Player Watch: Davinson Sanchez

[Shadydan]

Fall from flavour of the month? Haha! He’s been here over four years and apart from his first season he’s been so poor that he’s never been reliable enough to make the CB position his own, never once becoming a regular fixture.

Ruthless means getting rid of players who clearly aren’t good enough, nobody said give away for free but at the same time if we think somebody is going to pay us 40 million for him, well that’s ridiculous. We are going to have to cut our losses. Unfortunately though Levy spent a club record on him at the time and it’s not been money well spent. My point is there is zero point keeping him around in the hope he will turn into a top class CB. He’s not terrible, but he’s not good enough and there are no signs of improvement.

Selling our deadwood is one of the clubs biggest challenges but it’s one we need to make a success of if we want to move forward.

Understand the need to get rid but for me he shouldn't be the first one out the door as IMO he has untapped potential and has already shown how good he can be if he has someone next to him to help him through games. I think there's other players in the squad you need to be ruthless with but ideally we need to sign a CB or two who can lead, I'd rather see Dier out the door than Sanchez personally.

 

[Gbspurs]

This may sound stupid but if we had to keep one CB out of him, Foyth, Toby or Dier I'm still choosing him. I believe with a decent CB partner he is salvageable. Not sure the same can be said for Dier or Foyth and Toby is getting on.

 

[Aphex]

Understand the need to get rid but for me he shouldn't be the first one out the door as IMO he has untapped potential and has already shown how good he can be if he has someone next to him to help him through games. I think there's other players in the squad you need to be ruthless with but ideally we need to sign a CB or two who can lead, I'd rather see Dier out the door than Sanchez personally.

Absolutely agree with you, so would I (see Dier out first). It all depends on who we get offers for, if there is a straight choice I'd sell Dier but who knows. We may not be in a position to pick and choose, although Dier is probably more attractive in the market being English.

 

[Shadydan]

Absolutely agree with you, so would I (see Dier out first). It all depends on who we get offers for, if there is a straight choice I'd sell Dier but who knows. We may not be in a position to pick and choose, although Dier is probably more attractive in the market being English.

He's not homegrown though and that could be a problem.

 

[Aphex]

He's not homegrown though and that could be a problem.

Ah yes, that's twice in the space of a few days I've had to be reminded of that. Jeez, it just get's worse with Dier doesn't it...

 

[CoopsieDeadpool]

OK, apologies is this comes across as somewhat simple (hey, what you see is what you get).

I've read through the posts & seen opinions both for & against Sanchez. But something jumps out at me that I just can't make sense of.

People are saying we should persevere with Sanchez because, in his first season, he was excellent when being talked (coached) through games by Vertonghen and, if we could find somebody else who is capable of martialing the back line, Sanchez could be decent again.

But isn't that exactly why we should (perhaps) look for a better/alternative option? The lad was talked & guided through games by a truly brilliant player in Vertonghen, yet it seems blatantly obvious that he absorbed literally nothing that was said to him throughout Vertonghen's tutelage and, without somebody there to hold his hand in the future, we're all going to continue to see the same (almost clueless) performances from him.

I'm not one for knocking our players, and that's not the intention of this post. I'm just curious as to how some of us support a club that we believe could, and perhaps should be more successful. Yet seem to think it could be beneficial to maintain the services of a player who (seemingly) isn't able to do even the most basic of defensive duties without somebody alongside him giving him instructions.

Wouldn't persevering with him somewhat limit any potential defensive targets we may have, as we'd have to continually ascertain whether they'd be able to talk Sanchez through any games they could play together?

Surely we want to move on from this type of thing? Aren't we all constantly reading (on here) about how we need to have proper cover in each position? Surely a guy who seemingly doesn't learn when he's coached, and needs to be talked through each game is neither a starter or decent cover?

Sorry.

 

[Nebby]

Terrible heading technique, nowhere near aggressive enough and hasn’t developed at all since he arrived. He looks like bambi on ice. Got to move him on.

 

[rio bryan]

OK, apologies is this comes across as somewhat simple (hey, what you see is what you get).

I've read through the posts & seen opinions both for & against Sanchez. But something jumps out at me that I just can't make sense of.

People are saying we should persevere with Sanchez because, in his first season, he was excellent when being talked (coached) through games by Vertonghen and, if we could find somebody else who is capable of martialing the back line, Sanchez could be decent again.

