Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 minutes ago, NasPb said:

I* 

I just thought he was versatile but if he's only a lb no point in signing him 

He's certainly not only a LB. 

Posted

Not sure if he would command a place in our first team (how times have changed) this is a Wolves type of signing... 

Posted

I don't know him so can't comment. But it would look like a strange signing given that we're well covered in those areas and have real needs Elsewhere, like a Striker , Winger or Good midfielder.

 

I think this could be a smokescreen to drive his price up.

Posted
15 hours ago, Guest said:

Would he be our first Ukrainian?

 

I can't say I've ever been particularly wowed by him but he seems a tidy player and a versatile one at that which is handy, especially if we're to continue competing on multiple fronts.

He wouldn’t be my first Ukrainian 👀

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
33 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

I don't know him so can't comment. But it would look like a strange signing given that we're well covered in those areas and have real needs Elsewhere, like a Striker , Winger or Good midfielder.

 

I think this could be a smokescreen to drive his price up.

He is a midfielder....

Posted
1 minute ago, Clever Fox said:

Then it could make sense. I thought he was an LB.

Pep moulded him into a LB but he signed for them as a #10 and plays for Ukraine as a #8 or #6 depending on the formation they go with.

  • Like 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Schlupp was a striker for us and moulded in to a left back because he was very very crap as a striker.

The old "run around over there and ffs don't shoot" approach to player development.

  • Haha 1
Posted

Whenever I’ve seen him he’s looked decent - was standout at the KP in league cup QF a while back

 

Would have been a lot more excited if we were linked in the summer…

Posted
4 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Schlupp was a striker for us and moulded in to a left back because he was very very crap as a striker.

He was very very crap as a left back too. 

 

I don't think Zinchenko was switched because he wasn't good enough (although he would have been competing with the likes of David Silva for a spot in midfield so in a sense, he wasnt) but rather that all of their traditional LB's are made of Trifle and he needed cover. 

 

Worth noting though, Pep plays with inverted WB's so instead of bombing down the wings, they play more as CMs so the switch would have played to his strengths.

  • Like 1
Posted

He was actually signed by Manchester City as an Attacking Right Midfielder who can cut in onto his left. 

 

I mean he hasn't played there for a while, but he really is a serious utility player. 

 

He'd ensure that we don't get ourselves in any injury messes for the rest of the season because he can cover about four positions.

  • Like 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, The People's Hero said:

We've been here before; and possibly even been offered him before if memory serves. 

 

I suspect someone knows this and is rehashing that and coming to assumptions. 

That could very well be the case but we've also been known to look at players for quite a while before they actually sign. 

Posted
Just now, Foxy_Bear said:

That could very well be the case but we've also been known to look at players for quite a while before they actually sign. 

Yes; I agree that. I was about to say I didn't think we'd be matching wages to Man City players; but then I remembered Nacho!

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
8 hours ago, NasPb said:

Isn't he also a winger? Or am k wrong 

Naturally a midfielder that Man City used at left back one time and realised he's good there too.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...