Alexis Sanchez - Inter watch

MadDogg

Full Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
10,374
Location
Manchester Utd never lose, just run out of time
He had chance after chance, he is useless now. I don't see how people can't see this.
He never got a chance for us in the centre (which is where the person you are replying to said). The only time he played there was in a preseason, and that was probably the best he looked for us. Obviously that was only preseason, but it's surprising he never got a chance there for us properly when it was blatantly obvious he was never going to work out wide. Would it have worked out in the centre? Probably not, but it would have been nice to try it before completely giving up.

That doesn't mean I don't agree with getting rid of him. Considering I believe he was probably causing issues in the dressing room (not necessarily him himself, but simply his wages hanging over everybody while being the worst performing player in the team), we had to take the opportunity to get him out. But I would have liked to have given him the chance centrally before it came to that.
 

youngrell

Full Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2016
Messages
1,291
Location
South Wales
He never got a chance for us in the centre (which is where the person you are replying to said). The only time he played there was in a preseason, and that was probably the best he looked for us. Obviously that was only preseason, but it's surprising he never got a chance there for us properly when it was blatantly obvious he was never going to work out wide. Would it have worked out in the centre? Probably not, but it would have been nice to try it before completely giving up.

That doesn't mean I don't agree with getting rid of him. Considering I believe he was probably causing issues in the dressing room (not necessarily him himself, but simply his wages hanging over everybody while being the worst performing player in the team), we had to take the opportunity to get him out. But I would have liked to have given him the chance centrally before it came to that.
He actually played centrally in the CL away to Juve and I thought it was one of his better performances for us, I think also away at Bournemouth.

Anyway, playing better centrally and being good enough centrally are two different things, guy is shot.
 

Shamana

Full Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
2,047
Yeah, that's what it really boils down to. I'm almost certain he would have been better if we'd played him in the centre. But he probably still wouldn't have been good enough.
He's just never gonna be good enough to justify his wages which is the problem. All our best performers will rightly want to be paid more than he is for contributing feck all.
 

Sir Scott McToMinay

New Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2018
Messages
2,739
Location
Acapulco, Somalia
I see for some people 18 months wasn’t a long enough time to grasp that we may as well play Rojo in Sanchez’s position at United and there wouldn’t be any difference in productivity and effectiveness.

We played him on the right, we played him on the left, we played him in the center and he was awful, truly awful for us.
 

Marcelinho87

Full Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
5,268
Location
Barnsley
I actually think it's us that's the problem not these players.... Everybody who comes here turns to dog shit.

Would Sanchez have been this bad at City? I have my doubts.
 

Wednesday at Stoke

Full Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2014
Messages
15,971
Location
København
Supports
Time Travel
He won’t physically hold up as soon as he sees consistent game time at a high intensity. It’s a write off sooner than later.
 

haram

New Member
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
12,921
He won’t physically hold up as soon as he sees consistent game time at a high intensity. It’s a write off sooner than later.
Well that's why they have a selection of forwards that they can rotate.
 

Lee565

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2019
Messages
1,247
I actually think it's us that's the problem not these players.... Everybody who comes here turns to dog shit.

Would Sanchez have been this bad at City? I have my doubts.
This is how I see it, flair and technically gifted players have all suffered at this club massively since fergie left, I doubt Guardiola would have got it that terribly wrong when he was trying to bring Sanchez to man city, he's hardly put a foot wrong in recruitment, especially in attack, nolito was probably the worst and even then the player was struggling with life in England and wanted to go back home.

Imagine if we carry on our current form through the whole season and we and end up finishing around 8th-10th in the league whilst our "reject" strikers end up firing inter Milan to the serie A title, its early days yet but neither scenario looks far fetched at the moment.
 

Shamana

Full Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
2,047
I actually think it's us that's the problem not these players.... Everybody who comes here turns to dog shit.

Would Sanchez have been this bad at City? I have my doubts.
There is definitely a pattern. It's difficult to say which is which.
 

Roughseas

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
36
Having and underperformer on massive wages when you are trying to renew half of your squads contracts would be idiotic. It also affects team chemistry, and that’s one of the big issues Ole needs to work on- have us playing like a team and not like 11 Rashys.
 

