Jump to content

Signing French players at Villa


Juju

Recommended Posts

Just concerned. We seem to be linked to, and actually signing and therefore paying a lot of money, for very young and therefore inexperienced, albeit talented, French players.

 

However, I cannot think, of any that have been much of a success at Villa. Certainly, French players in the premiership have been successful, but say Arsenal, when Arsené Wenger took over and signed the likes of Petit and Henry, they were already either world class players having enjoyed an excellent World Cup and others were firmly established in the junior international sides. With a French speaking manager who had links with the youth national setup, who brought in an arguably "French" culture to the signing club, it meant the players didn't have such great cultural problems to wrestle with as they might otherwise have done.

 

However, with the likes of Didier Six, Mattheu Berson, David Ginola and those who came either from France or via an English club from France such as Djemba Djemba,Hassan Kachloul, Mustapha Hadji,and Moustapha Salifou, I can't think of any who have really had any "success" at the club. There always seems to be a record of training room breakdowns, home sickness, or just inability to adapt or even put basic effort in. I am concerned there is almost more of a cultural gap between France and England, than many places further afield. Even with non French players, such as Angel, there were great "transitional" issues which negatively effected the effectiveness of very expensive players.

 

With this, I have enormous concern over the recent signings of Amavi and Gueye. We seem to be paying large sums for young players, who with respect are more rather than less likely, to have cultural and basic communication issues than older "jobbing" pros. Certainly greater than say, established England internationals such as Delph have gone for. 

 

Noting we have a manager with no track record of signing players, it seems we could be blowing the "windfall" of selling our "family silver" by giving a man with no experience, the money to spend, on signings which have a high % of likely failure. I'd rather sign a player like Delph, than the two French players (who cost more) 10 times out of 10. 

 

Should Lerner (and by dint of his position,Fox) be stepping in at this point to reign in the manager, or are we seeing a reenactment of Martin O Neill -trust the manager and let him f**k things right up with no personal consequences.

 

I think he should.

 

Anyone agree?

(open the flaming!)

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your logic is insane, if that's the case we should never have signed Benteke after Luc Nillis & Gilles De Bilde. Kozak after Baros.

 

I can't comment on Six as I wasn't born, but Gregory has said Ginola was a massive mistake and basically Doug just wanted to take photos with him. Berson, I don't think had the athleticism for the Premier League or probably the ability, he didn't exactly set the world alight after he left us.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I get the point, any French players we ever sign, or players we sign from France... fail.

 

 

33455p.jpg?rnd=16

 

They have great fashion sense though

They certainly do.

278E528F00000578-0-image-m-38_1429007233

 

 

 

978x.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like they've gone all out on the security on those lockers with the key code things, but if someone really wanted to nick something, it looks like they could just saw a hole in them or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like they've gone all out on the security on those lockers with the key code things, but if someone really wanted to nick something, it looks like they could just saw a hole in them or something.

 

Ya clearly Zog's is between Herd's & Vlaar's he doesn't need a door or lock as no one would rob his shit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolute load of nonsense.

 

For a start, the way we sign players is now structured so that Sherwood specifically doesn't have free reign. So your conclusion is proved false without having to read the rest of the post (but I did anyway, and it flies in the face of logic)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â