I must confess that I am even starting to bore myself.... I reckon Scara is just getting going however.![]()
He's a £30m purchase earning £80-95k per week (depending on which story you read).
We're not City or Chelsea, we can't afford to do that.
Part of the frustration that we need a player who is a difference maker, so swapping Sissoko for Onomah - who may or may not be ready for that role - doesn’t solve that practically Sissoko-sized problem.
a) buying a replacement in today's market is incredible expensive.
b) the new player will take a place in the squad of limited size, risking us being stuck with 2 non-performers.
c) which leads me into c, there is no guarantee that the new guy will be a success (or suit our playing style).
d) having somebody with no future in the club is detrimental for club culture.
e) loads of non-hitters have made it outside the club. Paulinho, Boateng, Vlad+++. Many needed more than a season to blossom. Modric springs to mind. Giving people time is a sound strategy.
f) incoming player should be on par with the squad, not just improvement on Sissoko.
g) panic buys seldom works, ref. Sissoko.
h) buying first, selling after means worse bargaining position.
i) limited slots in squad for CL and League.
j) writing investments off is not Levy's style.
k) Levy (and Poch) would lose face.
l) players are coming back from injury and illness, meaning Sissoko will likely be a fringe player soon.
m) larger pool of players available during summer window.
I am positive the club works hard to find an improvement and to find buyers. They don't want to be in the same position with the new player in 1 year. And finding buyers who are willing to shell out £30M for him is difficult.
Yeah I do wonder about the cost to UK economic productivity by this thread existing.Anyone else feel like this debate has exhausted itself? Noone is budging, and quite clearly noone is going to budge![]()
We do OK despite him. At a guess he probably costs a handful a season - probably fewer than abandoning our fiscally responsible setup would over the long term.So it purely financial?
Ok let's follow that thread of thought How many points in your opinion does he cost us across a season? If he is as dog brick as some of you think he must cost us significant points. So how many?
That's all quite reasonable. So what you saying is that he is not dog brick, not detrimental to the team but someone we can and should look to upgrade on when we have the chance.
But his level of performance is such, (although not up to desired standard) is good enough for us to not be in a desperate hurry to do so.
If that's your stance, thats not entirel unreasonable
Perhaps Sissoko can take out South Korean citizenship and then choose to do his military service. I’m sure you’d be cool with that.We do OK despite him. At a guess he probably costs a handful a season - probably fewer than abandoning our fiscally responsible setup would over the long term.
Actually I wouldn't. As brick as he is, he cost us £30m and he's got no right to deprive us of the opportunity to recoup it.Perhaps Sissoko can take out South Korean citizenship and then choose to do his military service. I’m sure you’d be cool with that.
Even though as a hypothetically proud South Korean citizen who hypothetically feels a hyrpotehtical sense of duty to his newly-adopted country it would over-showdown (hypothetically) is actually contract with us?Actually I wouldn't. As brick as he is, he cost us £30m and he's got no right to deprive us of the opportunity to recoup it.
My stance is that Sissoko has shown enough, proven over time that he has little to nothing to offer at our level.
He even proved it before we bought him. Look at the compilation of his hyped performance in the Euro final against portugal. No end product. Which he has confirmed at spurs for 1.5 years.
His strengths are too few, and his weaknesses are too massive. He hinders the flow of our attack. His work rate is questionable. Offensively, having Sissoko on the field is only slightly better than playing a man down.
Nevertheless, I totally understand why he isn't replaced ASAP. In the meanwhile, Poch tries to get the best out of a bad asset, until he can be replaced. Which means we have a freeloader playing in our midfield. Starting Sissoko means that we put a ball and chain around the leg of our offensive players.
We do OK despite him. At a guess he probably costs a handful a season - probably fewer than abandoning our fiscally responsible setup would over the long term.
You blatantly contradict yourself then. "Barely better than playing with a man less" and "ball and chain around the leg of our offensive players"
Makes a mockery of your previous list. Because if he is as bad as you say then he should absolutely be replaced in the team at the earliest opportunity.... yet it's almost the end of Jan and he hasn't. Your previous list only makes sense, if in fact he is actually nowhere near as bad as you say.
There are far too many variables to calculate an unknown in football such as "what is Sissoko were actually a footballer?"How much is a handful? How about opportunity cost? Give me a actual number If you would be so kind
yes, offensively he is rubbish and hinders the team, slows the rhythm down with his awful passing and positional awareness. but the manpower is needed to do good offensive pressing.
Yes, he should absolutely be replaced in the team at the earliest opportunity. However, Levy does not accept a loss, so here we stand. £20M left on his fee to Saudi Sportswashing Machine and £80-95k per week in wages. This is the reason why he hasn't been replaced. Nobody wants him and we don't want to lose money. So Poch has to do the best he can with Sissoko, which is to instruct him to stay back, don't sprint forward, play short passes sideways and stand still and watch capable players like Son do their magic.
Levy wants his money back -> Sissoko stays as there are no takers.
You blatantly contradict yourself then. "Barely better than playing with a man less" and "ball and chain around the leg of our offensive players"
Makes a mockery of your previous list. Because if he is as bad as you say then he should absolutely be replaced in the team at the earliest opportunity.... yet it's almost the end of Jan and he hasn't. Your previous list only makes sense, if in fact he is actually nowhere near as bad as you say.
It does, entirely. If Poch was saying all that you want to infer he was, he wouldnt have qualified his statement.
Now, its not me trying to hang an entire argument on meaningless PR, its you - but as you are - you cant just ignore the key part of what he said and interpret it as you wish.
I refuse to say he is doing well? Because he isnt.
Ive said, time and again, Ive no doubt he is doing his best - and credit to him for that.
However, it doesnt change the fact his best is not good enough.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.