Terminating The Reguilón Loan Deal

Malone_Post

Full Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2022
Messages
845
Who’s bright idea was this then?

Once again we’re left with Lindelof playing left back because we have no fit left backs available. Malacia has been out all season & Shaw has always had injury problems. And yet we decide to get rid of the only natural alternative we had in the squad.

Just another genius decision from the club.
 

MikeUpNorth

Wobbles like a massive pair of tits
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
19,938
We were clearly happy moving Dalot to LB but then the Wan-Bissaka injury screwed us.
 

Bastian

Full Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2015
Messages
18,518
Supports
Mejbri
We likely thought Malacia was closer and we perhaps wanted to get a striker in on loan.
 

Wednesday at Stoke

Full Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2014
Messages
21,655
Location
Copenhagen
Supports
Time Travel
Another Murtough masterstroke to make it look like he’s being financially responsible after spending close to a small country’s GDP on Mount and Antony.
 

JB08

Searches for nude pics of Marcos Rojo
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
8,383
Shite decision and I said so at the time.

If Malacia were back playing, sure, it made sense. But even in that case considering Shaw's (lack of) availability it's probably smart to have three left backs.
 

prateik

Full Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
42,155
AWB back means Dalot at LB.. not as good as Shaw, but he will be better than Lindelof at LB..

whens AWB coming back?
 

CloneMC16

Full Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2021
Messages
4,424
I assume we thought Malacia was close to being back fit. He had a setback and it's screwed us. Wouldn't make sense to end the loan if we knew Malacia would still be injured by this point.

It's a shame, because he played well for us.
 

Woodzy

Full Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
14,720
Location
Cardiff
He’s at Brentford now right? Pretty sure he made a huge mistake yesterday.

We should have kept him though, especially as he was one of our better players the first half of the season.
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
53,190
Location
Hope, We Lose
The Malacia situation is very strange. At the current rate I wouldnt be surprised if once he finally is fit we sell him the next window

The only bright side is that Amass might get some time on the pitch at an accelerated rate, maybe just as a sub coming off the bench
 

TMDaines

Fun sponge.
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
13,959
Clearly something up with Malacia that the club do not want to shed light on. I can only assume that has worsened in recent months.
 

V.O.

Last Man Standing finalist 2019/20
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
7,930
Clearly something up with Malacia that the club do not want to shed light on. I can only assume that has worsened in recent months.
Between Malacia, Mount, Sancho and that period where Varane was fit but not playing, I'm not sure any other club has half as many mysterious absences.
 

midou

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
261
Location
Prague
It was a financial decision if I recall correctly, this is why we didn't go with Cucurella as that would have been a full-season loan.
 

Rood

nostradamus like gloater
Scout
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
21,260
Location
@United_Hour
Yes a really stupid decision that is hurting us now as Lindelof is a massive liability at fullback

When Reguilon left I assumed it was to make space for another loan player but clearly not
 

Oranges038

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Messages
11,947
He was shit. Termination was the right move.
Not replacing him was the wrong move.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,643
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Don’t see why it was a stupid decision. At the time the decision was made Malacia was due back before February. Had he returned as scheduled it would have looked a very stupid decision to retain Reguilon. Who was awful in his most recent appearances by the way. Not sure why that’s being ignored here.
 

Mr Pigeon

Illiterate Flying Rat
Scout
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
26,189
Location
bin
Why did we send him back? Why do we refuse to disclose the injuries and recovery times for players, and say it's to prevent other teams planning how to play against us, when we play the same way no matter which players play? Why did we spend so much on Antony?

Because we're fecking morons, that's why.
 

The Firestarter

Full Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
28,160
Why did we send him back? Why do we refuse to disclose the injuries and recovery times for players, and say it's to prevent other teams planning how to play against us, when we play the same way no matter which players play? Why did we spend so much on Antony?

Because we're fecking morons, that's why.
Pidgy dropping truth bombs on caf windscreens
 

Plant0x84

Shame we’re aren’t more like Brighton
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
12,851
Location
Carpark and snack area adjacent to the abyss
Must we complain about everything? The guy bearly played when Shaw was out, would have been entirely pointless to keep him on now players are coming back. AWB will be back, Malacia will be back, are we even certain that Shaw has a knock at this point? He could have gone off for picking up a yellow like Cas and Harry?
 