AFC NimbleThumb

Full Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2019
Messages
1,410
Hes going to be great for Inter, just like Lukaku.
Wouldn’t go as far as ‘great’ but played central asked for goals he’ll thrive.

Paying him to play for another team while youngsters can’t get off the bench when we’re 1-0 down is the stupidest thing we did this summer & that takes some doing.
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
24,273
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
I see for some people 18 months wasn’t a long enough time to grasp that we may as well play Rojo in Sanchez’s position at United and there wouldn’t be any difference in productivity and effectiveness.

We played him on the right, we played him on the left, we played him in the center and he was awful, truly awful for us.
I pity sanchez. The players dont like him everytime i see him playing you can see the others arent supporting him enough.

Our players shouldnt have the power to choose who they prefer to play with.
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
24,273
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
Having and underperformer on massive wages when you are trying to renew half of your squads contracts would be idiotic. It also affects team chemistry, and that’s one of the big issues Ole needs to work on- have us playing like a team and not like 11 Rashys.
It's a bad thing that half our squad cant accept there's a better paid player looking for pension fund and refuse to fully accept him.

It's hurting the club and the cause and it's unprofessional.

What if maguire is next? Or awb? Or james because he's stealing the limelight and making them look bad?
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
24,273
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
Wouldn’t go as far as ‘great’ but played central asked for goals he’ll thrive.

Paying him to play for another team while youngsters can’t get off the bench when we’re 1-0 down is the stupidest thing we did this summer & that takes some doing.
I can understand if we actually sold him to cut loss.

But we're still paying for his salary while he's banging goals for other teams.

Stupidity. Might as well let him warm the bench, an option is better than no options. We paid for it anyway
 

AFC NimbleThumb

Full Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2019
Messages
1,410
Having and underperformer on massive wages when you are trying to renew half of your squads contracts would be idiotic. It also affects team chemistry, and that’s one of the big issues Ole needs to work on- have us playing like a team and not like 11 Rashys.
He’s still a Manchester United employer & claiming his wage, it’s just now shared amongst 2 clubs & the club paying more is the one he isn’t playing for.

The wage excuse is a fallacy, if we took care of business appropriately then we’d have signed the likes of Rashford before the major payday or at least had him on a sliding scale ala Spurs youngsters.

If we were successfully managing things off the field, the Sanchez contract would be an anomaly but agents know they can bully us so they do.

Letting Mata leave on a free wouldn’t scupper the club. Realising Rashford is a premier talent in world football & continue to renew & extend his deal frequently wouldn’t either.

We’re paying Sanchez to play elsewhere, if anything it tells players performances at the club don’t matter cause we’ll do all we can to find you the best move regardless of service.
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
24,273
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
He’s still a Manchester United employer & claiming his wage, it’s just now shared amongst 2 clubs & the club paying more is the one he isn’t playing for.

The wage excuse is a fallacy, if we took care of business appropriately then we’d have signed the likes of Rashford before the major payday or at least had him on a sliding scale ala Spurs youngsters.

If we were successfully managing things off the field, the Sanchez contract would be an anomaly but agents know they can bully us so they do.

Letting Mata leave on a free wouldn’t scupper the club. Realising Rashford is a premier talent in world football & continue to renew & extend his deal frequently wouldn’t either.

We’re paying Sanchez to play elsewhere, if anything it tells players performances at the club don’t matter cause we’ll do all we can to find you the best move regardless of service.
Getting sanchez on 350k per week on a free transfer is a shrewd business (dressing room jealousy aside).

The total outlay of paying him 350k per week for 4 years is roundly 60m.

Compared to buying a player of his caliber (again, at time we dont know he'll turn into shit) for say 50m which is the going rate and pay him 200k perweek (again 200k is reasonable for a player like him without hindsight). That's total of 50+40 = 90m
 

AFC NimbleThumb

Full Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2019
Messages
1,410
We're only paying about 40% of his salary this way.
Reports state anything from between 40-60%, members of the forum are not in the negotiations so this point should be mute.

Whether it is 40%-60% he is reported to be the clubs highest earner, which would put him in the £300-£400k range.

We’re [likely, as I don’t know] paying him £150-£200k to score goals elsewhere whilst we have youngsters that are not ready being forced into a toxic set up.

