Lovre Kalinić

[Villarocker]

2 hours ago, Khizzy said:

We now have four senior keepers at the club. I wonder if we are going to cancel Moreira's loan now and send him packing, which would free up a loan spot.

Nyland can be number 2, but I hope we don't need to rely on him to play any games. Very positive signing and shows we do have money available if required. 

I think you'll find that Nyland is, by nature, a natural number two! 

[sir_gary_cahill]

10 hours ago, Daweii said:

Our defence will have to be on their toes as in that highlights video he likes to parry everything. Now that's not necessarily a negative provided the defence clean up every loose ball after a save. His positioning in the video was spot on every single time though which is nice to see. 

Gary Cahill is very good at that in my opinion, hopefully we get him in too

[MaVilla]

3 minutes ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

Gary Cahill is very good at that in my opinion, hopefully we get him in too

Who would he replace in our defence do you think?, Axel or Chester?

Edited December 21, 2018 by MaVilla

[sir_gary_cahill]

8 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

Who would he replace in our defence do you think?, Axel or Chester?

Axel, you? Get a left back too and we’re good to go in my opinion, Matt Targett would do nicely, maybe someone with a bit more experience would be better

[robby b]

I just read Dean Smith's press conference on the OS, he says that Kalinic "distributes really well" and that "he's good with both feet". That's a very welcome statement from the manager, I feel a bit less worried now, following a few people's concerns raised earlier in this thread, plus the five years contract.

[MaVilla]

12 minutes ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

Axel, you? Get a left back too and we’re good to go in my opinion, Matt Targett would do nicely, maybe someone with a bit more experience would be better

Personally i would replace Chester, i dont deny he is a capable player, but a 5ft 10 CB is just wrong for me, he will always be at risk in the air, and especially in the championship that's a big issue  (at least in my eyes).

I think Chester got away with the issue under SB because we played quite defensively, but under a DS system I think he can get exposed too easily, and has done at times.

Edited December 21, 2018 by MaVilla

[sir_gary_cahill]

7 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

Personally i would replace Chester, i dont deny he is a capable player, but a 5ft 10 CB is just wrong for me, he will always be at risk in the air, and especially in the championship that's a big issue  (at least in my eyes).

I think Chester got away with the issue under SB because we played quite defensively, but under a DS system I think he can get exposed too easily, and has done at times.

I think we need experience at the back. For me, Axel looks like a deer caught in headlights when he plays, he’s the weak link for me. Chester and Cahill at the back for me, we’d have the best centre back pairing in the division 

[KMitch]

2 hours ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

Axel, you? Get a left back too and we’re good to go in my opinion, Matt Targett would do nicely, maybe someone with a bit more experience would be better

lol...  No way we'll sign Targett.  He's started the last 4 games for Southampton and has been playing very well.  They aren't selling him this window.

[Dave-R]

wwe has the big show, we have footballs answer to the giant.

I would be scared I think coming at a 6ft8" goalkeeper, you've seen jack the giant slayer film havnt you, well that's what it's going to feel like, he's going to be a nightmare I can feel it.

Edited December 22, 2018 by Dave-R

[sir_gary_cahill]

2 hours ago, KMitch said:

lol...  No way we'll sign Targett.  He's started the last 4 games for Southampton and has been playing very well.  They aren't selling him this window.

Bertrand will be back soon for them, who do you suggest for the left back berth then?

[Ghost]

Make Lovre, not war. 

[Dave-R]

Would rather keep Tuanzebe and Hutton and replace taylor and Chester, I think ideally Tuanzebe is the only one worth keeping from defence. Yet again Tuanzebe is another player who is not ours who is doing better than our players in a similar role, it's a thing i hope we overcome. Hope wee start seeing in a few seasons that players we own are the ones that are setting the standard's when loan players come in, not loan players themselves, will take some time for that one to be sorted.

Edited December 22, 2018 by Dave-R

[John]

7 hours ago, MaVilla said:

Who would he replace in our defence do you think?, Axel or Chester?

