• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Richarlison

Jurgen the German said:
But Son still has 5 league goals and he’s had a stinker of a season, 4 goals from the bench too I might add. I’m not against giving Richarlison a go but I’m also a bit perplexed by the calls for him start more often as if he’s been a world beater. Some people may love his tracking back and tackling which is fine but me personally he’s been nothing short of underwhelming offensively which is why we bought him. Don’t see the point in highlighting all of Son’s weak points and focusing on Richarlison’s strengths, none of which at the moment include getting goals or being involved in goals. He’s just a windup merchant who loves getting into needless spats and fans love his aggression.
Click to expand...

Bishop said:
Richie's lack of starts and minutes is being used as focal point to complain. But let's be real he's no great striker, if he had gotten more starts and more minutes he isn't likely to have scored a great deal. Right now he's being held aloft to a high standard but as he plays more especially next season the truth of his ability level will sadly shine through.

Son has indeed been largely rubbish but he has still scored more and from the bench something Richie has been incapable of doing.
Click to expand...
Richarlison was a 1 in 3 goal scorer in a poor Everton side. There's no reason to think he wouldn't be at least similar here if given the chance.
The point is he has not been given a chance. It's not working with Son, try something different.
It would also hopefully benefit Son, give him a rest and use him from the bench when teams are getting tired.
 
Bishop said:
Yeah I don't have any issue with Richie getting more starts, I just don't think that would have achieved what here seem to think it would. Since the arrival of Danjuma that's the player I would have started off the left. He's similar to Son but younger and a better dribbler, we could have played the same system and potentially had a better in form player in that position, but alas Conte has interest in him and 0 intention of playing him.

Richie for me should have been rotated for Kane earlier in the season but we know that never happens.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk
Click to expand...

We spent 50m quid on him, what you expect him to do? Put out cones?

I mean come on, you would expect a manager to see an underperforming player in Son and maybe think about playing someone else? And at the end of the day its not about Richy per say, its about the lack of any willingness to plug the obvious gaps that appear infront of the manager thats being highlighted. Its shocking TBH

GHod forbid that a manager motivates his players, add it to the list of things Conte does not seem to want to do and gets a pass on...press conference, player development, squad management, motivator....I wonder what he is really here to do TBH
 
glasgowspur said:
There's no such thing as a replacement for Kane.
This is a problem we keep running into, Modric, Eriksen, bale, Kane and even Dembele, there are no replacements, they are all unique players with skill sets no one else has.
You adapt and move on, we don't seem to be able to do that.
Click to expand...

Fair point. That said, Richarlison isn’t a goalscorer and shouldn’t be playing in the middle on a regular basis IMO.
 
Jurgen the German said:
Fair point. That said, Richarlison isn’t a goalscorer and shouldn’t be playing in the middle on a regular basis IMO.
Click to expand...

If he isn't being played through the middle we shouldn't be paying £60m for him.
If he can't get games through the middle because of kane why buy him?
Its an odd signing all round, only reason I can see for it is to acclimatise him for next season if we know harry is off.
 
glasgowspur said:
If he isn't being played through the middle we shouldn't be paying £60m for him.
If he can't get games through the middle because of kane why buy him?
Its an odd signing all round, only reason I can see for it is to acclimatise him for next season if we know harry is off.
Click to expand...
He can cover LWF and CF, if Conte would actually rotate and make use of subs it would've been a sensible signing.
Enough games with rotation, injury etc for all three
 
DubSpur said:
He can cover LWF and CF, if Conte would actually rotate and make use of subs it would've been a sensible signing.
Enough games with rotation, injury etc for all three
Click to expand...
Exactly this. If we're rotating properly throughout the season, we won't end up with having to rotate nearly the entire team against Sheffield United. It's not only about physical rest either; the players need to be kept on their toes mentally as well. Son starting every match regardless of form is incredibly demoralizing for the squad.

Richarlison's comments about how he should be starting aren't exactly wise but he felt the need to vent his frustrations. He won't be naming WHICH player he should be replacing in the starting line-up, but the implication is there that Conte should be dropping someone in favor of him. As others have said, I don't think Richarlison will get any playing time now as a result of this interview.
 
Grays_1890 said:
We spent 50m quid on him, what you expect him to do? Put out cones?

I mean come on, you would expect a manager to see an underperforming player in Son and maybe think about playing someone else? And at the end of the day its not about Richy per say, its about the lack of any willingness to plug the obvious gaps that appear infront of the manager thats being highlighted. Its shocking TBH

GHod forbid that a manager motivates his players, add it to the list of things Conte does not seem to want to do and gets a pass on...press conference, player development, squad management, motivator....I wonder what he is really here to do TBH
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have spent 50m on him tbh.

He's an ok player, but that's it. He definitely should have been given more starts and minutes especially earlier in the season but I don't believe it would have made much difference. He just isn't that good a player ultimately.

I agree Conte doesn't use the squad well. He refused to play Spence, he didn't use Richie much, he doesn't play Sarr, didn't play Skipp, ignored Gil etc so definitely complaints I can agree with.

I just don't see Richarlison as the saviour and I genuinely believe that if he had played significantly more he would be getting pelters for poor overall play. Imo.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk
 
Bishop said:
I wouldn't have spent 50m on him tbh.

He's an ok player, but that's it. He definitely should have been given more starts and minutes especially earlier in the season but I don't believe it would have made much difference. He just isn't that good a player ultimately.

I agree Conte doesn't use the squad well. He refused to play Spence, he didn't use Richie much, he doesn't play Sarr, didn't play Skipp, ignored Gil etc so definitely complaints I can agree with.

I just don't see Richarlison as the saviour and I genuinely believe that if he had played significantly more he would be getting pelters for poor overall play. Imo.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk
Click to expand...


Can't say i disagree on Richarlison , but how dispiriting most it the rest of the squad to see sons name on the team sheet week after week?
Its getting to Sissoko proportions now.
 
Bishop said:
I wouldn't have spent 50m on him tbh.

He's an ok player, but that's it. He definitely should have been given more starts and minutes especially earlier in the season but I don't believe it would have made much difference. He just isn't that good a player ultimately. I agree Conte doesn't use the squad well. He refused to play Spence, he didn't use Richie much, he doesn't play Sarr, didn't play Skipp, ignored Gil etc so definitely complaints I can agree with. I just don't see Richarlison as the saviour and I genuinely believe that if he had played significantly more he would be getting pelters for poor overall play. Imo.
Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk
Click to expand...

While all of that may be true, where I can see the frustration is

- We have in general played brick all season (very few exceptions)
- Conte finally plays Richi instead of Son, Davies instead of Perisic, Royal/Deki on other side and it worked
- Then Conte changes/rotates for no fudging apparent reason.
 
Raziel said:
While all of that may be true, where I can see the frustration is

- We have in general played brick all season (very few exceptions)
- Conte finally plays Richi instead of Son, Davies instead of Perisic, Royal/Deki on other side and it worked
- Then Conte changes/rotates for no fudging apparent reason.
Click to expand...

Stellini did.
 
DubSpur said:
At least 50% of those were as LWF and it's similar to the numbers Son has put up for us.
Click to expand...

See above post from Bishop. I have no preference as to who starts between Richarlison and Son tomorrow but the more Richarlison plays I think we will realise we need better than him as he’s a good player but not world class or even close to it. The more minutes he gets the more people will get frustrated with him IMO. By all means give him a run in the side but he’s not the answer to our problems.
 
Linked with PSG and Madrid. Would you take what we spent on him back, or keep him? What are his wages do we think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back