• 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

Nabil Bentaleb

Robspur12 said:
I love that philosophy. It keeps players on their toes and is part of the reason Poch is so successful in improving players. Sadly the downside is that some players will not be happy sitting around waiting for their chance. Bentaleb and Siggurdson are the only ones we have let go who, imho, could have staked a claim for a starting place. Even Chadli,who I liked a lot , has been surpassed by Son.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. The Bentaleb ship has sailed as I was under the impression that Shalke can initiate the purchase clause whenever they want. No doubts that on his day, he can be a really good player.

I see no problem with players wanting game time. In fact I think it should be a pre-requisite for any player. However it is the way they demand it that could cause issue and this seems to be the case for Nabil. He and his reported entourage have obviously upset Poch enough to just completely discard him. That's fair enough for me as I think when you look at the harmony and desire of the team at the moment, it's as strong as I have ever known it.
 
Robspur12 said:
I love that philosophy. It keeps players on their toes and is part of the reason Poch is so successful in improving players. Sadly the downside is that some players will not be happy sitting around waiting for their chance. Bentaleb and Siggurdson are the only ones we have let go who, imho, could have staked a claim for a starting place. Even Chadli,who I liked a lot , has been surpassed by Son.
Click to expand...

I wonder with Siggurdson whether he would have ever got the game time with us to find his best form. I think that he suffered a bit with us from being in and out of the team but he is clearly not quite good enough to be a starter for a team like us.
 
milo said:
I wonder with Siggurdson whether he would have ever got the game time with us to find his best form. I think that he suffered a bit with us from being in and out of the team but he is clearly not quite good enough to be a starter for a team like us.
Click to expand...

Poch regrets letting Sigurdsson go and said that he would be the perfect player for us. It's a shame that we let him go, but we could still get him back. In fact I could definitely see us being interested in getting him again. Quite who he would play instead of, I have no idea!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38184714
 
milo said:
I wonder with Siggurdson whether he would have ever got the game time with us to find his best form. I think that he suffered a bit with us from being in and out of the team but he is clearly not quite good enough to be a starter for a team like us.
Click to expand...
You may be right. My view was based on how consistently good he has been this season in an otherwise mediocre Swansea team. He had a good engine so he would have suited Poch's high intensity game. He would have been great cover/competition for Lamela and Eriksen that we don't currently possess.
 
Gazzasrightboot said:
Poch regrets letting Sigurdsson go and said that he would be the perfect player for us. It's a shame that we let him go, but we could still get him back. In fact I could definitely see us being interested in getting him again. Quite who he would play instead of, I have no idea!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38184714
Click to expand...

You could be right. My thoughts at the time was that he was just being nice in the run up to a game against them.

I'd be delighted to have him back at the club, if he could sustain his form coming in and out of the side and from the bench.
 
milo said:
You could be right. My thoughts at the time was that he was just being nice in the run up to a game against them.

I'd be delighted to have him back at the club, if he could sustain his form coming in and out of the side and from the bench.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think when he is on one of his runs of good form, it can only be a good thing. His set pieces are quite good as well so provides further options for us.
 
Gazzasrightboot said:
Completely agree. The Bentaleb ship has sailed as I was under the impression that Shalke can initiate the purchase clause whenever they want. No doubts that on his day, he can be a really good player.

I see no problem with players wanting game time. In fact I think it should be a pre-requisite for any player. However it is the way they demand it that could cause issue and this seems to be the case for Nabil. He and his reported entourage have obviously upset Poch enough to just completely discard him. That's fair enough for me as I think when you look at the harmony and desire of the team at the moment, it's as strong as I have ever known it.
Click to expand...

Sums it up for me as well, any player who is happy to sit on the bench is one i would not want anywhere near my team ( not saying that is the case here). However the way to prove a manager wrong in not selecting you is to get out on the training pitch and show him that you deserve a starting spot. It seems ( although we do not have solid proof) that Bentaleb and his entourage went about it in a different whey and if that is the case we were right to move him on.
 
BILD running a story tonight that when Bentaleb starts his next Bundesliga-game, a mandatory purchase option will be triggered.

He has started 17 leaguegames for Schalke - the 18th will make his stay in Schalke permanent.

Transfer fee is €19m.
 
Yoof said:
They can but he still needs to agree to it and at the moment it's not clear what he wants.
Click to expand...

Ahh I see. I always, perhaps naively, thought that when a purchase clause was inserted into a loan agreement, the player also agreed to their own terms.
 
Denmark Spur said:
BILD running a story tonight that when Bentaleb starts his next Bundesliga-game, a mandatory purchase option will be triggered.

He has started 17 leaguegames for Schalke - the 18th will make his stay in Schalke permanent.

Transfer fee is €19m.
Click to expand...
19,000,000? I liked Bentaleb when he first came up but for that dough I'd drive him there myself. But I won't have to because he's already there. Good luck to him whatever happens. One of our own.
 
90291Spur said:
19,000,000? I liked Bentaleb when he first came up but for that dough I'd drive him there myself. But I won't have to because he's already there. Good luck to him whatever happens. One of our own.
Click to expand...

Well he's twice the player Sissoko is, so by that logic he should be a £60m player.

I'm not sure on the currency rate, but the permanent fee reported in the summer was £17m
 
Denmark Spur said:
BILD running a story tonight that when Bentaleb starts his next Bundesliga-game, a mandatory purchase option will be triggered.

He has started 17 leaguegames for Schalke - the 18th will make his stay in Schalke permanent.

Transfer fee is €19m.
Click to expand...
Bentaleb will have to agree a contract with them still - the only thing activated will be the fee between the two clubs
 
Good luck to him if he chooses to go there. I sincerely hope he succeeds in his career, and I'll remember him fondly for his efforts in 13/14 and 14/15.
 
r-u-s-x01 said:
That's not always the case, he may have already agreed terms prior to the loan. You know anything about this one specifically
Click to expand...

Why would a player agree personal terms for a long term contract a year ahead of it starting? Wouldn't happen - If he's a huge success on loan he'd be in a position to negotiate a much better deal than at the beginning of his loan and what if after a year he hates it in Germany?
 
Last edited:
billyiddo said:
Why would a player agree personal terms for a long term contract a year ahead of it starting? Wouldn't happen - If he's a huge success on loan he'd be in a position to negotiate a much better deal than at the beginning of his loan and what if after a year he hates it in Germany?
Click to expand...

If it was supposed to be a permanent deal, but the buying club pulled back at the last minute and made it a loan-with-a-view-to-a-permanent to give them a bit of protection from the player flopping.

The Fazio-Roma deal was supposedly the same. Maybe Njie and Lopez too, as fees were agreed in both those.
 
Gutter Boy said:
If it was supposed to be a permanent deal, but the buying club pulled back at the last minute and made it a loan-with-a-view-to-a-permanent to give them a bit of protection from the player flopping.

The Fazio-Roma deal was supposedly the same. Maybe Njie and Lopez too, as fees were agreed in both those.
Click to expand...

Yeah I still don't see why the player would agree a long term deal if he's going on loan initially
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back