Andre Onana image 24

Andre Onana Cameroon flag

2023-24 Performances


View full 2023-24 profile

5.6 Season Average Rating
Appearances
50
Clean sheets
13
Goals
0
Assists
0
Yellow cards
6

UpWithRivers

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
3,688
Why is everyone saying excellent game? He did nothing. That power shot right at him ok. But its bread and butter for any keeper. I'm not having a go at him. Just didn't see an excellent keeper performance. Just a quiet game thanks to the defence.
 

Oscar Bonavena

Full Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2022
Messages
1,360
Location
Ireland
Made one excellent reaction save from a (I think) Soucek header from a corner. His reactions to close range shots have been one of the areas of his game heavily criticised so only fair to acknowledge it.

There was another shot that he parried away well out of danger. A save any PL gk would be expected to make for sure, but parrying or punching the ball back into the danger zone was another feature of his game so hopefully it's something him and the gk coaches have worked on (or else I don't know what the f**k they're being paid for!)

But I'm still not convinced by the guy, I think the basic fundamentals of his goalkeeping technique when it comes to saving shots looks off, and it will continue to cost us softish goals. Not sure if that's something that be coached into him.
 

utdalltheway

Sexy Beast
Joined
Aug 20, 2001
Messages
20,557
Location
SoCal, USA
Why is everyone saying excellent game? He did nothing. That power shot right at him ok. But its bread and butter for any keeper. I'm not having a go at him. Just didn't see an excellent keeper performance. Just a quiet game thanks to the defence.
That save in the 11th minute was pretty good. That goes in and then we’re panicking and lose by 3 or more.
 

TwoSheds

More sheds (and tiles) than you, probably
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
13,023
Pleased with his performance today. One exceptional save, did ok at dealing with crosses and corners, kicking game was excellent. 8/10 for me, hope he can keep it up.
 

Sylar

Full Member
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
40,601
Wonder how his season would have looked if he had varane and Martinez for the majority of it, as well as mainoo case in front? Some consistency in front might have helped him settle better.
 

Mr Smith

Full Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2015
Messages
4,027
Location
Australia
Why is everyone saying excellent game? He did nothing. That power shot right at him ok. But its bread and butter for any keeper. I'm not having a go at him. Just didn't see an excellent keeper performance. Just a quiet game thanks to the defence.
He made some pretty important saves and was secure when coming for high balls/crosses. Should he not be praised for that, especially when it's an improvement? Sometimes I feel like people here begrudge players performing solidly and being praised for it once they've decided they're not good enough...
 

Hughes35

Full Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2014
Messages
2,633
His technique is really poor, several minor fumbles with even straight forward shots. When did he deliver a 'wow' save.
I agree completely, that's why i said I'm not a fan.

He did make a good save yesterday though to be fair to him.
 

Unam333

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
5,902
Good performance from his point of view.
Dealt with high crosses and corners, but his technique still looks a bit iffy.
 

Litch

Full Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2013
Messages
10,329
DId better than most people will be him credit for. Not sure when we stopped giving players the benefit of the doubt in their first season or did losing football games change our outlook on this? feck me some of our legends where absolutely dog shit in their first season...
 

Gordon Godot

New Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2016
Messages
1,374
DId better than most people will be him credit for. Not sure when we stopped giving players the benefit of the doubt in their first season or did losing football games change our outlook on this? feck me some of our legends where absolutely dog shit in their first season...
He's not a novice. We paid over $40m for a 27 year old who should be at his peak. Even though we could have had him on a free the previous summer. He has some large technical flaws and pretty much cost us champions league place. Its fair to question this. Its one thing to need some time to settle in, its another to have big technical flaws that aren't going to change much at his age.
 

Oranges038

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Messages
12,481
He's not a novice. We paid over $40m for a 27 year old who should be at his peak. Even though we could have had him on a free the previous summer. He has some large technical flaws and pretty much cost us champions league place. Its fair to question this. Its one thing to need some time to settle in, its another to have big technical flaws that aren't going to change much at his age.
Again and again you get told this isn't true and you still persist with it. He verbally agreed to join Inter Milan in November 2021, so he wasn't available for free to Utd or anyone else in that summer.
 

