We will disagree and you will be offended that I see your view, as others, as a typical British football fans views. I saw a lot of skill in what he did or tried to do. It didn't work often and he hardly made an impression at Saints on the field, but I saw his talent. If you didn't then that's fair enough, but I know what I saw. As for my insistence on his ability alluding to potential, that is your interpretation not my view.
Just for reference, you just said he wasn't good enough and a knob. I didn't see that as just in Southampton performances, hence my 'insistence' that I thought he was good enough just didn't deliver.
We usually have a good exchange on here FLT, so I answer you with respect, unlike the previous poster. But saying that, I disagree with you on this one. Talent, potential, ability - call it what you like, it is fruitless if the individual in question fails to do the basics of his job. It's no good having a nice "touch" as a striker, if your finishing is below par, you create few opportunities for your teammates, and you score few goals. I wonder if those who are so quick to defend him would do the same if he was an unfashionable, unpopular, cheaper purchase from the lower divisions. Probably not.
The important thing is that we are not missing Osvaldo...that tells you how much impact he had. He would be an okay substitute if anything happened to Rickie or Jay, but no more than that. He had potential and might have settled in eventually, but we can't be sure of that. Mauricio said that Dani moving to another club was a win/win situation...I will take his judgement on that.
Not offended, but suggesting you can spot talent while others can't, based simply on one player, is a teeny bit arrogant. I'm sure there are other players in the Premier League who I regard as talented, to which you would disagree. It's a very subjective thing, is sports spectatorship. Anyway, it's time for the pub and the game. Hopefully we will both be agreeing later on who scored the best of Saints five goals today.
It's not a view based on one player; it is a general overview and yes, maybe be seen as arrogant, but I do feel that UK fans do often miss players ability; it's just my view and closely linked to why I think as a national team we never seem to do anything anymore, but that is a way different discussion. Yes, it is head to the ground time. I hope you are right and we are discussing the best of the 5 goals later. Enjoy the game.
Just seen this. we are having a good exchange Black. I still think we see this topic the same but from different angles. I am not defending his time at Southampton; I think he was a let-down and he didn't deliver. No argument from me. His time was "fruitless". The point I have tried to get across is that I think he is a good player with good ability, who didn't perform here. Is that difficult to get across or have I worded it poorly? My "defending" him is not really defending him and I would apply it no matter what he cost and where he came from if I felt it true. My comments all come from reading several posters who have said he was not a good footballer or implied that. I can objectively look at a player who did not succeed with our club, yet is still a good footballer. There is no doubt he did not deliver for Southampton, and I did not like his time here and I thought he behaved like a spoiled prima donna. That doesn't make him a bad footballer. This last sentence is probably the most coherent I have used to explain my view. I wonder if those who are so quick to defend him would do the same if he was an unfashionable, unpopular, cheaper purchase from the lower divisions. Probably not. Like Jayrod last season? I defended him when he was getting stick on here. I still defend him now when people moan when he misses a chance. Like Guly? Like Fox? Defended both of those too (although with Fox that was in the Championship as I didn't think he was good enough for a Premier League team)
Doesn't matter if the player was cheap or broke our transfer record. You can still see if a player is good or not. A few people get blinded by the fee and expect a foreign player to adapt straight away. It is very rare a player that is from abroad and in our price range can adapt straight away. As for last comment you can twist it with ease. I wonder if the people that slate him would do if he was a cheap buy? I doubt it. It's because he was a expensive people moan he didn't adapt from the off and scoring loads of goals. I don't get it myself, in both cases(cheap and expensive) the player needs time to adapt. We just get some people being very short sighted.
Exactly right, particularly with the bolded bit. And for what it's worth, I probably wouldn't have been as quick to defend him if he was a cheap lower division purchase, because Osvaldo has actually shown that he's got excessive talent while a cheap lad from the lower leagues wouldn't have.
This I do agree with. I used to play with a kid who played in a trial match for Saints in which he scored 4 goals and yet he wasn't taken up. Rightly so to as he had all the skill but always played with his head down and was infuriating to play with. I still can't say I saw much with Osvaldo though. I was prepared to give him some time before passing judgement but he obviously wasn't prepared to give himself the time to show us.
I think the confusion actually stems from my initial post, not any of yours. I understand exactly the point you have been making. What I meant - I thought it clear when I wrote it - was that Osvaldo was not good enough while playing for us, not that he isn't good enough full stop. I never have, and still don't doubt that there is obviously something to his game; that he has talent. Simply being picked for Italy would do enough to suggest this. I just don't think he showed it for us. So, in sum, yes we are just arguing the same case, ha! My comment about lower league players was more a general assumption about football fans than a personal dig at you. No need to defend yourself there. Enjoy the game!!
Well yeah, that's my point (though poorly made, admittedly). Every player should start on a blank page, and neither have to perform above or below their potential to cause a stir etc. I understand it is very unrealistic to ask this, even of myself. We all get caught up in the glamour of a big money signing etc. The point about allowing players time, of course this is valid, but just how much time and patience can you afford in today's game when you gamble so much on one individual? It's not ideal, but it's just the way it is unfortunately. Hence why managers rarely last for longer than 12 months these days. If a 15 million pound striker takes a season to settle, how much does he really "cost"?
Well, anyway. It appears Dani thought the British game too physical, relying on that more than tactics and technique. Juventus is where he has found himself and he wants to make the move permanent: http://www.express.co.uk/sport/foot...i-Osvaldo-struggled-with-physical-Premiership
Part of football transfers is to take chances. Look at Lovren? He has been class. Loads of people were writing him off when he joined us. Simply answer is some players just don't work out for whatever reason.
When you say "lots of people" do you mean lots of people lead by Dan? We mustn't let him forget that!!
José Fonte: “There have been a couple of text messages, apologising and stuff. But some things take time to heal. He left, obviously he left for a reason, and it was for the best for the team and the club. We move on, I’ve moved on and he has surely moved on as well, so everything is alright. The club thought it was for the best, so, if the club decided that it is for the best, then, obviously, it will be best for the group.”