Sanchez leaving once our window had closed & we could not replace; accompanied with not replacing Lukaku was malpractice.
 

awop

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
899
Location
Paris
Supports
Arsenal
Getting sanchez on 350k per week on a free transfer is a shrewd business (dressing room jealousy aside).

The total outlay of paying him 350k per week for 4 years is roundly 60m.

Compared to buying a player of his caliber (again, at time we dont know he'll turn into shit) for say 50m which is the going rate and pay him 200k perweek (again 200k is reasonable for a player like him without hindsight). That's total of 50+40 = 90m
He wasn't free though, you lost a 20/30m asset in the deal by giving us Mikhitaryan.
 

Casanova85

New Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2018
Messages
4,218
Location
Northwestern Mediterranean
Supports
Cruyff/SAF
I'm glad Lukaku is gone (18-19 still an open wound), but really, if Rashford was supposed to be our new CF (if Martial injured or suspended) we might as well have kept Sánchez as our bench CF. He's done as an explosive winger, but as a CF for the assists and sitters, could have worked...
 

charlenefan

Far less insightful than the other Charley
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
22,205
He did alright tonight tbf, hopefully he does well enough Inter want to keep him
 

Wednesday at Stoke

Full Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2014
Messages
15,971
Location
København
Supports
Time Travel
I'm glad Lukaku is gone (18-19 still an open wound), but really, if Rashford was supposed to be our new CF (if Martial injured or suspended) we might as well have kept Sánchez as our bench CF. He's done as an explosive winger, but as a CF for the assists and sitters, could have worked...
He was sent packing to avoid every player up for an extension using his wage package as a measuring stick for their own demands.
 

manutddjw

Full Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
3,293
Location
Canada
Didn’t think he was great, but then again we have Lingard whose far worse so it’s hard to really gloat about anything
 

jem

Full Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,577
Location
Toronto
He was sent packing to avoid every player up for an extension using his wage package as a measuring stick for their own demands.
Well maybe those undeserving gimps should be sent packing. Yes Sanchez was bad for us, but at least he had previous to justify a big contract. What justifies giving bumper contracts to the likes of Rashford and Lingard?
 

Florida Man

Cartoon expert and crap superhero
Joined
Jan 24, 2014
Messages
12,645
Location
Florida, man
Well maybe those undeserving gimps should be sent packing. Yes Sanchez was bad for us, but at least he had previous to justify a big contract. What justifies giving bumper contracts to the likes of Rashford and Lingard?
It’s a good point.
 

Sterling Archer

New Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2016
Messages
4,293
Well maybe those undeserving gimps should be sent packing. Yes Sanchez was bad for us, but at least he had previous to justify a big contract. What justifies giving bumper contracts to the likes of Rashford and Lingard?
Great perspective. Can you blame someone for getting old? I can blame someone for being in their prime and not applying themselves well enough.
 

Beans

Full Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
373
Location
Midwest, USA
He was sent packing to avoid every player up for an extension using his wage package as a measuring stick for their own demands.
I think getting our wage structure under control is a big part of our problem. If we pay 200,000 a week to the likes of Rashford and Martial then what will an actual top player expect to make?! It attracts mercenaries who are past it, though our decision making in transfer choices is an even bigger problem. We could have paid City level fees and wages if we'd only managed to select top players.

Take Sanchez. Well, Arsenal have every player hooked up to 100 sensors, and they saw that he wasn't able to hit the physical heights he was before. I'm sure his top speed, distance covered, number of sprints, dribbles and all the rest were down. We don't want to be the team coming in and buying up stars as they begin to decline physically, the game is just too much about running these days. Same thing with Schweinsteiger, Falcao, even Mata had lost half a step by the time he got here.

We were much better off taking punts on the likes of Zaha and Depay. At least their wages are reasonable, and they might get better.
 

RedRonaldo

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
10,774
Getting sanchez on 350k per week on a free transfer is a shrewd business (dressing room jealousy aside).

The total outlay of paying him 350k per week for 4 years is roundly 60m.

Compared to buying a player of his caliber (again, at time we dont know he'll turn into shit) for say 50m which is the going rate and pay him 200k perweek (again 200k is reasonable for a player like him without hindsight). That's total of 50+40 = 90m
I did the maths and thought it’s around 75m, if add signing on fees and agent fees, would easily cost over 80m.