Player Watch: Erik Lamela

Status
Not open for further replies.

nedley

John Duncan's Love Child
Joined
Jul 28, 2006
Messages
8,861
#2
What is worrying is that Mr Burt (an apparent bum chum of AVB) is saying we face a fight to keep AVB.

If AVB leaves i'd be fuming.
 

Snarfalicious

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Messages
10,513
#3
Good Lord. If we got Erik Lamela... If the rumored prices for Bernard and Lamela are the same and Lamela is okay with a move to us, it's time to put Bernard to the side.
 

ChristianBaler

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Messages
1,797
#6
What is worrying is that Mr Burt (an apparent bum chum of AVB) is saying we face a fight to keep AVB.

If AVB leaves i'd be fuming.
He cant even get the fee right for Lamela though, when sold to Roma....makes the rest of that piece a bit questionable to me.
 

Ghost Hardware

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
6,402
#8
I just don't believe this one. Not unless we are shifting Bale.... Lamela plays best cutting in from the right and I would be very surprised if we started playing Bale out left again. That on top of his fee which would probably be in the 20 mils.
 

beats1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2010
Messages
26,256
#10
I just don't believe this one. Not unless we are shifting Bale.... Lamela plays best cutting in from the right and I would be very surprised if we started playing Bale out left again. That on top of his fee which would probably be in the 20 mils.
Interchanging front 3 is the way we need to go, which would work great with lamela and bale
 

Ghost Hardware

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
6,402
#13
Interchanging front 3 is the way we need to go, which would work great with lamela and bale
I agreed in theory but I think to work best you need the two inside forward to have alternate dominant feet. As we will prob play 433 that means ether Lamela or Bale would start left and both are left footed. essentially this would not giving us the maximum benefit of interchangeable inside forwards.
 
Joined
May 5, 2004
Messages
19,219
#14
I agreed in theory but I think to work best you need the two inside forward to have alternate dominant feet. As we will prob play 433 that means ether Lamela or Bale would start left and both are left footed. essentially this would not giving us the maximum benefit of interchangeable inside forwards.
Whenever I saw Roma last season they were playing with wingbacks and Lamela was in a more central position...
 

Ghost Hardware

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
6,402
#15
Whenever I saw Roma last season they were playing with wingbacks and Lamela was in a more central position...
But I think AVB is aiming to shift to his preferred 433 next season which would effectively remove the AMC role. Ether way as much as I rate Lamela very highly, I think he is quite similar to Bale in some ways, I think for the amount it would take to bring him to us we could use on positions we are clearly lacking. Regardless of my opinion Levy won't be spending 24 plus mil on a midfielder.
 

Syn_13

Fly On, Little Wing
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
13,379
#16
Don't think this a goer. Roma won't let him go cheap.
If we get Baldini, I can see him wanting to go all out for Lamela. He was one of his buys at Roma and looks sensational. However, that's probably even more of a reason for Roma not wanting to let him come to us.
 
Joined
May 5, 2004
Messages
19,219
#17
If we get Baldini, I can see him wanting to go all out for Lamela. He was one of his buys at Roma and looks sensational. However, that's probably even more of a reason for Roma not wanting to let him come to us.
Baldini's brief will be to get the next Lamela though, buy on the way up, not at peak value.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top