Ben Chilwell

Status
Not open for further replies.
Doubt there's any truth to this. Perma crock and not good enough anyway, agent trying to drum up interest.

If I were over a PL club, I wouldn't give Chelsea a penny, they have a squad of over 40 players ffs, screw them, let them wallow in the financial misery they'll undoubtedly find themselves in a a couple of years.
 
A bit of a shame this, as he is a very good player. But he seems to be injury prone, so would probably cause as many problems as he addresses. I would definitely take him, if it was on some sort of pay-to-play contract.. '..you play a certain amount of games, then we pay you and your selling club this amount...'

Otherwise, I think we have to say no. But if someone gets this right, they are getting one of the best left-backs in the Premiership.
 
If he's an injury-prone type I can't see why our recruitment folks think this makes sense. Maybe they know something we don't, or maybe, just maybe there is no substance in the rumours.
 
SirMattlives said:
If he's an injury-prone type I can't see why our recruitment folks think this makes sense. Maybe they know something we don't, or maybe, just maybe there is no substance in the rumours.
Click to expand...
The rumours are of him being offered as opposed to our interest.
 
Would he be a good pay per play option? They sound desperate.
 
I would take Chillwell on loan. If Luke Shaw is only fit for half of the season, Chilwell could take up the slack. They could both make up two halves of a decent left back for the season. He's also good pals with Mount and Shaw, so it's another positive element that bonds the team.

Significant upgrade on the likes of Reguilon, Malacia or Dalot playing on the left.
 
Wheato said:
I would take Chillwell on loan. If Luke Shaw is only fit for half of the season, Chilwell could take up the slack. They could both make up two halves of a decent left back for the season. He's also good pals with Mount and Shaw, so it's another positive element that bonds the team.

Significant upgrade on the likes of Reguilon, Malacia or Dalot playing on the left.
Click to expand...
Unlikely, he's more injury prone than Shaw is
 
Another injury prone left back? We already have Shaw and Malacia, but to add another one? No thanks
 
Robertd0803 said:
First one definitley.
Second one, Im not sure Ineos feel the need to go down the Glazer style PR route about targets to cover the lack of willingness to spend. Or at least I hope
Click to expand...
I agree. That kind of cheap PR games were very Glazer style, and I hope INEOS are better than that
 
ROFLUTION said:
I'd say yes, but he's mostly been used as an advanced left wing-back. He's great at arriving the right places and creating chances, but I can't say I know enough about his defensive qualities as I've mostly watched him in attack. His role would be different here at United in a 4-3-3.
Click to expand...
He's still a very good and dangerous attacking left back. He's also an elite player in the air. Has lost a step due to injury that has reduced his effectiveness when isolated as a 1v1 player.

Not the best passer in tight areas but generally a good if not elite crosser of the ball. Equally comfortably overlapping or underlapping to either cross or shoot when in the final third but don't expect him to create space for himself.
 
pocco said:
I was discussing him last season with Chelsea supporters who were saying he's great etc, whereas I thought Cucurella was a better player and that Chilwell is massively overrated. @P-Ro @jakko @Nickholas do you still all rate him that highly?
Click to expand...
He has very clear strengths and weaknesses that will always limit him unless they are accounted for.

Cucurella is the better and more versatile player overall - but Chilwell is better at being an attacking fullback than Cucurella is at doing any one particular thing, if that makes sense.
 
FootyGirl88 said:
Do you have the figures for that?
Click to expand...

Last 3 seasons total club appearances, most recent season first

CHILWELL (64) 21, 30, 13
SHAW (89) 15,47,27

Some other mug can work out what % of the club's games those equate to, but it's pretty clear Shaw is tiers above Chilwell in getting near the pitch
 
Sandikan said:
Last 3 seasons total club appearances, most recent season first

CHILWELL (64) 21, 30, 13
SHAW (89) 15,47,27

Some other mug can work out what % of the club's games those equate to, but it's pretty clear Shaw is tiers above Chilwell in getting near the pitch
Click to expand...

thanks!
 
As United fans, sometimes we can be our own worst enemies. Why is anyone giving traction to this story? Nothing about this suggests United would be anywhere near it. There is absolutely nothing about the player that aligns with the philosophy of the new management.

As United fans, it's incumbent upon you to sort through the bullshit, do your job people.
 
Shame we sold Kambwala, we could have had a left sided defence of Chilly Willy.
 
Cantonagotmehere said:
Maybe it's being short-sighted, but I would not pay Chelsea anything at all for him. No interest in helping balance their books.
Click to expand...

Yep we did enough of that with the ridiculous 50m on Mount with 1 year left on his deal!
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
He's still a very good and dangerous attacking left back. He's also an elite player in the air. Has lost a step due to injury that has reduced his effectiveness when isolated as a 1v1 player.

Not the best passer in tight areas but generally a good if not elite crosser of the ball. Equally comfortably overlapping or underlapping to either cross or shoot when in the final third but don't expect him to create space for himself.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, what? Chilwell!?
 
This is surely just them offering him to us. That's all the story is. Nothing about how we've done business would suggest we sign Ben Chilwell. Poor guy is knackered. He's a free signing in January for Forest. Not someone you buy if you have a plan.
 
Are we looking for subject for our experiment on injury prone players to upgrade our treatment department?
 
The only deal to be done here is a non-starter anyway. With his injury record and the fact we shouldn’t be bailing them out of their own issues, unless it is a straight loan with close to zero cost and Chelsea paying his full wages, then I don’t see any logic behind it. Decent player for an area we have a weakness, but we shouldn’t be investing in someone of his profile. It feels to me as though LB will be an area that we focus on in future windows.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
He has very clear strengths and weaknesses that will always limit him unless they are accounted for.

Cucurella is the better and more versatile player overall - but Chilwell is better at being an attacking fullback than Cucurella is at doing any one particular thing, if that makes sense.
Click to expand...

See I think the way you've played him, he's not really been able to show that side of his play. But when I watched him at Brighton and wanted us to sign him, he was dangerous going forward. I think he showed that too at the Euros. I remember him being full of energy for 90 minutes and he was pretty clinical with his passing in and around the box. Maybe not the fastest, but he had no issue getting up and down the pitch.
 
pocco said:
See I think the way you've played him, he's not really been able to show that side of his play. But when I watched him at Brighton and wanted us to sign him, he was dangerous going forward. I think he showed that too at the Euros. I remember him being full of energy for 90 minutes and he was pretty clinical with his passing in and around the box. Maybe not the fastest, but he had no issue getting up and down the pitch.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's fair - and he's been moved around quite a bit (LCB under Potter a lot of the time, LWB on occasion, inverting into midfield under Poch, etc). I'm not saying Cucurella is a bad attacker or anything but it's very fair to say Chilwell remains better going forward.
 
Yakuza_devils said:
Are we looking for subject for our experiment on injury prone players to upgrade our treatment department?
Click to expand...
We aren't looking at anything, just another thing for fans to moan for no reason
 
The only left back in the league who is likely to miss more matches than Luke Shaw
 
Whitwell has reported on a few occasions that his information is that the club aren’t looking for a LB. We have Shaw, Malacia and Amass who are specialists and also Dalot, Mazraoui and Martinez who can cover. It shouldn’t be the problem it was last season. Chilwell is a none starter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.