Gordon Godot

New Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2016
Messages
1,374
Again and again you get told this isn't true and you still persist with it. He verbally agreed to join Inter Milan in November 2021, so he wasn't available for free to Utd or anyone else in that summer.
Ok, though I think we all know a verbal agreement is worth very little, and ETH must have been aware of his contract situation. But we still paid over £40m for a player who was supposed to be at his peak, who did go on a free whether United might have reacted at the time or not. The key point remains its a lot of money for a player with key technical failings, has had some real shockers, and who hasnt so far had any real impact on our style of play.
 

RedRocket9908

Full Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2023
Messages
2,672
Location
Manchester
Ok, though I think we all know a verbal agreement is worth very little, and ETH must have been aware of his contract situation. But we still paid over £40m for a player who was supposed to be at his peak, who did go on a free whether United might have reacted at the time or not. The key point remains its a lot of money for a player with key technical failings, has had some real shockers, and who hasnt so far had any real impact on our style of play.
He signed a pre-contract agreement which is legally binding with Inter Milan in the January of the season his contract expired which was before Man Utd had even spoken to Erik about becoming our manager so he was never available to us on a free.
 

lex talionis

Full Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
14,339
Again and again you get told this isn't true and you still persist with it. He verbally agreed to join Inter Milan in November 2021, so he wasn't available for free to Utd or anyone else in that summer.
I believe you but a verbal -- I think you mean oral -- agreement in this context is not binding. If there were a written agreement that's a different matter but if what you mean is that there was a gentlemen's agreement, so to speak, not written on paper between Onana and Inter then it is the case that Onana "was available" if he could have been persuaded to join United instead of Inter. Maybe it's pure fantasy on our part to believe Onana could have been persuaded to join United instead of Inter, but then again he was persuaded to leave Inter for United so perhaps it wouldn't be pure fantasy to believe he could have been persuaded to join United instead of Inter in the first place.

Perhaps Italian law is different from US/UK law, but a verbal/oral agreement is almost never binding. A written agreement...absolutely binding. Your point is not well taken.
 

Cantonalegod

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 16, 2022
Messages
161
I believe you but a verbal -- I think you mean oral -- agreement in this context is not binding. If there were a written agreement that's a different matter but if what you mean is that there was a gentlemen's agreement, so to speak, not written on paper between Onana and Inter then it is the case that Onana "was available" if he could have been persuaded to join United instead of Inter. Maybe it's pure fantasy on our part to believe Onana could have been persuaded to join United instead of Inter, but then again he was persuaded to leave Inter for United so perhaps it wouldn't be pure fantasy to believe he could have been persuaded to join United instead of Inter in the first place.

Perhaps Italian law is different from US/UK law, but a verbal/oral agreement is almost never binding. A written agreement...absolutely binding. Your point is not well taken.
Read post #7301, explains it perfectly.
 

Pogue Mahone

Swiftie Fan Club President
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
134,399
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
I believe you but a verbal -- I think you mean oral -- agreement in this context is not binding. If there were a written agreement that's a different matter but if what you mean is that there was a gentlemen's agreement, so to speak, not written on paper between Onana and Inter then it is the case that Onana "was available" if he could have been persuaded to join United instead of Inter. Maybe it's pure fantasy on our part to believe Onana could have been persuaded to join United instead of Inter, but then again he was persuaded to leave Inter for United so perhaps it wouldn't be pure fantasy to believe he could have been persuaded to join United instead of Inter in the first place.

