Rory Delap seems to get a lot of stick around here by various posters, he was a good solid pro, the stick he gets is purely because he was our record signing for so long.
Of course I agree in general for most players it is a difficult transition, for players like Gaston it is very much so, but I just don't think a player with the attributes that Osvaldo has can complain too much. He had all the necessary qualities to make it in the Premier League and of course even then it still takes some time to adapt, but I think it is a cop out to run off whimpering about the different styles.
I feel like the Osvaldo we saw is who Osvaldo is. There was no "adapting" to be done. His main problem at Southampton-- as it has been everywhere he's played-- is his own ability to curb his behavior and stay on the pitch.
I agree that he copped out by running off and he had the attribues needed, but I does take time. His head was a different matter for sure. Soldado? Similar situation except he hasn't cried off or lumped anyone yet. I've not seen as much of him but what I have he seems to have the necessary attributes for our game; he's just not done it yet. Given time I think he will. Looks like Osvaldo won't get to show us anyway now.
Black, ignoring the unnecessary abuse, are you really saying that you could not see that Osvaldo had bags of ability? Just because he didn't "do it" for us, doesn't means he wasn't talented; he clearly was.
A lot of talented European players do well here, so it comes down to Osvaldo. I was willing to accept it could take a while (as were most fans), but he wasn't. It didn't work for him immediately and that probably made it more likely he would explode at some point (given his character).
Black we can do without the name calling please!!! By all means make your point but without the semantics. I happen to agree, one piece of skill does not mean a person is good enough. Scoring goals however is only a small part of a footballers arsenal. Osvaldo had already proven he had the skills to become a good player with another club. Sadly those skills did not in the main show themselves for us. His temperament however was already known and no doubt it would have been conveyed to him that Saints would not tolerate such behaviour as has been proved to him.
To me there is no doubt the ability is there and I would have loved to see him and Gaston play together more as I think they would have enhanced one another's performances. I remember seeing a tweet from Osvaldo where you could tell he was getting frustrated as the first goal hadn't came after a few games. He wanted to do well and score for the team (and himself, no doubt). I guess he is a confidence player and when things are going well on the pitch, everything seems better and goes well off the pitch. Every player has to justify themselves to their team mates (and fans), particularly if they come with a large price tag and have replaced a popular squad member who has been there a long time. The jury is still out on Wanyama, if he really excelled on his arrival, it is likely there wouldn't be so much debate ref him and Cork. Lovren came in and played brilliantly and has been welcomed with open arms by team mates and players a like. The perfect signing. I just wonder though, if things had been different. what if Lovren had a couple of shockers, would he have settled so well and would we be happy with him replacing Maya or Jos? And back to Osvaldo, do we think that if he started his career here with more goals he would have been much happier and none of this would have happened. I guess what I am saying is that although players need time to settle and adapt, it can be the first few matches that shape their time at a club, as Lovren and Osvaldo show. I just think it could have been a lot different if the situations were reversed.
I wasn't commenting on Osvaldo's ability, but on what he actually did when he was on the pitch. Two very different things. Potential is futile if it is never realised. The fact of the matter is, he wasn't good enough for us, considering the amount we paid for him, and also that the money we spent on him meant that we were (arguably) weaker in another position (perhaps centre-back or right-wing). Sorry!!
Black, you completely missed my question. Completely. I didn't mention potential. I simply asked if you could not see he was a talented footballer. Could you not see he has ability? I know he didn't deliver for Saints; if he had, he'd still be here and happy.
To be fair, THAT goal apart, I don't think he did show much evidence of any real talent. It is only because we know what he is capable of that we can say that he is "clearly" talented. Assume for a moment that all you knew of him was what he did for us.............then I don't think there was much for the talent spotters.
Si, the jury is not out for me on Vic. The moment he stepped out the team, we struggled. Where the jury is out is on those fans who can't see that playing well or doing a good job is different for each player. Wanyama's job was to make us tighter. He did that as part of an improved team including Lovren and a fit Boruc. The jury is not out at all for me. He is excellent at what he needs to do. He is not as good a passer as others and so if they play we look a slightly different team (not better or worse, different). For 10 games we had the est defensive record in the league and Vic was a big part of that. It really isn't difficult to see that when he came into our team at the start of the season we looked harder to beat.if we need to pass a team to death, I may pick someone else. If we need to be as tight as possible, I'd pick him.
I think you've touched upon part of the answer and that's who a player comes into replace. Hooiveld for all his charming personality had a pretty shocking season of own goals and gaffs. Lovren is a step up in quality and the way he has started his Southampton career is exceptional, but his performances have not been under the same microscope of the other two. Because he is an obvious step up in class from Championship(Hooiveld) to Premier League/International (Lovren). Our best partnership last season was probably Cork & Schneiderlin, so eyebrows were raised when Victor was signed, but as we saw with Corks injury at the start of last season we needed competition for places in this role. Because Jack is a popular player amongst supports the performance of Wanyama was the main focus. Any slight error or misplaced pass(and there has been a few) would be over analysed and lead to calls for the prodigal son to return. Apart from that 1st half at Fulham I've not seen a bad display from Victor overall and had he of come in to challenge the place of a Dean Hammond or Paul Wooten we wouldn't be having a debate about whether he was a good signing. Osvaldo came in to replace a legend...he couldn't do it
I probably should have been a bit clearer, I said the jury is still out mainly because it is still a hotly debated topic on these boards, not as to whether he is a good signing (which I very much believe he is), my point was more to do with how players have to perform to win over fans/team mate's at the start, which shapes their career at the club. Wanyama would probably have to had scored half a dozen goals with assists for there to be no debate at all given the way Cork performed last year but that has been discussed at length on different threads.
Yep, that makes perfect sense. Perhaps it is expectations of what they need to do to be accepted that put pressure on players. As you said, Lovren was replacing Jos and everyone knew more or less that he was in a different class, not scoring own goals was an improvement so the expectations on him were less. Osvalso on the other hand had to do so much more to meet our/ the teams expectations as someone who could challenge Rickie. He had the ability but didn't hit the ground running and it went down hill form there really.
Sure, but my initial post was not a discussion of his ability, it was a comment on his actual performances in a Saints shirt. If you want me to answer the question of whether or not I think Osvaldo is a very good footballer based on the games he played for us, then my answer would be "no". I would say he is somewhere between "average" and "a little disappointing". Other than that goal, I can not remember any specific passes or pieces of skill etc which he ever did. My most prominent memory in fact, is the number of very easy chances that he was unable to even get on target (once on his debut, twice against City etc), that he was a little 'greedy' at times, and that he had an unnecessarily high temperament, which in no way improved his game. What's more, while you didn't mention the word "potential", your insistence in his ability is an allusion to his potential to play well for Southampton. So they are related.
Osvaldo used to leave the pitch after his enevitable substitution, go straight to his bag and put his glasses on. I think his problem was he couldn't actually see the goal!
I disagree. I believe I can see talent in a player. Touch is one thing that stands out a mile and what people try to do with the ball. So, sorry LFF, there was enough there for 'us' talent spotters. Many, many a time have I known of talent spotters that go to watch a game and are not interested in the player who scored the three goals, but someone where they have seen something in the player and their abilities. Imagine for a moment you considered his ability not his performance; then maybe there would be a lot more for you to have spotted. It is a typical view of many fans. (See the other thread where TSS mentions undervalue of skill)