Another central defender would add to our options rather than replace one of the two that we currently have available. We need cover for injury and suspension that we currently lack in the same way and as urgently as until very recently we had needed a reliable goalkeeper.

[John]

12 hours ago, GENTLEMAN said:

Regards FFP. Long contract until 2023; so cost will probs be less than a potential loan, in the short term, due to amortisation.

I never thought that I would see the once dreaded "amortisation" word used positively in relation to our football club's transfer dealings. Well done sir!   

[John]

18 hours ago, alreadyexists said:

Welcome Lovre! Make a few saves and you’ll be an instant fave!  

A Flavor Flav perhaps?  

[GENTLEMAN]

Indeed, I know people have mentioned: 1) the fee 2) the length of contract as a negative but It’s the opposite. Here’s my position, say we went for Heaton. I presume they’d be a loan fee plus his wage, which I would guess would be at least twice that of Louvre’s wage. This would be over the 6 months and would effectly ‘cost’ us a lot more this season. Furthermore, Heaton goes back, if he has a productive 6 months, Burnley sell on, similar to the SJ situation.

Now, with have Croatia’s No. 1, who I think is on an upward trajectory, the transfer fee is spread over length of his 4 year contract, at he end of which he will have just turned 33 (still a serviceable age as a keeper). Furthermore, goalkeepers are less likely to get long term injuries. You would argue that he would also retain some sell on value, which could be offset against he transfer fee.

Edited December 22, 2018 by GENTLEMAN

[MaVilla]

2 hours ago, John said:

Another central defender would add to our options rather than replace one of the two that we currently have available. We need cover for injury and suspension that we currently lack in the same way and as urgently as until very recently we had needed a reliable goalkeeper.

If we are buying a CB as backup I don't see the point, if we want a backup CB we should just recall Elphick.

We shouldn't be wasting money really, Axels and Elphick contract expire at the end of this season (loan/deal exp ofc), so why would we not look to spend wisely and buy the best CB we can if we intend to spend money on one?

Or, recall Elphick as backup if it's backup we need, and wait till summer to invest in a starting CB, then spend the money in Jan on a LB and anything else we need desperately.

[alreadyexists]

54 minutes ago, GENTLEMAN said:

Indeed, I know people have mentioned: 1) the fee 2) the length of contract as a negative but It’s the opposite. Here’s my position, say we went for Heaton. I presume they’d be a loan fee plus his wage, which I would guess would be at least twice that of Louvre’s wage. This would be over the 6 months and would effectly ‘cost’ us a lot more this season. Furthermore, Heaton goes back, if he has a productive 6 months, Burnley sell on, similar to the SJ situation.

Now, with have Croatia’s No. 1, who I think is on an upward trajectory, the transfer fee is spread over length of his 4 year contract, at he end of which he will have just turned 33 (still a serviceable age as a keeper). Furthermore, goalkeepers are less likely to get long term injuries. You would argue that he would also retain some sell on value, which could be offset against he transfer fee.

Totally agree. He could, in all seriousness gain value even as a 33 year old. For a good keeper, they could have 5 years left of top football, and if he does turn out to be good, we will at least get our money back.

Bottom line is we need a keeper, and if we loan again then there’s is more instability. I don’t really like loaning such an important position as it leads it instability long term and unsettles the defence and the team.

[Spoony]

Surely it just appears on our balance sheet as a £7m liability regardless of how long it takes to pay it off. In return you get a depreciating asset. 

If FFP is coming into play I can only assume we just somehow satisfy their criteria in however our finances have been restructured. 

[alreadyexists]

1 minute ago, Spoony said:

Surely it just appears on our balance sheet as a £7m liability regardless of how long it takes to pay it off. In return you get a depreciating asset. 

If FFP is coming into play I can only assume we just somehow satisfy their criteria in however our finances have been restructured. 

Think we’re paying £5.5 million, not that it makes any difference to your point, but I thought it was reported as that.