Adrien Silva

[HighPeakFox]

4 minutes ago, UHDrive said:

Slim was a flop from day one.

I'd love to agree, but a league debut where he scored twice contradicts this.

[UHDrive]

4 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

I'd love to agree, but a league debut where he scored twice contradicts this.

Aside from that.... if thats your opinion then Diabate is the dogs bollocks 

[HighPeakFox]

2 minutes ago, UHDrive said:

Aside from that.... if thats your opinion then Diabate is the dogs bollocks 

No - I was merely pointing out that what you said was inaccurate in a literal sense.

[TeamRocket]

16 hours ago, NasPb said:

would anyone consider keeping him if he is willing to accept a bench role? certainly better than james and all the options in that spot, like gotze, lallana etc.

If we play him after 14 seconds. I don't see why not

[UHDrive]

5 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

No - I was merely pointing out that what you said was inaccurate in a literal sense.

As was I. You could of course, in a littoral sense, apply your meaning to Musa against Barca. Literally speaking....

[HighPeakFox]

Just now, UHDrive said:

As was I. You could of course, in a littoral sense, apply your meaning to Musa against Barca. Literally speaking....

Have a nice day.

[z-layrex]

6 hours ago, Angus Scott said:

Well Bruno Fernandes didn't seem to have too many problems

Exactly! Just our luck. We used it all up winning the league.

[NasPb]

1 hour ago, TeamRocket said:

If we play him after 14 seconds. I don't see why not

its funny because hes only played 14 times with us  

[whoareyaaa]

He can't make us any worse than we have looked for most of this year, get him, slimani and deardie back we're paying there wages so may as well make use of them, cause by the looks of it we are signing no one this window

[MPH]

7 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

I'd love to agree, but a league debut where he scored twice contradicts this.

 

7 hours ago, UHDrive said:

Aside from that.... if thats your opinion then Diabate is the dogs bollocks 

 

2 hours ago, UHDrive said:

As was I. You could of course, in a littoral sense, apply your meaning to Musa against Barca. Literally speaking....

 

 

You’re  not making sense. he’s simply saying he was Not a flop from day 1. He’s not saying he’s an amazing player.

[UHDrive]

4 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

 

 

You’re  not making sense. he’s simply saying he was Not a flop from day 1. He’s not saying he’s an amazing player.

Why on earth are you responding to this? Does your friends hand need holding?

[HighPeakFox]

7 minutes ago, MPH said:

You’re not making sense. he’s simply saying he was Not a flop from day 1. He’s not saying he’s an amazing player.

Thank you for trying - I decided (and you can see why above) that it isn't worth taking it any further.

[TeamRocket]

1 hour ago, NasPb said:

its funny because hes only played 14 times with us  

Maybe on his 15th game will see why we signed him

[DJ Barry Hammond]

20 hours ago, NasPb said:

would anyone consider keeping him if he is willing to accept a bench role? certainly better than james and all the options in that spot, like gotze, lallana etc.

The whole premise of this thread from your statement is very, very week. 

First of all, you highlight that the player would need to be willing to accept a reduced role of fringe player - now given his reported weekly wage, he might be willing to do that, but then again as a full international with 27 caps to his name, I expect he might value first team football more, especially with the Euro's scheduled to be happening at the end of this coming season.  

 

Secondly, will we as a club want to do what you suggest?

 

A significant outlay on someone that has struggled to make an impact at the club seems a waste and having him on the bench could be counterproductive to giving that spot to one of our younger players that can be developed into the kind of player that does fit what we want to do within our midfield? 

 

You then go to assert that he's "certainly better than James" to reinforce your argument but this seems irrelevant. James hasn't made any meaningful contribution to the club for over 2 years so you're not exactly setting a high bar there. 

 

You go on to suggest he's better than "all the [other] options in that spot."

 

Well within the first team rotation for typically three central midfield spots (plus two bench spots) we have Ndidi, Tielemens, Maddision, Praet, Mendy, Choudhury, the aforementioned James and arguably Amartey if he can return from injury. Then there's also Dewsbury-Hall and Tavares to name just two from the academy that could also potentially play a role in first team affairs going forward. 

 

So is he, on balance, better than these options at the club on a cost effective ratio? 

 

At the reported £80,000 a week, I would suggest not - especially given keeping that level of outlay on the wage bill for a bench player restricts what you can do in bringing in another player, be that an additional midfielder or reinforcements on the wing or at left back that we clearly need. 

 

This leads me onto your final point in respect of "gotze [sic], lallana [sic], etc"  as 'options' - presumably you mean they could be signings the club could make as an alternative to having Silva on the bench.  

 

Now assuming these are references to Mario Götze of Boruissa Dortmund and Adam Lallana who recently signed for Brighton, this addition only furthers the weakness of your argument.