Superunknown

Full Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2019
Messages
8,238
In situations like this, I always prefer us to look within our own youth system and promote somebody, even if it's only for a few games. We've already got Shaw, Dalot, Malacia, and AWB on the books for the left and right back positions, which seems like a sensible amount. I understood the deal with bringing Reguilon on loan, but also understand why it's only a very short team deal to cover any injuries during that time period.

At the same time, it really isn't viable to have 3 or 4 choices for every position to cover every eventuality. Financially, that doesn't make a lot of sense. What do you do with those players when most of the squad/everyone is fit and available? You're then stuck with players who aren't playing. What we need to be careful of is just stacking the squad with numbers, rather than quality.

I do admit that I am concerned by the amount of time Malacia has missed with his injury and the full scale of the situation there. Shaw has missed a lot of time with injuries, so that concerns me, too. But, to have 3 or 4 left backs at the club or players who can fill in that position just seems silly in my opinion. Sometimes we just have to make do with what we have, even if that does seem a bit makeshift at times.
 

Rood

nostradamus like gloater
Scout
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
21,260
Location
@United_Hour
Don’t see why it was a stupid decision. At the time the decision was made Malacia was due back before February. Had he returned as scheduled it would have looked a very stupid decision to retain Reguilon. Who was awful in his most recent appearances by the way. Not sure why that’s being ignored here.
Relying on the fitness of a player who hasn't played even 1 minute the entire season and perennial sicknote Shaw is pretty stupid

Reguilon did alright I thought and certainly a better option to Lindelof at LB
 

gajender

Full Member
Joined
May 7, 2016
Messages
3,832
Didn't he also miss games due to injury in his short time here .
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,643
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Relying on the fitness of a player who hasn't played even 1 minute the entire season and perennial sicknote Shaw is pretty stupid

Reguilon did alright I thought and certainly a better option to Lindelof at LB
We’re not relying on the fitness of both of them. We’re relying on two players to cover one position between them. With the added option of Dalot playing there when AWB is available.

Which is exactly what we did last season, when Reguilon wouldn’t have got a look in and literally nobody would have claimed we were stupid not to loan another left back.
 

kps88

Full Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Messages
22,511
Most on here thought it was the right call at the time. We had Shaw fit, Dalot also doing alright at LB and Malacia supposedly close to a return. Not to mention less games now that we're out of Europe and Reguilon himself not exactly looking great.
 

foolsgold

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
1,678
Location
Aotearoa
Relying on the fitness of a player who hasn't played even 1 minute the entire season and perennial sicknote Shaw is pretty stupid

Reguilon did alright I thought and certainly a better option to Lindelof at LB
He had some good games I agree, I suspect it came down to the money and getting another wage off the books. We're skirting pretty close to the line on PSR
 

Vault Dweller

Correctly predicted Italy to win Euro 2020
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
6,586
Location
Vault 88, The Commonwealth
Madness we didn't move for another LB even if Malacia has had a set back. With Shaw's availability issues, and Malacia missing so much time, we clearly needed another. This summer we should be looking at moving AWB, keeping Dalot as first choice (massive improvement from him) and getting another RB as cover, and determining if it is worth having two players at LB you can't rely on from a fitness PoV, and perhaps sign another too.
 

Rood

nostradamus like gloater
Scout
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
21,260
Location
@United_Hour
We’re not relying on the fitness of both of them. We’re relying on two players to cover one position between them. With the added option of Dalot playing there when AWB is available.

Which is exactly what we did last season, when Reguilon wouldn’t have got a look in and literally nobody would have claimed we were stupid not to loan another left back.
No point comparing to last season, it's a totally different scenario that lead to Reguilon being here in the first place.

Since Malacia has been out the entire season and not yet back when the decision was made, it was a big gamble on the fitness of players who have shown no sign of being fit this season.

Are you happy with Lindelof at LB?