But isn't that exactly why we should (perhaps) look for a better/alternative option? The lad was talked & guided through games by a truly brilliant player in Vertonghen, yet it seems blatantly obvious that he absorbed literally nothing that was said to him throughout Vertonghen's tutelage and, without somebody there to hold his hand in the future, we're all going to continue to see the same (almost clueless) performances from him.

I'm not one for knocking our players, and that's not the intention of this post. I'm just curious as to how some of us support a club that we believe could, and perhaps should be more successful. Yet seem to think it could be beneficial to maintain the services of a player who (seemingly) isn't able to do even the most basic of defensive duties without somebody alongside him giving him instructions.

Wouldn't persevering with him somewhat limit any potential defensive targets we may have, as we'd have to continually ascertain whether they'd be able to talk Sanchez through any games they could play together?

Surely we want to move on from this type of thing? Aren't we all constantly reading (on here) about how we need to have proper cover in each position? Surely a guy who seemingly doesn't learn when he's coached, and needs to be talked through each game is neither a starter or decent cover?

Sorry.

Christ almighty he's 24 years of age not 17, name me another 24 years old CB who needs to be guided through games ? some people for some strange reason want to continually give him the benefit of the doubt, probably being do the same when he is 35.

 

[Shadydan]

OK, apologies is this comes across as somewhat simple (hey, what you see is what you get).

I've read through the posts & seen opinions both for & against Sanchez. But something jumps out at me that I just can't make sense of.

People are saying we should persevere with Sanchez because, in his first season, he was excellent when being talked (coached) through games by Vertonghen and, if we could find somebody else who is capable of martialing the back line, Sanchez could be decent again.

But isn't that exactly why we should (perhaps) look for a better/alternative option? The lad was talked & guided through games by a truly brilliant player in Vertonghen, yet it seems blatantly obvious that he absorbed literally nothing that was said to him throughout Vertonghen's tutelage and, without somebody there to hold his hand in the future, we're all going to continue to see the same (almost clueless) performances from him.

I'm not one for knocking our players, and that's not the intention of this post. I'm just curious as to how some of us support a club that we believe could, and perhaps should be more successful. Yet seem to think it could be beneficial to maintain the services of a player who (seemingly) isn't able to do even the most basic of defensive duties without somebody alongside him giving him instructions.

Wouldn't persevering with him somewhat limit any potential defensive targets we may have, as we'd have to continually ascertain whether they'd be able to talk Sanchez through any games they could play together?

Surely we want to move on from this type of thing? Aren't we all constantly reading (on here) about how we need to have proper cover in each position? Surely a guy who seemingly doesn't learn when he's coached, and needs to be talked through each game is neither a starter or decent cover?

Sorry.

If we had Man City's money I'd probably agree with you we would be able to move on and replace him with someone else quite easily but seeing as we don't have the money and we're in the middle of pandemic we can't really afford to do that especially since there are others we need to move on first. I personally think he still has the raw tools but needs coaching and nurturing - he doesn't have any confidence and we don't have a natural leader at the back so I wouldn't give up on him yet.

 

[CoopsieDeadpool]

If we had Man City's money I'd probably agree with you we would be able to move on and replace him with someone else quite easily but seeing as we don't have the money and we're in the middle of pandemic we can't really afford to do that especially since there are others we need to move on first. I personally think he still has the raw tools but needs coaching and nurturing - he doesn't have any confidence and we don't have a natural leader at the back so I wouldn't give up on him yet.

I understand where you're coming from BUT I think it's clear that, despite being brilliantly guided through games by Vertonghen in his first season, the guy is, quite frankly thick as shit & hasn't absorbed a single bit of whatever it was that Vertonghen was doing with him that made it look like we had a player on our hands.

So if he wasn't able to absorb things from actually within the game itself, I honestly don't think all the coaching in the world is going to make the slightest bit of difference.

I'd have absolutely no problem whatsoever being proven wrong, I just (personally) can't see it happening.

 

[Shadydan]

I understand where you're coming from BUT I think it's clear that, despite being brilliantly guided through games by Vertonghen in his first season, the guy is, quite frankly thick as shit & hasn't absorbed a single bit of whatever it was that Vertonghen was doing with him that made it look like we had a player on our hands.

So if he wasn't able to absorb things from actually within the game itself, I honestly don't think all the coaching in the world is going to make the slightest bit of difference.