 

We have absolutely no chance of signing Götze, especially if all we're going to do is stick him on the bench and Lallana reportedly signed a contract worth £100,000 a week so is again not an option and just goes to show your thoughts on this subject have no basis in any footballing reality. 

 

The final point I would make in demolishing your original post is that the entire history behind Silva and his signing for the club makes him returning to become a success much more difficult than it might have been. The fact he missed 6 months of football due to a 14 second delay set the pattern of an unhappy time at the club - and I imagine both parties will be relieved when Silva does finally move to another club and can have a fresh, less ominous start.  

 

Therefore in short;

 

NO!

 

No fan of the club should consider keeping Silva as a bench player as a positive option for the club going forward.

 

Now of course, you are welcome to your view and to express it on a forum as you wish - but when doing so and starting a thread, it might be advisable to give the matter a little more consideration, otherwise those that do and can articulate those thoughts can respond as I have done. 

 

Edited 30 August 2020 by DJ Barry Hammond

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

The whole premise of this thread from your statement is very, very week. 

First of all, you highlight that the player would need to be willing to accept a reduced role of fringe player - now given his reported weekly wage, he might be willing to do that, but then again as a full international with 27 caps to his name, I expect he might value first team football more, especially with the Euro's scheduled to be happening at the end of this coming season.  

 

Secondly, will we as a club want to do what you suggest?

 

A significant outlay on someone that has struggled to make an impact at the club seems a waste and having him on the bench could be counterproductive to giving that spot to one of our younger players that can be developed into the kind of player that does fit what we want to do within our midfield? 

 

You then go to assert that he's "certainly better than James" to reinforce your argument but this seems irrelevant. James hasn't made any meaningful contribution to the club for over 2 years so you're not exactly setting a high bar there. 

 

You go on to suggest he's better than "all the [other] options in that spot."

 

Well within the first team rotation for typically three central midfield spots (plus two bench spots) we have Ndidi, Tielemens, Maddision, Praet, Mendy, Choudhury, the aforementioned James and arguably Amartey if he can return from injury. Then there's also Dewsbury-Hall and Tavares to name just two from the academy that could also potentially play a role in first team affairs going forward. 

 

So is he, on balance, better than these options at the club on a cost effective ratio? 

 

At the reported £80,000 a week, I would suggest not - especially given keeping that level of outlay on the wage bill for a bench player restricts what you can do in bringing in another player, be that an additional midfielder or reinforcements on the wing or at left back that we clearly need. 

 

This leads me onto your final point in respect of "gotze [sic], lallana [sic], etc"  as 'options' - presumably you mean they could be signings the club could make as an alternative to having Silva on the bench.  

 

Now assuming these are references to Mario Götze of Boruissa Dortmund and Adam Lallana who recently signed for Brighton, this addition only furthers the weakness of your argument.

 

We have absolutely no chance of signing Götze, especially if all we're going to do is stick him on the bench and Lallana reportedly signed a contract worth £100,000 a week so is again not an option and just goes to show your thoughts on this subject have no basis in any footballing reality. 

 

The final point I would make in demolishing your original post is that the entire history behind Silva and his signing for the club makes him returning to become a success much more difficult than it might have been. The fact he missed 6 months of football due to a 14 second delay set the pattern of an unhappy time at the club - and I imagine both parties will be relieved when Silva does finally move to another club and can have a fresh, less ominous start.  

 

Therefore in short;

 

NO!

 

No fan of the club should consider keeping Silva as a bench player as a positive option for the club going forward.

 

Now of course, you are welcome to your view and to express it on a forum as you wish - but when doing so and starting a thread, it might be advisable to give the matter a little more consideration, otherwise those that do and can articulate those thoughts can respond as I have done. 

 

Everything ok at home mate?

[NasPb]

7 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

The whole premise of this thread from your statement is very, very week. 

First of all, you highlight that the player would need to be willing to accept a reduced role of fringe player - now given his reported weekly wage, he might be willing to do that, but then again as a full international with 27 caps to his name, I expect he might value first team football more, especially with the Euro's scheduled to be happening at the end of this coming season.  

 

Secondly, will we as a club want to do what you suggest?

 

A significant outlay on someone that has struggled to make an impact at the club seems a waste and having him on the bench could be counterproductive to giving that spot to one of our younger players that can be developed into the kind of player that does fit what we want to do within our midfield? 

 

You then go to assert that he's "certainly better than James" to reinforce your argument but this seems irrelevant. James hasn't made any meaningful contribution to the club for over 2 years so you're not exactly setting a high bar there. 

 

You go on to suggest he's better than "all the [other] options in that spot."

 

Well within the first team rotation for typically three central midfield spots (plus two bench spots) we have Ndidi, Tielemens, Maddision, Praet, Mendy, Choudhury, the aforementioned James and arguably Amartey if he can return from injury. Then there's also Dewsbury-Hall and Tavares to name just two from the academy that could also potentially play a role in first team affairs going forward. 

