Is the situation really that precarious? Just doing some back of the envelope math: 50k/week wages * 20 weeks = 1m.
Not exactly breaking the bank for depth in an important position.
Terminating The Reguilón Loan Deal
- Thread starter Malone_Post
- Start date
-
Hello, Guest! We have two new competitions (with taglines and awards as prizes) starting for the new Premier League season.
A new Premier League Predictions competition is starting now. Click here to enter to submit predictions for MD1.
A new Last Man Standing competition is starting now. Click here to enter to submit predictions for MD1.
For Last Man Standing you have until the 16th August to submit your predictions. Submissions will be open for the next 20 days, 16 hours, 40 minutes, 50 seconds, and will close on Aug 16, 2024 at 20:00.
Bonus: for fans of Odds or Evens, the thread will be going up mid-August with a deadline for after the transfer window shuts.
Not exactly breaking the bank for depth in an important position.
Is Malacia ok?
Loan fee was the problem. Just a guess.
I don't rate him but I thought he was fecked off because we needed a loan space for a striker.
Now we actually need him more than ever. We'll done Erik.
Now we actually need him more than ever. We'll done Erik.
Unlikely, he had to get a 2nd operation to try to cure his injury in early December.
Sending Reguilon back to Spurs was a bad decision but we're the best around at those so hardly surprising.
May have been the case but once Malacia had to undergo a 2nd operation in early December the club must have known he would be out for most of the season.
Did we really terminate it? Because I remember when we signed him in the summer it said loan until January. I thought termination means if the loan is 12 months then you terminate the contract to 6 months.
But I find it shocking how we don't extend the loan contract if Malacia is nowhere near ready to be back.
But I find it shocking how we don't extend the loan contract if Malacia is nowhere near ready to be back.
You’ve got your timeline wrong. He didn’t have an operation in early December. He was already rehabbing from it by December 1st. We also know he was back in training in January. ETH said so in a press conference on Jan 31st. Said he was “back on grass”. If he’s had another set back then it happened in February, after the transfer window closed and Reguilon was already playing for Brentford.
Last edited:
Fair enough, I read a story on it in early December which seemed to indicate he would be getting more surgery then. His second surgery must have been October/November.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...ted-left-Tyrell-Malacia-ruled-early-year.html
Yeah, must have been around then. Followed by some other set back in early February which didn’t need surgery.
A weird detail in all of this is that Mount is following the exact same timeline this year. Same original return date, followed by same recent set back.
ETH asked today if it was a mistake to terminate this loan - seems to blame the medical team who assured him Malacia would be back
Malacia would have taken a while to get up to speed, even if that was the case... Then you add how unreliable Shaw is at keeping fit.
Better to just admit he/they fecked up.
Better to just admit he/they fecked up.
Incompetence all round as ever then.
INEOS cleaning house cannot come soon enough.
INEOS cleaning house cannot come soon enough.
Ineos should clean the circus,the club is a joke at the moment
So Ten Hag was assured Malacia would be ready in January by the Medics.
Malacia disappears again.
Head of Rehab let go.
INEOS recognise that there are serious problems at United at all levels. The manager will be the last to face the fury.
Give him a run with a fit squad and good squad options. If he’s still shit - bye! But ETH has not had that.
Malacia disappears again.
Head of Rehab let go.
INEOS recognise that there are serious problems at United at all levels. The manager will be the last to face the fury.
Give him a run with a fit squad and good squad options. If he’s still shit - bye! But ETH has not had that.
If Reguilon is 'shit', what the actual feck is Lindelof at left back. Reguilon did fairly well in his time here. Nothing really to shout about; but he didn't do much wrong.
The general thrust of the OP is that it would be useful having him around as an option, rather than being lumbered with a sluggish, right-footed centre back.
Banking on Shaw staying fit when his injury record would suggest otherwise and sending out Alvaro Fernandez on loan is just textbook Murtough.
Last edited:
I feel like Ten Hag has to take responsibility for the overall injury situation too rather than blaming the medical department. I hope there is an inquest into the spate of injuries this season
Even if medics assured him, he should have kept Reguilon for back up. That would be a wise move and not terminating the contract. Sooner decision making about the squad goes out of these incompetent hands better. Utter idiosyncrasies at all levels.