I'd have absolutely no problem whatsoever being proven wrong, I just (personally) can't see it happening.

So don't you think if we had a competent defender he'd play better and possibly start to return back to the player that he was?

What you're seeing now is a player low on confidence just like our other defenders. The difference is that he's the one that's already played at higher level with a leader next to him so we know he can reach that potential.

He was being coached through games pretty well in his first season when he was 21, what makes you think he's un-coachable now?

 

[CoopsieDeadpool]

So don't you think if we had a competent defender he'd play better and possibly start to return back to the player that he was?

What you're seeing now is a player low on confidence just like our other defenders. The difference is that he's the one that's already played at higher level with a leader next to him so we know he can reach that potential.

He was being coached through games pretty well in his first season when he was 21, what makes you think he's un-coachable now?

I'm going solely upon the appearance that he doesn't seem to have learnt from, or absorbed a single thing from the (admittedly good) first season he had. That concerns me.

I stated in the long post about him, that the fact he 'needs' somebody next to him somewhat dictates/limits any future defensive reinforcements we may seek, as we'll have to not only ascertain the players actual ability, or his suitability to the PL & our system, but also whether he's going to be able to guide Sanchez through games.

I've also stated that I'd have no problem whatsoever being proven wrong about him. I just don't personally understand why we'd limit ourselves in an already shallow transfer market, just so we can make sure that Sanchez has his own personal guide.

Surely we have the equivalent in our youth set-up to be coached through games, while Sanchez could (potentially) bring in a moderate fee that could be put towards a CD to actually solve our issues, rather than come in to guide one of them? Again, as I stated in the long post, we're constantly reading about having true quality cover in each position and, in my opinion, Sanchez doesn't provide that.

But I mean no disrespect.

 

[Shadydan]

I'm going solely upon the appearance that he doesn't seem to have learnt from, or absorbed a single thing from the (admittedly good) first season he had. That concerns me.

I stated in the long post about him, that the fact he 'needs' somebody next to him somewhat dictates/limits any future defensive reinforcements we may seek, as we'll have to not only ascertain the players actual ability, or his suitability to the PL & our system, but also whether he's going to be able to guide Sanchez through games.

I've also stated that I'd have no problem whatsoever being proven wrong about him. I just don't personally understand why we'd limit ourselves in an already shallow transfer market, just so we can make sure that Sanchez has his own personal guide.

Surely we have the equivalent in our youth set-up to be coached through games, while Sanchez could (potentially) bring in a moderate fee that could be put towards a CD to actually solve our issues, rather than come in to guide one of them? Again, as I stated in the long post, we're constantly reading about having true quality cover in each position and, in my opinion, Sanchez doesn't provide that.

But I mean no disrespect.

He's not the only one who's regressed though which is kinda my point. There are other players who have gone backwards which is a symptom of the team going backwards and our defence is probably the area which has fallen so far from the level is one was, every single defender who we've played there all look calamatous or nervous back there for a while, it's not exclusive to Sanchez.

It's all well and good saying that he should have learnt or absorbed the coaching initially had but you can label that at any player clearly low on confidence young or experienced.

Theres nothing wrong with players who need someone next to them to make them look better, it's always been the case for years with many good defenders in the past, without their partner their flaws get exposed...happened a lot of times with Vidic when Ferdinand didn't play, happened with Terry When Galls wasn't covering him. Joe Gomez is a player who has Van dijk playing next to him which has upped his level, look at John Stones since Ruben Dias has come in, same for Zouma and Thiago Silva.

It's not about having a personal guide it's about marrying his raw tools (pace, physicality) with a defender who is able o defend and lead and since we've already seen him play up to his potential there's no reason why he can't go back to that an subsequently improve.

You can make the same argument for Rodon or any other young defender that comes to play CB, what do you thinks gonna happen with them in our defence? So we don't just need a leader for Sanchez, we need a leader regardless to improve our defence, once our defence improves our players will naturally improve, I just do happen to think that he alongside Rodon has the highest potential.

 

[CoopsieDeadpool]

He's not the only one who's regressed though which is kinda my point. There are other players who have gone backwards which is a symptom of the team going backwards and our defence is probably the area which has fallen so far from the level is one was, every single defender who we've played there all look calamatous or nervous back there for a while, it's not exclusive to Sanchez.

It's all well and good saying that he should have learnt or absorbed the coaching initially had but you can label that at any player clearly low on confidence young or experienced.

