I've been counting him as a full back regarding our subs bench........ You know the bench that also contains Karius, Gillespie, Hall, Livermento, Krafth, Ritchie, Manquillo (pre sale), Lascelles and then everyone loses their **** over Howe's game management skills
So basically Howe wants to get through this season without having to play him anymore, cos that gives him £30m to spend on another player in the summer. I agree tbh
Isn't, by his own admission and that of Chelsea, Hall more of a midfielder than LB? I get annoyed watching Miley, Longstaff and Bruno running around totally goosed when he could come on in their place.
If we do that, we have to keep him due to meeting the (mysterious) performance related aspect of the obligation too buy... If the gaffer doesn't fancy him after spending time with him in training... I get it. It's the only explanation. If he's still here as an NUFC player next year, I'll give up trying to understand anything ever again.
Fast forward 5yrs when he's playing a blinder against us in the semi-final of a cup......i would be the Newcastle thing to happen.
Scenarios I can see: 1. Howe is just biding his time with Hall, to ensure he settles as part of the squad and fits the style, etc. - like he has with most of the youngsters. BUT, even in that case he could have used him far more with all our recent injuries (especially with both Targett out and Willock out of left midfield) 2. Howe just doesn't rate him enough (not even with all those injured players out) and would rather play Burn. In which case, Howe could be playing a dangerous game if going against the thoughts of Ashworth & co who brought Hall in. 3. The club have told Howe to restrict Hall's games, to avoid triggering the obligation to buy clause. But I don't see why, given it kicks in this summer and by then we'll have cash to spend. Also why wouldn't the club have just terminated his loan in January instead if that was their thinking? 4. Hall has a bad attatude and isn't working in training or generally fitting as a squad member. But again, surely the club would have just terminated the loan deal in Jan? So either way, it's all just a bit baffling. Unless there is an option 5 that suddenly makes far more sense.
Agree, but then why bother keeping him now? Just terminate the loan in January if we're not going to use him. It's all very odd.
I think the 5th option could be they rate him, just not as a starter at the moment and there could be clauses behind the loan - which has an obligation to buy (I personally think he's our player already technically) and the club are trying not to pay out on him until next year, for example if there are clauses such as £x amount after 5/10/15/20 appearances we are just trying to hold back on paying out after "x" games of the loan due to FFP.
Some interesting comments when the deal came to light from some Chelsea fans. https://www.reddit.com/r/PremierLea...s_hall_to_nufc_was_this_a_good_deal_for_both/
By the looks of things there are still criteria he needs to meet for the deal to go ahead. That’s probably why he isn’t playing.
He is a really good attacking full back yet I’m not going to play him. i wonder if the plan long term wise is to go 5 at the back with Hall and Tino as attacking full backs? Or we play with a holding midfielder?
Definitely looked so much better as a defender vs Man City than simply an attacking option on the left. Just needs to add some consistency to keep at that level which I'm pretty sure will come with time
And he admits to having learned a lot here especially in regard to defensive positions etc. Read it somewhere but can't remember where and not going to look.
Dan Burns terrific defensive ability at lb for months was keeping him out. Came straight in vs west Ham and has been very good ever since. A few extra cones and weeks later he's an international.... get your wand out more often Eddie.