Who was the genius behind this totally unnecessary decision?!
Yeah utterly dreadful planning wasn't it
Medical has been a shitshow for years now, it's not a secret to anyone. Hopefully, a slew of sackings follow.
Man Utd is rotten in so many levels and departments. I can't believe that there were lots of posters praised and defended Murtough previously like he was the 2nd coming.
Obviously there was more reasons to it than just Shaw being available, maybe Malacia was due to return. Maybe they needed to free up a loan space for a potential January signing if one became available. Maybe Reguillon just didn't want to stay because he spent most of his time sat on the bench. He only started 6 games for Utd, he's already started more games and played more minutes for Brentford in a few weeks than he did for Utd in 3 months.
This is just like thinking it was wrong to get rid of Fred, it wasn't. The right move was to shift these guys out, the wrong part of these decisions is not ensuring there is a proper replacement readily available to come in.
Probably the same genius who paid £86m for Antony.
Ahhh makes sense now, our medical team accidentally performed Mount’s surgery on Malacia and vice versa.
They both begin with M, easy mistake.
Guess we’re lucky they didn’t end up like Mr McGreg, with a leg for an arm and an arm for a leg…
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 15,631
- Supports
️
Not only sending Reguilon back but also loaning out other players who could have done a job at left back with no recall clause.
Poor planning not to have a 19/20 year old LB who can come in from the u23s and do a job. Next available option after the two first team lad is 16yo Harry Amass
Poor planning not to have a 19/20 year old LB who can come in from the u23s and do a job. Next available option after the two first team lad is 16yo Harry Amass
Did the break clause have to happen at the start of January? Recognise it wouldn't be in Spurs' or Reguilón best interests for us to terminate the loan at a later stage but waiting another week or two would have been sensible
If you don’t have a 19/20 year old that has the quality to play in the first team at left back then you don’t have one. It’s pointless keeping someone around because they play that position just because they are logically next in line. If they don’t have the quality there is no way they should play.
I presume they were constrained by the transfer window. If he was going to register with a different club it needed to be before the window closed.
It would have made sense if the idea was to bring in a striker on loan instead, which is what I and probably most people assumed was the plan at the time. You can only have two loaned players at once, so we'd have to cancel either Amrabat or Reguilon to do that.
But then not only did we not bring in a striker, we didn't seem to be highly linked to any either.
I would think so, though I think we terminated his loan at the very start of the window.
My point is not whether they are good enough to be first choice or even at the club long term, my point is there shouldn't be a huge chasm...so you don't have two senior LBs and then nothing until Harry Amass who is 16.
We have Brandon Williams and Alvaro Fernandez out on loan, why? What purpose does that serve? I can't imagine Ipswich are paying much of Brandon's wages, it's not increasing his value either. Fernandez is sat on the bench at Benfica. Will they buy him? Who knows. Is his value going up...arguably not as much as it would have if he'd played LB for us until the end of the season and done OK.
Do you think the academy is 11 players in each age group that is ready to step up to the next age group or first team if required? Of course it isn’t. There’s going to be gaps, it takes a lot of luck on top of the coaching to have a player in any position good enough for first team football at 18/19.
Whilst some blame should be pinned on the medical team, the human body is complex as feck, maybe he was on track to be ready by January and something unexpected has aggravated his injury?
Well, he's blaming the Malacia and left back problem on the medical department to be exact. I still think he should've insisted Reguilon stayed on, even after getting those reassurances that Malacia was returning soon, because the medical team have proven to be incompetent for years now, but who knows what's going on behind the scenes in terms of recruitment and player contracts.
They also decided to get rid of Alvaro Fernandez
I have half a cigar and a bit of Chivas 18 leftover from the holidays. I've tucked them away when something warrants a small celebration.
As far as football is concerned, the sacking of John Murtough would be one of those occasions. As bad as anything under Woodward.
I have to disagree. You need look no further than the evidence I provided.
We have two Premier League/Championship standard young LBs at the club. We decided to send them on loan. Dubious loans at that.
Now we're playing a bad CB at LB and it's completely killed the recent upturn in attacking threat down the left hand side.