 

So is he, on balance, better than these options at the club on a cost effective ratio? 

 

At the reported £80,000 a week, I would suggest not - especially given keeping that level of outlay on the wage bill for a bench player restricts what you can do in bringing in another player, be that an additional midfielder or reinforcements on the wing or at left back that we clearly need. 

 

This leads me onto your final point in respect of "gotze [sic], lallana [sic], etc"  as 'options' - presumably you mean they could be signings the club could make as an alternative to having Silva on the bench.  

 

Now assuming these are references to Mario Götze of Boruissa Dortmund and Adam Lallana who recently signed for Brighton, this addition only furthers the weakness of your argument.

 

We have absolutely no chance of signing Götze, especially if all we're going to do is stick him on the bench and Lallana reportedly signed a contract worth £100,000 a week so is again not an option and just goes to show your thoughts on this subject have no basis in any footballing reality. 

 

The final point I would make in demolishing your original post is that the entire history behind Silva and his signing for the club makes him returning to become a success much more difficult than it might have been. The fact he missed 6 months of football due to a 14 second delay set the pattern of an unhappy time at the club - and I imagine both parties will be relieved when Silva does finally move to another club and can have a fresh, less ominous start.  

 

Therefore in short;

 

NO!

 

No fan of the club should consider keeping Silva as a bench player as a positive option for the club going forward.

 

Now of course, you are welcome to your view and to express it on a forum as you wish - but when doing so and starting a thread, it might be advisable to give the matter a little more consideration, otherwise those that do and can articulate those thoughts can respond as I have done. 

 

Mate I'm just bored 😂😂, it's not that serious 

[MPH]

1 hour ago, UHDrive said:

Why on earth are you responding to this? Does your friends hand need holding?

 

 

i was trying to help YOU.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

15 minutes ago, NasPb said:

Mate I'm just bored 😂😂, it's not that serious 

Well evidently, because from the replies you must have been able to gather no-one was taking you seriously either. 

I just decided that your initial post was so lacking of any cognitive merit and even basic research, it needed demolishing in brutal fashion. 

[SystonFox]

13 hours ago, Raw Dykes said:

I'm not convinced. It's more like 4 months, and he'd still be training. He wasn't injured or anything, was he? I don't think it would have made much difference. I'm pretty sure it's the difference in standard or pace of the leagues.

Training and playing games is a world apart. Anyone who’s played any level of football will tel you that. Apologies if you’ve never played and I sound condescending  or anything but it is so far apart it’s unreal.

 

you simply don’t get the same competitiveness in a training session. You can not replicate many game situations

Edited 30 August 2020 by SystonFox

[Raw Dykes]

7 minutes ago, SystonFox said:

Training and playing games is a world apart. Anyone who’s played any level of football will tel you that. Apologies if you’ve never played and I sound contradicting or anything but it is so far apart it’s unreal.

 

you simply don’t get the same competitiveness in a training session. You can not replicate many game situations

No, I do get that. You're right about that, but I just don't buy that 4 months without a game could turn a high-profile Portugal international into a League 2 player. My point was that your argument would have more weight to it if he had been out injured for 6 months.

 

Sometimes, a good foreign player isn't effective in the PL. It happens - Veron, Aquilani, Shevchenko. Silva's not the first, and he won't be the last. Whether that's because of the pace of the league or because the player can't settle, I'm not sure, but in this instance, I suspect it's mainly the lack of time on the ball.

 

He didn't look the part here at all. He was slow, ponderous, weak and often misplaced passes.

[NasPb]

1 hour ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

Well evidently, because from the replies you must have been able to gather no-one was taking you seriously either. 

I just decided that your initial post was so lacking of any cognitive merit and even basic research, it needed demolishing in brutal fashion. 

Lol

[foxile5]

3 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

Thank you for trying - I decided (and you can see why above) that it isn't worth taking it any further.

If anything is been downhill since day one. Which is marginally better I guess. 

[HighPeakFox]

10 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

If anything is been downhill since day one. Which is marginally better I guess. 

Marginally yes. I only took issue with the accuracy of the day one bit, but some people are terribly defensive for no reason whatsoever.

[foxile5]

Just now, HighPeakFox said:

Marginally yes. I only took issue with the accuracy of the day one bit, but some people are terribly defensive for no reason whatsoever.

No. You're dead right. Looked like a real player day one. 

 

[Kitchandro]

On 29/08/2020 at 23:34, dylanlegend said:

Is he shit? I don’t think we got to see much of him, if we sell Praet and can’t get rid of AS he’s got to be a consideration... isn’t he a Euro 16 winner... I mean FFS

So is the guy who scored the winner in the final and I haven't heard of him since. Drinkwater won the Premier League that year, would you have him back now?

 

These phrases are meaningless. I only care how good he is as an individual. And now not in 2016.