Is Ricky Alverez not the answer to our problems regarding a creative midfielder. Can Big Dick not get the best out of him ? With this pending legal battle with Inter, why don't we keep him and play him to his strengths, I reckon he could be a big player for us, you don't get to play for Inter and Argentina while being a **** player..
Phew! Well, first off, I think Alvarez is a terrific player. He didn't show much for SAFC last season apart from the Fulham game. But the skill is definitely there, and it was his first half season in the PL So we do have to make some allowances. The question is, did Inter knowingly sell us a pup and how bad is that knee of his? On the other hand, if it was that bad at the time of the transfer, why didn't SAFC's medical pick it up? It's a complicated case, and I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Inter wouldn't allow the operation. He still hasn't had his op yet so he's not even at the half way stage of recovery from a bad injury. That's no good to us. Inter should have agreed to the op when he needed it and we'd probably be in training now. He needed the Op back in early march btw.
Jesus, that makes it more complicated. Inter did not knowingly sell us a pup - he was injured after his loan to England. According to them (and it is disputed) we agreed to sign him permanently if we stayed up. In early March, we were not certain of staying up at all, so he was still technically Inter's player. Thus,they had every right to block the operation if that's what they thought was right. By May, we had stayed up, and now it's up to us what we do with him - he's our player since May.. I'm not qualified to comment further on this. But frankly, just looking at it, I don't think SAFC has a very good case. It will probably hinge on the original agreement though - and that has never been made public. We'll see.
If both him and Rodwell got working to be Johnson's standard we might not need to pay £15 m for Townsend !, although he is an excellent midfielder. We have players at this club who need to up their speed and prove they can be brilliant for us.
Sunderland have claimed that Inter broke the terms by refusing to consent to the Op(They will have retained legal obligation to pay towards the players treatment in the agreement like all loans) if Inter have refused the Op that they were legaly required to contribute to payments, It doesn't look good for Inter, because you have got to weigh up lost value from inters refusal and potential permanent damage by inter prolonging the injury. (Remember we wanted him to have the op) These things effect value and wage packages. Pre agreed price and wages should no longer valid due to Inter's negligence and voiding of the agreement, not Sunderland. We wanted to negotiate a lower price to account for this and Inter refused. So we've pulled the plug and said see you in court if you don't like it. I can't see it how it equates to Sunderland being in a bad position. It does account to inter wanting have their cake and eat it the way I see it. It sounds like they chucked their own player to dogs on the gamble we stay up so they don't have to pay their legal share towards treatment and still coup the full fee. It's extremely unethical and could open up doors for loans to be exploited and completely destroying the integrity of a loan transfer. Inter winning means no club would ever risk loaning to buy again in case the loaning club ****s them over. Can't see FIFA allowing it as in the big picture could lead to a huge dent in the footballing economy. FIFA should not be rewarding fat, greedy, unethical inter whilst cutting off football's nose to spite it's face.
You're welcome to your opinion, mate. I happen to disagree - and I presume I have a right to do that.
Problem is if we are forced to buy hhim we lose a sizeable chunk of our budget on a dud who isn'tcut out for English football and doesn't really fit into Advocaat system.
My question is this...why did Inter block the op? Why would they do that? He's no good to anyone injured so to block the op is a strange one. Even if one of their own medical staff checked things out but it doesn't appear to be the case...
I'm hoping we can wriggle out of signing him, he's no doubt got ability but not sure he's shown that he has the mental strength to be successful here, granted his first season was cut short with injuries and allowing time for a player to adapt to playing in England. I'm not sure where the reasoning would be to play him as a creative midfielder through the middle, he didn't seem to get to grips with the pace and physicality of the league out wide so wouldn't have a cat in hells chance through the middle.
Because that's where he plays. What's better reasoning than play him in his natural, strongest position? Same applied to any player. Fact is not a single Sunderland fan has seen him pull on our shirt and play in his natural position, so to write him off in it is insane imo. He's too slow to play wide but his forward passing and vission would be unrivaled in our current squad. He's a central creator, it's his bread and butter but typical Poyet wanted him to be something he wasn't. Don't let deluded Poyet give you the wrong idea about him. This tells you his position http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/ricardo-alvarez/profil/spieler/76077 this tells you where he played in his last season at inter game by game. http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/ricardo-alvarez/leistungsdatendetails/spieler/76077/plus//saison/2013
To be honest I didn't know he'd even played through the middle before(I was just going off what I saw last year), if that's where he normally plays I stand corrected, but I'd still be concerned about how he could deal with the physicality of the premier league in the middle of the park based on how he didn't handle it too well last year. If we end up having to sign him he might well come good but from what he's shown so far he's a show pony and a luxury player we can't really afford to carry.
It was a shock to the system like, out of position and unfamiliar with the league. I'd still take him, he's made for Defoe's runs, but that 7m is a piss take considering Inter intentionally prolonged his Injury. 3m-4m max. That won't happen so we're better off out of it completly imo.
I'd agree with that mate, £3-4 million would be worth a punt, even if he then just ends up as an impact sub sort of player you've not really been ripped off then.
I reckon this is all posturing - we'll probably have to take him, but at a discount. At face value, if we could have him for 3-4 million, it would be an ok deal. However this does not take into account the proportion of our wage budget he'd chewing up. The other major issues are his confidence - I just couldn't see him getting his act together for us after this saga - and his damn knee. In the end, we need to get the price down far enough so that we can immediately sell him on at an attractive price. He's just got too many knobs on him and we can't afford to experiment. If we win the arbitration and don't have to buy, I'd be very, very happy.
If the only condition on the contract states Sunderland must buy Ricky if we stay up, then it looks a pretty nailed on case we are stuck with him. Nearly 20m on Rodwell and Ricky? Serious questions need to be asked.
