Axel Disasi

ASCPFC said:
We needed him. Hopefully we sort out the Sarr and the Mateta situation. It looks like we're going with the midfielders we have so we just have to put up with it. Unless we get pleasantly surprised.
Click to expand...
TBF we do seem to have tried to get a midfielder in. We may still be trying under the radar. Whilst we're well up the food chain, we aren't at the top.
 
Good signing.

Only downsides are a) a year of experience being handed out to a player who has no long term value to us, and b) it didn't get done a month ago.

On the bright sides he's at his prime age, physical, PL experience, settled in London, hits the ground running - he helped turn West Ham around. He immediately improves our backline.
 
Axel will be great, be outstanding for us then Chelsea will call him back because the centre back they signed has failed badley (max)… its Palace… it could happen
 
ambrose7 said:
Good signing.

Only downsides are a) a year of experience being handed out to a player who has no long term value to us, and b) it didn't get done a month ago.

On the bright sides he's at his prime age, physical, PL experience, settled in London, hits the ground running - he helped turn West Ham around. He immediately improves our backline.
Click to expand...

V annoying, but I'm guessing the issue was that Chelsea ideally wanted to sell. So might not have entertained a loan a month ago
 
MrRobbo said:
V annoying, but I'm guessing the issue was that Chelsea ideally wanted to sell. So might not have entertained a loan a month ago
Click to expand...
Yep, always a game signing players. It took us a few years to bag Sarr. McNiell six months. Unless you have endless funds like City or Chelsea its like haggling at a car boat for the rest of the teams.
 
ambrose7 said:
Good signing.

Only downsides are a) a year of experience being handed out to a player who has no long term value to us, and b) it didn't get done a month ago.

On the bright sides he's at his prime age, physical, PL experience, settled in London, hits the ground running - he helped turn West Ham around. He immediately improves our backline.
Click to expand...
A year is a long time in football.
Doesn’t matter if you’ve got a player on a 3 year contract, he’ll still feck off the moment a prettier girl lifts her skirt ! I’m looking at you Max !
 
doombear said:
Also when it reached the point where they were willing to sanction a loan, the loan fee was unacceptable. However, the Riad injury may mean that we've had to bite the bullet and pay what Chelsea wanted.
Click to expand...
I hope that’s not true, after losing Guehi,and Lacroix, we badly needed a something approaching a decent replacement. People say ,having sold Lacroix to Chelsea, there had to be a 45 day gap for financial reasons if we took one of theirs. Haven’t checked it out but sounds feasible and the timing is about there.
 
Putitout said:
I hope that’s not true, after losing Guehi,and Lacroix, we badly needed a something approaching a decent replacement. People say ,having sold Lacroix to Chelsea, there had to be a 45 day gap for financial reasons if we took one of theirs. Haven’t checked it out but sounds feasible and the timing is about there.
Click to expand...
If I understand things correcyly, the 45 days is about a deal where having sold to Celsea we buy from them or loan from them with either an obligation to buy or a conditional one with easy conditions. In any of those circumstances, UEFA would regard our selling price as being the fee for Lacroix MINUS what we paid or would be obliged to pay for the player coming in from Chelsea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top