Theres nothing wrong with players who need someone next to them to make them look better, it's always been the case for years with many good defenders in the past, without their partner their flaws get exposed...happened a lot of times with Vidic when Ferdinand didn't play, happened with Terry When Galls wasn't covering him. Joe Gomez is a player who has Van dijk playing next to him which has upped his level, look at John Stones since Ruben Dias has come in, same for Zouma and Thiago Silva.

It's not about having a personal guide it's about marrying his raw tools (pace, physicality) with a defender who is able o defend and lead and since we've already seen him play up to his potential there's no reason why he can't go back to that an subsequently improve.

You can make the same argument for Rodon or any other young defender that comes to play CB, what do you thinks gonna happen with them in our defence? So we don't just need a leader for Sanchez, we need a leader regardless to improve our defence, once our defence improves our players will naturally improve, I just do happen to think that he alongside Rodon has the highest potential.

I can respect all of that, and I do hope you don't think I'm arguing with you for the sake of it.

I see a guy who is unable to read the game, unable to track the flight of a ball & is capable of 'shutting off' at the worst possible moment, while you still hold out hope that with the right addition(s) could replicate that first season form. Again, I'll happily be wrong if it means we'll benefit in the long term.

We simply have a differing opinion on this particular matter/player which, at the end of the day, is what this place is all about.

 

[BringBack_leGin]

I see a guy who is unable to read the game, unable to track the flight of a ball & is capable of 'shutting off' at the worst possible moment

This specifically has been his biggest issue since his first season. I was sat pretty low down in the long stand and about 30 yards up the pitch so when we were defending on my side of the pitch he was pretty much in line with me off the ball, and I used to get so frustrated by him being beaten to balls he should’ve been winning easily, by slower players. Soon I realised that he always started running that second too late. At the time I assumed he was just cocky about his pace and didn’t realise how much faster forwards are here than in Holland, but I realise now that really he just doesn’t seem to read the flight of the ball at all well once it’s been hit.

 

[H-SF]

Done well today

 

[Yiddo100]

Easy to criticise when he’s bad, so just as easy to praise when he has a good game, well played dave

 

[daveduvet]

Him and Aurier played very well.

 

[Shadydan]

So don't you think if we had a competent defender he'd play better and possibly start to return back to the player that he was?

What you're seeing now is a player low on confidence just like our other defenders. The difference is that he's the one that's already played at higher level with a leader next to him so we know he can reach that potential.

He was being coached through games pretty well in his first season when he was 21, what makes you think he's un-coachable now?

 

[Strikeb4ck]

OK, apologies is this comes across as somewhat simple (hey, what you see is what you get).

I've read through the posts & seen opinions both for & against Sanchez. But something jumps out at me that I just can't make sense of.

People are saying we should persevere with Sanchez because, in his first season, he was excellent when being talked (coached) through games by Vertonghen and, if we could find somebody else who is capable of martialing the back line, Sanchez could be decent again.

But isn't that exactly why we should (perhaps) look for a better/alternative option? The lad was talked & guided through games by a truly brilliant player in Vertonghen, yet it seems blatantly obvious that he absorbed literally nothing that was said to him throughout Vertonghen's tutelage and, without somebody there to hold his hand in the future, we're all going to continue to see the same (almost clueless) performances from him.

I'm not one for knocking our players, and that's not the intention of this post. I'm just curious as to how some of us support a club that we believe could, and perhaps should be more successful. Yet seem to think it could be beneficial to maintain the services of a player who (seemingly) isn't able to do even the most basic of defensive duties without somebody alongside him giving him instructions.

Wouldn't persevering with him somewhat limit any potential defensive targets we may have, as we'd have to continually ascertain whether they'd be able to talk Sanchez through any games they could play together?

Surely we want to move on from this type of thing? Aren't we all constantly reading (on here) about how we need to have proper cover in each position? Surely a guy who seemingly doesn't learn when he's coached, and needs to be talked through each game is neither a starter or decent cover?

Sorry.

Have to disagree with the premise.

Varane is the exact same - he often looks hopeless when he isn't next to Sergio Ramos. Some of the games he's played alongside Eder Militao this season would make our CBs look world class.

Would you let Varane go?

Maybe it's not so much that Sanchez needs to play alongside a smart CB so much as he needs to not play alongside shit ones.