Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Yeah, seamless play. Also looked like a player we were struggling to contain. I was out and watching on my phone, so only caught glimpses.
Agree. He's putting up good numbers now, but I don't see him as a certain profile in a big team, like some make him out to be.
From comments he was misused at Ajax, so he shouldn't be a player the club should be targeting if under Eth. A wide player who's creative and dynamic would be Olise a far better fit.
Yeah think that's spot on.
He's best as a roaming/free midfielder to run forward with the ball through the middle... Not a pure 10, but the hybrid 8/10/mezzala type. Capable of being a false 9 or a inverted winger but not a natural there.
This is him all over though, one game he'll run the show and the next he won't find a team mate. When he is on form, he's far more effective than Anthony, his floor is much lower though.
Antony £86m
Scored twice against Egypt (AFCON)
Cheers.
I find it concerning he couldn't assess between the two when it takes less than a minute to see the gulf between them; Kudus is better than him at everything except maybe defensive work; faster, stronger and smarter, too.
ETH didn't really rate Kudus. In fact him leaving Ajax and taking Antony with him allowed Kudus to step into the team to show the talent he always had. That's the irony of it all.
That’s just false, but ok.
Yeah but that's not ok, what's this thing where people want to challenge your ideas but then don't want to put theirs on the table. If what I said is false, come with examples and reasons why. I may learn a thing or 2 and could even change my supposedly wrong assumption.
Because when the crux of your comment is to throw slights at the other two it makes it seem as if you’re just posting with an agenda. And that’s ok, but tiresome. But here is what actually happened if you do want to know: He used him more as an 8/10 than out wide on the wings, meaning his competition was Gravenberch, Klaassen, and to a lesser extent Berghuis and Tadic. His true rise to glory was being used as a F9, in the CL, by Megamind. Schreuder was using him in parts as a 10 early in the season but to overall less team success, then when he got fired the caretakers shifted him out wide moreso, where he continued and arguably was better than in his role as a F9. On top of that, he was healthy for the full season, and didn’t deal with knee issues like at the start of year one or rib issues in year two (I may be switching the years) where he missed large chunks of the season under Erik. If you want to bury EtH for failing to recognize the position he’d excel more at, by all means, but it has nothing to do with Antony.
well said
How is saying ETH and Antony leaving Ajax paved the way for Kudus a slight on those 2. At worst your can call it a blessing in disguise for Kudus career. I've followed Kudus career so I'm aware of the injury issues during ETH time. I'm not one those who say ETH should've signed Kudus over Antony as their career timelines aren't comparable. Antony was a better prospect than Kudus when he was signed but if ETH really rated Kudus he would have gone back to Ajax again and bought him. Evidently he was available for just over half what we paid for Antony. Instead he decided to spend more on Mason Mount. That is the indictment on ETH.
A year later Kudus was available at a very affordable price and was at the right development level and we still didn't sign him. What was the excuse then?
ETH chose to sign Mason Mount who many prefer pretending is rubbish, who doesn't play the same role as Kudus currently. You'd have grounds to complain and claim ETH is indicted by the decision if Kudus was excelling as a center midfielder at West Ham. Yet he operates at right wing for them, a role Garnacho is occupying with increasing aplomb currently. A role Mount was NEVER purchased to occupy.
When good players are available at fair prices, you buy them. It's called squad building. Do Madrid need Endrick right now? No, but they're still buying him. Did they need Vinicius when they bought him? again no but they can't do without him now. The reason we're playing Garnacho in the right position is because the player we signed to play there has been underwhelming at best. Signing Kudus even as cover for Antony would leave Garnacho free to compete on the left with Rashford. Feck who knows it would have even allowed us to play Sancho on his preferred position on the left, moving Rashford to compete up top with Hojlund. You now have decent cover and competition in all areas upfront.
I agree. Thats what we did with likes of Mount and THEN run out of money. I have almost no doubt if we didn't we'd have signed Kudus in addition to Rasmus for our attack at the price he went for to West Ham
All true. Yet still you are comparing fruit with animals. Real Madrid are a club with no debt, excellent recruitment practice, top end negotiation skill and long term planning. Manchester United in comparison have heavy debt, poor recruitment practice, low end negotiation skill and no discernable long term planning till now. Its like judging fish on tree climbing.
The ONLY reason they are baflled are based on two false premises: the first being he was both ready and available for transfer by the time we signed Antony. The second being we chose to bag others over him rather than simply running out of money due to our poor negoation skills with deals
I get why some feel that way. But as I said earlier, Kudus isn't excelling in the league in the role Mount was bought for. Neither is the sample size of play time for Mount big enough for ANYONE to soundly claim his signing was wrong.
I agree that saying we should've signed Kudus instead of Antony at the time he was signed is dealing in hindsight. But given that a year later Kudus had come on leaps and could have also been got easily is so disappointing. It stems from the issues you listed above. We had open channel to Ajax and Ajax were willing to sell unlike with Antony. It was much easier transfer to make so the fact that we didn't push when we did for many others including Mount & Amrabat tells me the manager didn't rate Kudus that much or Kudus didn't want to come here - which is untrue.
I'd buy the 'he deserves criticism " yet he doesn't do negotations. His list had Kim Nin jae, Amrabat, Kudus and a striker on it. All players we needed in addition to what we got. So to blame him "for running out of money" of 'having poor recruitment choices' makes no sense. Even for the Antony transfer. It's not he who wanted to go back late in the window to bag him for 80m. That decision was taken above his head!
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
