So it's January and we find ourselves in a position where our £30m record signing, Erik Lamela - who's yet to make a start in the league at WHL - is being linked with loan moves away from the club this window. According to people on Twitter, his father has apparently said that Erik wants to go back to Italy (not sure if perm or loan) and so quite frankly it's looking like one big bloody mess at the moment for a player we were all so extremely excited about signing. When a club like us splash that sort of cash on a player, in reality, we need it to work. We can't be like a City/ Chelsea/ Madrid etc and fork out shed loads on a player only to fob him off without worrying if they're no good. £30m is a hell of a lot of money for our club to spend and as of right now, Lamela is looking no more than a £3m player if truth be told. We've all seen glimpses of the magic the lad has to offer but then we've seen glimpses from players like dos Santos, Taarabt and Bentley. As it stands, the more we leave Lamela on the sidelines, the longer it'll take for him to adapt and likely become more pissed off/ upset/ disillusioned. So if you were in a position where you could make a choice on what to do with Lamela, what would you do. Of the options I can think of, they are as follows: A) Continue to keep him as a sub and hope that when he comes on he'll start producing to the point where you have to start him. B) Give him a run of starts in the side and hope he finds some sort of form, doesn't even have to be match winning the games but just showing that he merits his place - but who drops out for him? C) Loan him out to a Prem club where they can guarantee 1st team football until the end of the season and hope that he begins to find his feet in England. D) Loan him out to an Italian club where he knows the style of play, likely regain some form and come back hopefully in good spirits ready to make an impact in England. THOUGH it could back fire and he may want not want to return and therefore come back desperate for a move away. E) Sell him, we won't get anywhere near what we paid but the longer we leave him out the side, the more his price drops and I highly doubt we're in a position to be able to swallow £30m. I seriously have no idea what I'd do to be honest, if I had to pick I'd probably lean with option B and drop Soldado but I'm not fully convinced with my choice, so I'm putting the question out there to you lot to see if there's a general consensus of agreement on a particular option. (If I've missed an option let me know)
i would start him against Palace instead of Soldado for a start. I think he's more likely to unlock the bus than Soldado.
Option C for me please. Just looking at players like Lukaku and how is has been a great success for two seasons now. If we want him to work out for us then he has to get used to the pace of English football, so no point sending him back to Italy. The problem in keeping him at Spurs is that same problem that we had with GDS and that is who do we drop to bring him in. There is one other option that I said on the transfer thread- Ask for our money back-he is surely still under guarantee and we obviously paid by credit card.
There has been cases of similar players eventually setting but the problem with Lamela is he isn't playing. He needs to be playing at least 30 games a season. Not being hidden away and chucked on sparingly. I know some like to make comparisons with Bale but Bale had games under his belt from the saints. He was settled here and when he first played under Jol he made an instant impact. If we're not going to play the guy then he has no hope of trying to get to grips with the league.
Yeah great point, Lukaku along with other youngsters have massively benefitted form loan moves to Prem sides. Haha I bloody wish we could, with Eriksen and Chiriches aside, I'd be getting our money back ASAP!
He needs to be playing somewhere! If we really overpaid for him then we've effectively got a loss whether we sell him or not - we just need to decide now whether he is worth more to us than we can sell him for. I'd put him in the side for the rest of the year and then decide, but he's really not suited to 442!
Problem is he didn't look too great in a 4-5-1 most of the time (in his sporadic appearances). I'd like to see a midfield of: Sandro (if fit), Dembele Lennon, Eriksen, Lamela against Palace and see how it fairs.
I'm not sure he's best suited to the Palace game because I expect them to play narrow and deep, defending physically in the last 3rd. He's been picking up little injuries lately, hasn't he? It's a shame because games like United and Arsenal away would've been better games for him to play in. I've said it before, if Lamela is going to fit into our current set up I believe he has to play upfront. I just don't see him working out on the flanks unless he's playing high up enough to be right up against the fullback all game. Either way, if he's not going to play I'm happy for him to go out on loan to somewhere he will play, let him get his confidence back and return for the new season when we'll likely have a new manager in.
He has to get used to whoever we play, picking and choosing is not the problem simple game time is the answer, as Boss said. Seven new players make the problem of them settling a bigger one, it will simply take longer for all to bed in.Personally I don't see a major problem with Lamela the last couple of games he's looked lively and quite ready for the physical side too. YV you don't want to see ANOTHER manager surely. All this changing does us no good at all it would be much better if Sherwood could make a success of it. I hope he does because for me he has all the right attitudes, so far anyway.
He's definitely looked lively and more physical, if anything too physical at times. He made a few fouls against Soton and I think he came on as a sub on one of the recent home games and picked up a yellow, maybe wrong but I'm sure it was him. If only we could put Townsend's confidence at running at players into Lamela's body!
As much as I wasn't inspired by Sherwood or called him a toe rag, I agree with you on this Spurf and I hope Sherwood is a success and no it has nothing to do with the fact he has already pencilled in Tom Carroll for our midfield next year
Lamela's supposed to be a versatile forward who can play on either wing or behind a main striker, so I can't see why he wouldn't get a lot of opportunities to play. We're light up front, Lennon can't play in every game and the left wing's up for grabs, so he's just got to get his head down and take his chances.
Just read that Lamela's brother, who constantly talks about him on Twitter, has said that he's happy at Spurs and he's going nowhere. Probably a lot of fuss about nothing.
On the subject of this, I'd like to know what the relationship is like between Sherwood and Baldini, before I cast my opinion, as i could be on the money, or ****ing way off! perhaps "someone" could provide some info on this?
I think the younger players we bought in the 7 are not all necessarily for 'now'. A lot of them are only 21, and so have a couple more years developing, as for Lamela, he was never expected to hit the ground running with a regular first 11 spot....so why are some expecting that? A midfield of Chadli, Holtby, Lamela and Eriksen for example, is frighteningly inexperienced! I wasn't aware there was a rush with these players to make them match-winners overnight...chill!
What has he done to earn his place? People seem to be arguing that he should be playing because he cost shed loads of money regardless of how able he is to do the job, and have some mystical belief that simply by playing him he will justify that price tag. What message does that send out to others who have to fight for their place? What evidence is there that he will contribute anything if he does get games? I want players who can contribute now, get points now. I am not ready to write this off as an experimental season yet!