Perhaps Italian law is different from US/UK law, but a verbal/oral agreement is almost never binding. A written agreement...absolutely binding. Your point is not well taken.
Why do you keep doubling down when a 10 second google can confirm that what you’re claiming is factually wrong? It’s a bad habit to have on an internet message board.
 

lex talionis

Full Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
14,339
Why do you keep doubling down when a 10 second google can confirm that what you’re claiming is factually wrong? It’s a bad habit to have on an internet message board.
I assume that what this poster wrote was a true statement: "He verbally agreed to join Inter Milan in November 2021,"

If it's not a factually true statement that Onana had a "verbal agreement" with Inter in November 2021 then you should submit your complaint to him, not me. If it is a factually true statement that Onana had a verbal but not written agreement with Inter under canons of contract law, at least in the US and UK (no idea about Dutch and Italian law) a verbal agreement is in no way binding.

I'm spending the day tomorrow on the campus of a university in Palo Alto to work out terms of a contract and I can assure you that if the Definitive Agreement is not in writing, with my signature on it, there will be no binding contract. No handshake, no zoom call and no high five will ever constitute a binding agreement, and a claim of breach would never hold up in a court of law if all one had was a phone call or a handshake. Agreements need to be in writing to be binding agreements.

What brand of crackpipe did you say you were smoking?

The underlying point is irrelevant anyway as the amount we spent on Onana is immaterial to whether we should or should not have brought him in, but the point that the previous poster made that because Onana had a "verbal agreement" with Inter -- his claim, not mine -- in no way contradicts the point that if we wanted to hijack the deal of Onana going to Inter it was impossible because of the "verbal agreement". We could have hijacked the deal if we had wanted to. That was didn't is pointless to debate now other than dispensing with the idiocy that a verbal agreement Inter precluded Onana from entering into a written agreement with United if United and Onana had desired to enter into such an agreement, which is all the previous poster further back was pointing out.

According to this piece, which is what I'm saying, Onana signed with Inter as a free agent: https://onefootball.com/en/news/int...a-free-transfer-italian-media-report-33700290

In layman's terms, what it means to be a free agent is that Onana, in this case, could have signed with any club who wished to have him -- without enduring the burden of paying a transfer fee. Inter signed Onana on what is known as a "free transfer". I'm not suggesting United should have signed Onana on a free transfer as he's clearly a downgrade from De Gea, but what other posters are suggesting is that by virtue of Onana's status as a free agent United could have gone after Onana on a free. But in the end Inter signed Onana on a free and then after one season sold him to United for a reported 47m transfer fee, laughing all the way to the bank as they upgraded their keeper with Sommer.

We have quite a long way to go before United management learn how to build a squad. And some posters need to take remedial contract law lessons to understand the difference between an oral and a written contract.

Wait, does anyone doubt that Inter upgraded their keeper by getting rid of Onana and replacing with him with Sommer?

https://www.goal.com/en-gh/lists/se...ann-sommer-signing-season/bltf610f721156a6bca

The fear was that the Nerazzurri would seriously miss the Cameroonian goalkeeper, but the Swiss has proven a massive upgrade

In May of last year, Inter had little intention of selling Andre Onana. The Cameroonian goalkeeper had only arrived at San Siro the previous summer and was enjoying a stellar debut season in Serie A.

"It is difficult to predict the future," Inter CEO Beppe Marotta told reporters at the time, "but we have not received any offers and he wants to stay, so we do not intend to put him on the market." However, while Marotta is no Nostradamus,
he is a master of the transfer market, capable of spotting a bargain a mile away.

Manchester United are the laughingtock of international football when it comes to transfer activity. A decade ago it began with Fellaini, followed by numerous flops such as Alexis, and then most recently our Dutch manager has gotten it wrong with nearly every transfer in except Martinez. As for Onana, Inter hardly miss him at all.
 

Pogue Mahone

Swiftie Fan Club President
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
134,399
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
I assume that what this poster wrote was a true statement: "He verbally agreed to join Inter Milan in November 2021,"

If it's not a factually true statement that Onana had a "verbal agreement" with Inter in November 2021 then you should submit your complaint to him, not me. If it is a factually true statement that Onana had a verbal but not written agreement with Inter under canons of contract law, at least in the US and UK (no idea about Dutch and Italian law) a verbal agreement is in no way binding.

