people didn't want to pay anyway near what we did.

Ranieri had just won the league, he had a strong hand.

Slimani and Vardy just didn't work.

Vardy, rather than a slow-ish big man, is to me the best option in a 4-2-3-1.

We spent over £50m on Slimani and Nacho Man.

The world's gone mad.

[hackneyfox]

19 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I think the first thing counts for Okazaki also, so if you think you need a big man it makes sense to keep that one surely? Also, is there actually any substance to this Slimani stuff?

Certainly agree about Okazaki, poor for the latter half of last season as well.

I'd have let both big men go and if rumours of salary FFP are true I'd have let Slimani, Okazaki and King go on frees (assuming there were no takers with a fee) and bought in a big man.

May have had to pay them off due to high salaries but worth taking the hit imo.

Edited 27 November 2018 by hackneyfox

[volpeazzurro]

3 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

From what I've been told, it was Ranieri specifically who pushed the boat out for Slimani.

Some of the recruitment people didn't want to pay anyway near what we did.

Ranieri had just won the league, he had a strong hand.

Slimani and Vardy just didn't work.

Vardy, rather than a slow-ish big man, is to me the best option in a 4-2-3-1.

We spent over £50m on Slimani and Nacho Man.

The world's gone mad.

We were looking at Slimani before Ranieri even came here. 

[Babylon]

2 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

We were looking at Slimani before Ranieri even came here. 

Rumours started when we first got promoted, makes sense as we went for a big man in Ulloa. I think the point UTLF is making, is that whilst we scouted him before it was Ranieri who wanted him at any price. Rather than what we thought he was worth.

 

There must have been a battle behind the scenes with him and Walsh about it. Because whilst Walsh was here we let the buy out clause expire, then once he'd gone we went and spent another £7m on the bloke, above what we could have got him for.

 

Can't imagine Ranieri knew much about him though TBH, probably more a case of "we need a striker, get me one whatever the cost" and he was all we could get on the list.

Edited 27 November 2018 by Babylon

[UpTheLeagueFox]

4 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

We were looking at Slimani before Ranieri even came here. 

Quite possibly

 

1 minute ago, Babylon said:

 I think the point UTLF is making, is that whilst we scouted him before it was Ranieri who wanted him at any price. Rather than what we thought he was worth.

Correct

[That_Dude]

3 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

From what I've been told, it was Ranieri specifically who pushed the boat out for Slimani.

Some of the recruitment people didn't want to pay anyway near what we did.

Ranieri had just won the league, he had a strong hand.

Slimani and Vardy just didn't work.

Vardy, rather than a slow-ish big man, is to me the best option in a 4-2-3-1.

We spent over £50m on Slimani and Nacho Man.

The world's gone mad.

See I'm fairly certain that a target man or a false 9 would fit better than any striker with Vardy's strengths. Not in any way a dig at Vardy, but as far as I know we're whipping quite a number of crosses in the box, we're not primarily relying on fast paced counter-attacks. Opponent sits quite deep in our home games making things even more difficult for Vardy.

 

With Maddison failing to have a significant impact on the game and linking with the striker (also because both of the DMs aren't able to bring the ball forward) we more than often resort to play on the wings through either Chilwell, Albrighton, Ricardo or Ghezzal/Gray. And since none of them really has Mahrez's vision or ability to skin the FB, they often just whip it in the box.

 

[Simoken]

5 hours ago, Leeds Fox said:

I’d imagine we’re paying a chunk of his wages. I think with our lack of goals at the minute he might be worth having as a different option. 

I hope this was a joke..

[FoxNotFox]

I think Ricardo has shown himself to be pretty adept at skinning his man. He has pace and a few tricks too.

[Rileigh84]

Heard the other day Slimani's got the worst shots to goals conversion rate of any striker in the turkish league at the moment... 

[Crispin LA]

Reminds me of when Stan Collymore was at LFC, started so promising but then went all wrong! 

Slimani scored great goals for us, he strong and has physical strength, but not for 90 minutes, maybe we can use him as a sub. 

Leicester payed nearly 30m for a player approaching 30, who made that decision considering no big clubs were interested in signing him