I'm spending the day tomorrow on the campus of a university in Palo Alto to work out terms of a contract and I can assure you that if the Definitive Agreement is not in writing, with my signature on it, there will be no binding contract. No handshake, no zoom call and no high five will ever constitute a binding agreement, and a claim of breach would never hold up in a court of law if all one had was a phone call or a handshake. Agreements need to be in writing to be binding agreements.

What brand of crackpipe did you say you were smoking?

The underlying point is irrelevant anyway as the amount we spent on Onana is immaterial to whether we should or should not have brought him in, but the point that the previous poster made that because Onana had a "verbal agreement" with Inter -- his claim, not mine -- in no way contradicts the point that if we wanted to hijack the deal of Onana going to Inter it was impossible because of the "verbal agreement". We could have hijacked the deal if we had wanted to. That was didn't is pointless to debate now other than dispensing with the idiocy that a verbal agreement Inter precluded Onana from entering into a written agreement with United if United and Onana had desired to enter into such an agreement, which is all the previous poster further back was pointing out.

According to this piece, which is what I'm saying, Onana signed with Inter as a free agent: https://onefootball.com/en/news/int...a-free-transfer-italian-media-report-33700290

In layman's terms, what it means to be a free agent is that Onana, in this case, could have signed with any club who wished to have him -- without enduring the burden of paying a transfer fee. Inter signed Onana on what is known as a "free transfer". I'm not suggesting United should have signed Onana on a free transfer as he's clearly a downgrade from De Gea, but what other posters are suggesting is that by virtue of Onana's status as a free agent United could have gone after Onana on a free. But in the end Inter signed Onana on a free and then after one season sold him to United for a reported 47m transfer fee, laughing all the way to the bank as they upgraded their keeper with Sommer.

We have quite a long way to go before United management learn how to build a squad. And some posters need to take remedial contract law lessons to understand the difference between an oral and a written contract.

Wait, does anyone doubt that Inter upgraded their keeper by getting rid of Onana and replacing with him with Sommer?

https://www.goal.com/en-gh/lists/se...ann-sommer-signing-season/bltf610f721156a6bca

The fear was that the Nerazzurri would seriously miss the Cameroonian goalkeeper, but the Swiss has proven a massive upgrade

In May of last year, Inter had little intention of selling Andre Onana. The Cameroonian goalkeeper had only arrived at San Siro the previous summer and was enjoying a stellar debut season in Serie A.

"It is difficult to predict the future," Inter CEO Beppe Marotta told reporters at the time, "but we have not received any offers and he wants to stay, so we do not intend to put him on the market." However, while Marotta is no Nostradamus,
he is a master of the transfer market, capable of spotting a bargain a mile away.

Manchester United are the laughingtock of international football when it comes to transfer activity. A decade ago it began with Fellaini, followed by numerous flops such as Alexis, and then most recently our Dutch manager has gotten it wrong with nearly every transfer in except Martinez. As for Onana, Inter hardly miss him at all.
:lol: You doubled down again. Amazing.
 

Gordon Godot

New Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2016
Messages
1,374
I assume that what this poster wrote was a true statement: "He verbally agreed to join Inter Milan in November 2021,"

If it's not a factually true statement that Onana had a "verbal agreement" with Inter in November 2021 then you should submit your complaint to him, not me. If it is a factually true statement that Onana had a verbal but not written agreement with Inter under canons of contract law, at least in the US and UK (no idea about Dutch and Italian law) a verbal agreement is in no way binding.

I'm spending the day tomorrow on the campus of a university in Palo Alto to work out terms of a contract and I can assure you that if the Definitive Agreement is not in writing, with my signature on it, there will be no binding contract. No handshake, no zoom call and no high five will ever constitute a binding agreement, and a claim of breach would never hold up in a court of law if all one had was a phone call or a handshake. Agreements need to be in writing to be binding agreements.

What brand of crackpipe did you say you were smoking?

The underlying point is irrelevant anyway as the amount we spent on Onana is immaterial to whether we should or should not have brought him in, but the point that the previous poster made that because Onana had a "verbal agreement" with Inter -- his claim, not mine -- in no way contradicts the point that if we wanted to hijack the deal of Onana going to Inter it was impossible because of the "verbal agreement". We could have hijacked the deal if we had wanted to. That was didn't is pointless to debate now other than dispensing with the idiocy that a verbal agreement Inter precluded Onana from entering into a written agreement with United if United and Onana had desired to enter into such an agreement, which is all the previous poster further back was pointing out.

According to this piece, which is what I'm saying, Onana signed with Inter as a free agent: https://onefootball.com/en/news/int...a-free-transfer-italian-media-report-33700290

In layman's terms, what it means to be a free agent is that Onana, in this case, could have signed with any club who wished to have him -- without enduring the burden of paying a transfer fee. Inter signed Onana on what is known as a "free transfer". I'm not suggesting United should have signed Onana on a free transfer as he's clearly a downgrade from De Gea, but what other posters are suggesting is that by virtue of Onana's status as a free agent United could have gone after Onana on a free. But in the end Inter signed Onana on a free and then after one season sold him to United for a reported 47m transfer fee, laughing all the way to the bank as they upgraded their keeper with Sommer.

We have quite a long way to go before United management learn how to build a squad. And some posters need to take remedial contract law lessons to understand the difference between an oral and a written contract.

Wait, does anyone doubt that Inter upgraded their keeper by getting rid of Onana and replacing with him with Sommer?

https://www.goal.com/en-gh/lists/se...ann-sommer-signing-season/bltf610f721156a6bca

The fear was that the Nerazzurri would seriously miss the Cameroonian goalkeeper, but the Swiss has proven a massive upgrade

In May of last year, Inter had little intention of selling Andre Onana. The Cameroonian goalkeeper had only arrived at San Siro the previous summer and was enjoying a stellar debut season in Serie A.

"It is difficult to predict the future," Inter CEO Beppe Marotta told reporters at the time, "but we have not received any offers and he wants to stay, so we do not intend to put him on the market." However, while Marotta is no Nostradamus,
he is a master of the transfer market, capable of spotting a bargain a mile away.

Manchester United are the laughingtock of international football when it comes to transfer activity. A decade ago it began with Fellaini, followed by numerous flops such as Alexis, and then most recently our Dutch manager has gotten it wrong with nearly every transfer in except Martinez. As for Onana, Inter hardly miss him at all.
Your post is spot on. My point is not the exact details of when or if Onana became available. But that we jumped in and paid £40m plus for a keeper that went on a free the summer before, with no great fight for his signature. And now Inter seem to have a better keeper. As with Antony, we have a manager who seems to be a truly awful judge of a player, even when he managed them for several seasons. £125m spent on two players who are simply not good enough and from a fair play perspective and wages they are on have set back our rebuild by a season or more. That's why I am still firmly in the ETH camp, he is either too stubborn or flawed as a manager to really cut it.
 

Oranges038

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Messages
12,481
:lol: You doubled down again. Amazing.
Thank feck I've ignored that.

He agreed in principle to join Inter in November 2021 and agreed the contract with them the following January. I don't think anything was officially announced/signed until May/June.

It's not hard for people to Google this stuff, once he had an agreement with Inter he was never going to walk away and go somewhere else.
 

Pogue Mahone

Swiftie Fan Club President
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
134,399
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Thank feck I've ignored that.

He agreed in principle to join Inter in November 2021 and agreed the contract with them the following January. I don't think anything was officially announced/signed until May/June.

It's not hard for people to Google this stuff, once he had an agreement with Inter he was never going to walk away and go somewhere else.
For sure. There’s two issues here. An oral contract can be legally binding. Or, at the very least, something that would need to be challenged in the courts. But also he might be someone who thinks giving his word stands for something. I’m sure footballers and their agents do actually care about the damage to their reputations if they’re seen as someone whose word can’t be trusted.
 

Oranges038

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Messages
12,481
For sure. There’s two issues here. An oral contract can be legally binding. Or, at the very least, something that would need to be challenged in the courts. But also he might be someone who thinks giving his word stands for something. I’m sure footballers and their agents do actually care about the damage to their reputations if they’re seen as someone whose word can’t be trusted.
Yeah, we've seen this lots of times before.
Players agreeing to move to a club and waiting almost a year to sign the contract. The revisionism going on here that he was available for free to Utd or ETH in the summer of 2022 and using it as a stick to beat the club or ETH with for signing him a year later is absolute bs.
 

Gordon Godot

New Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2016
Messages
1,374
Yeah, we've seen this lots of times before.
Players agreeing to move to a club and waiting almost a year to sign the contract. The revisionism going on here that he was available for free to Utd or ETH in the summer of 2022 and using it as a stick to beat the club or ETH with for signing him a year later is absolute bs.
Still missing the point. It was a great deal for Inter and we were rinsed yet again. Ended up with a technically flawed keeper on big wages and a huge fee sat on balance sheet. So we are stuck with him. Its not all on ETH, but as with Antony he knew these players inside you. Antony in particular is just gob smacking.

The stuff about speculation about an oral contract, what was or wasnt said, is just that, Speculation. Oral contracts are almost impossible to enforce given evidential constraints
 

RedRocket9908

Full Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2023
Messages
2,672
Location
Manchester
Still missing the point. It was a great deal for Inter and we were rinsed yet again. Ended up with a technically flawed keeper on big wages and a huge fee sat on balance sheet. So we are stuck with him. Its not all on ETH, but as with Antony he knew these players inside you. Antony in particular is just gob smacking.

The stuff about speculation about an oral contract, what was or wasnt said, is just that, Speculation. Oral contracts are almost impossible to enforce given evidential constraints
Claiming we were rinsed is a massive over-statement, £45m for a keeper that that was the best keeper in that seasons Champions League and was one of the front runners for World Goalkeeper of the Year is not being rinsed, especially when Chelsea paid £75m for Kepa.
 

Gordon Godot

New Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2016
Messages
1,374
Claiming we were rinsed is a massive over-statement, £45m for a keeper that that was the best keeper in that seasons Champions League and was one of the front runners for World Goalkeeper of the Year is not being rinsed, especially when Chelsea paid £75m for Kepa.
Strange we haven't seen that keeper play for us, not sure 'best keeper in the champions league' is a thing, is it? We were rinsed, especially given our FFP position and inability to spend this window. Chelsea are even more stupid with money that us. Still, keep on with the Onana love in.
 

Teja

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
6,018
45m is hardly getting rinsed. That's what decent GKs cost these days.

For reference: Ederson 6 years ago went for 40M. He'd probably cost double that now with football inflation the way it is. Alisson went for close to 70M (again 6 years ago) for a world record fee. Keeper world record fee will probably be more than 100M now.
 

lex talionis

Full Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
14,339
Oral contracts are not enforceable except in small claims court. Surely no one here can possibly believe that a conversation between a player’s agent and club staff that is not consummated with a signed contract can possibly be binding. Seriously, does anyone here believe that absent a signed agreement in writing that Onana could have sued Inter for breach had the club changed its mind about him?

What United should have done after the decision was made to get rid of De Gea is a different discussion which won’t end anytime soon, but if it is true that Inter got Onana on a free transfer — and I can only assume it is true but I really have no idea — it’s ludicrous to believe that United could not have gotten Onana on a free transfer.

If it is true that Inter got Onana on a free transfer, the real answer is that United weren’t interested in Onana at the time he was available on a free transfer. If we had expressed interest in Onana at that time maybe he would have said no, or maybe he would have said yes. We will never know, but what we do know is that Onana wanted to leave Inter once he learned United was interested, which at the very least invites the speculation. That he might have said yes when he was available on a free transfer, provided we had expressed interest at the time he was available on a free transfer, is hard to refute.
 
Last edited: