Morgan Sanson

[Xela]

17 hours ago, Zatman said:

Buendia or Coutinho for Sanson with Ramsey or McGinn pushing forward was the best option

How many Scottish Premierships have you won?  

[Xela]

I'd be tempted to play Sanson in the next game. In place of McGinn. See how he links up with JJ and Luiz. 

[hippo]

43 minutes ago, AvonVillain said:

Not quite sure I understand this. Surely it makes perfect sense to give minutes to a highly rated youngster at risk of leaving the club over a fairly inconsistent/average senior pro like Sanson? Otherwise, we're at risk of doing exactly what we all still class as the stupidest thing MON ever did allowing an outstanding young player (now retired?) to leave for a desperately average senior pro. It would be as inconceivable as it would unforgivable to not learn from such MONumental(!) stupidity as this.

Gerrard is doing exactly the right thing here.

Wow great post.

Who can really argue with that.

[avfc1982am]

32 minutes ago, AvonVillain said:

Surely it makes perfect sense to give minutes to a highly rated youngster at risk of leaving the club over a fairly inconsistent/average senior pro like Sanson?

I don't get this either tbh. Firstly your being completely unfair on Sanson who when he has played has looked far better than average. The other point being if Carney isn't signing a new deal then we are in essence prepping him for somewhere else anyway. As I have said it's only a feeling and not based on anything factual but I felt Sanson should have been the player coming on last night not Carney. Regardless of contractual situations. 

And the difference with the Cahill situation was Mon sold him. He didn't walk, which is the concern with Carney. Totally different. 

 

[avfc1982am]

41 minutes ago, hippo said:

Wow great post.

Who can really argue with that.

I have because it's not a great post. The Carney situation is totally different to the Cahill one. It's not even comparable.  

It's also telling that some people think we should give him minutes in the hope of persuading him to stay rather than because he deserves it or it's the right move in-game. 

[wilko154]

Morgan Sanson should get a chance because he's a very good midfielder that we paid money for.

He's a player that should be able to come in and do a job from the off, although a run of games will help him and is what he has missed since joining.

Carney is a young player who needs to be slowly introduced to the team, like Ramsey was last season.

[AvonVillain]

2 hours ago, avfc1982am said:

I don't get this either tbh. Firstly your being completely unfair on Sanson who when he has played has looked far better than average. The other point being if Carney isn't signing a new deal then we are in essence prepping him for somewhere else anyway. As I have said it's only a feeling and not based on anything factual but I felt Sanson should have been the player coming on last night not Carney. Regardless of contractual situations. 

And the difference with the Cahill situation was Mon sold him. He didn't walk, which is the concern with Carney. Totally different.

Apologies but I'm a bit confused by this, and I'm not trying to be a dick. It's a matter of opinion on Sanson. Personally I think he looks 'okay', which I think we can all agree is something we're looking to move on from. My personal feeling is that Matt Targett was better than okay, and we got rid of him for an upgrade.

You say "It's only a feeling" that Chuk won't sign a new contract, after saying "we are prepping him for someone else" which is of course completely hypothetical. Only the club knows the situation. He's another of our highly rated youth products, so I am personally glad to see the manager ignore peoples 'feeling' on social media, whilst demonstrating to the lad that if he performs, he has a future and role to play, and on this basis it's difficult to imagine that still won't be enough for Chuk to commit his future. That doesn't look to be just my feeling, but the considered approach of the manager and coaches at the club.

It's not a phrase I particularly like, but honestly what ceiling has 27 year old Morgan Sanson got at this stage of his career, compared to that of18 year old Carney Chukwuemeka?

Finally, and again remember my opening sentence, but walk or sold and totally different. How so? I honestly don't care how a brilliant youngster leaves my club. Perhaps you do. Cahill couldn't get into the team over some fairly average senior pros, so looked to further his career elsewhere. We must never repeat this atrocity. A proper, modern manager has to look to the future of the club as well as attempt instant success. It's a balancing act that doesn't always pay off, but when it does, a Jack Grealish, and what looks like a Jacob Ramsey comes through and we start to look like a proper club that knows what it is doing. I really hope we're at the beginning of something of a dynasty here with these young players, as we all do, so think it's well worth sacrificing the likes of punt-signing Morgan Sanson for the huge potential elsewhere.

[VillanousOne]

1 hour ago, wilko154 said:

Morgan Sanson should get a chance because he's a very good midfielder that we paid money for.

He's a player that should be able to come in and do a job from the off, although a run of games will help him and is what he has missed since joining.

Carney is a young player who needs to be slowly introduced to the team, like Ramsey was last season.

we have to move from the 'always start if fit' mentality that was applied by Dean to numerous players. Now we have players coming back we have to change things if we are not getting the results we should be.

If McGinn or Luiz plays sh*te - we start Sanson or Chuk

if Ollie plays badly we start Ings (or Bailey/Traore when fit)

Even Mings shouldn't be undroppable, all be it with Konsa suspended playing with a centre back two of Chambers and Hause could be dire.
 

Edited February 10, 2022 by VillanousOne

[Wezbid]

That poor back-pass aside, he's looked class whenever he's been on the field. I know the competition in strong for the middle 3 but McGinn is not un-droppable or just a valid option to come off as sub. Sanson has more physical size than given credit for, really quick feet, can compete defensively, better passer than JM. I feel like we're going down the Veretout path with him. The guy is class, please don't **** this up, especially the price we got him for.

[Zatman]

3 hours ago, VillanousOne said:

we have to move from the 'always start if fit' mentality that was applied by Dean to numerous players. Now we have players coming back we have to change things if we are not getting the results we should be.

If McGinn or Luiz plays sh*te - we start Sanson or Chuk

if Ollie plays badly we start Ings (or Bailey/Traore when fit)

Even Mings shouldn't be undroppable, all be it with Konsa suspended playing with a centre back two of Chambers and Hause could be dire.
 

I think this manager has a similar policy. Watkins and McGinn no way should have finished that match last night and will start again Sunday 

[Kiwivillan]

5 hours ago, VillanousOne said:

all be it with Konsa suspended playing with a centre back two of Chambers and Hause could be dire.

Not sure they could've done worse vs Leeds more Konsa less Mings

[Delphinho123]

I think he may get another chance against Newcastle. 

With Buendia likely out, he may move Ramsey up alongside Coutinho and slot Sanson in. Either that or he’ll start Chukwuemeka. 

[Tomaszk]

13 minutes ago, Delphinho123 said:

I think he may get another chance against Newcastle. 

With Buendia likely out, he may move Ramsey up alongside Coutinho and slot Sanson in. Either that or he’ll start Chukwuemeka. 

I thought he was alright?

[Delphinho123]

6 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

I thought he was alright?

Hopefully! I just assumed he was out? Hope to god he isn’t. 

[CVByrne]

Buendia was just a knock by looks of it and exhaustion, the amount they had to run and he always tops the running charts. 

Sanson has to get a start this weekend. Only reason he might not is to keep Luiz sweet to sign a new contract to protect his value

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

13 hours ago, avfc1982am said:

I don't get this either tbh. Firstly your being completely unfair on Sanson who when he has played has looked far better than average. The other point being if Carney isn't signing a new deal then we are in essence prepping him for somewhere else anyway. As I have said it's only a feeling and not based on anything factual but I felt Sanson should have been the player coming on last night not Carney. Regardless of contractual situations. 

And the difference with the Cahill situation was Mon sold him. He didn't walk, which is the concern with Carney. Totally different. 

 

We are also in a completely different place, as a club, compared to MON days.

The recruitment, academy, finances and structure etc are on a totally different level.

[MWARLEY2]

Football is as much about luck as it is about ability. When Unsworth did his u turn on the M6 that basically gave Gareth Barry the career he had .i am not saying he wouldnt have made it but it would have taken far longer. 

Sanson getting injured constantly last season and this gave Jacob the chance to get far more minutes than he might have got otherwise. Which would have meant he didnt get the trajectory he now has.

Sanson has had awfully bad luck. He has showed glimpses of quality since being here but also nothing to make him stand out. Even the back pass against Manure was not misjudged . it was just unlucky as when he went to hit it back his right leg hit the manure defender right behind him meaning there was no power . 

I say with sadness but i cannot see him here beyond this summer. He just isnt lucky enough 

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

6 hours ago, Zatman said:

I think this manager has a similar policy. Watkins and McGinn no way should have finished that match last night and will start again Sunday 

It's starting to look like those 2 players, are players managers love, which will frustrate the hell out of fans at times.

Problem is, we all know on his day, McGinn is outstanding, however are " the days " too inconsistent?

I reckon Ollie is in a similar camo to McGinn.

There should be a point where they can at least be subbed though.

In the same vein, whenever either of those two are out, we usually miss them.

[avfc1982am]

11 hours ago, AvonVillain said:

Apologies but I'm a bit confused by this, and I'm not trying to be a dick. It's a matter of opinion on Sanson. Personally I think he looks 'okay', which I think we can all agree is something we're looking to move on from. My personal feeling is that Matt Targett was better than okay, and we got rid of him for an upgrade.

You say "It's only a feeling" that Chuk won't sign a new contract, after saying "we are prepping him for someone else" which is of course completely hypothetical. Only the club knows the situation. He's another of our highly rated youth products, so I am personally glad to see the manager ignore peoples 'feeling' on social media, whilst demonstrating to the lad that if he performs, he has a future and role to play, and on this basis it's difficult to imagine that still won't be enough for Chuk to commit his future. That doesn't look to be just my feeling, but the considered approach of the manager and coaches at the club.

It's not a phrase I particularly like, but honestly what ceiling has 27 year old Morgan Sanson got at this stage of his career, compared to that of18 year old Carney Chukwuemeka?

Finally, and again remember my opening sentence, but walk or sold and totally different. How so? I honestly don't care how a brilliant youngster leaves my club. Perhaps you do. Cahill couldn't get into the team over some fairly average senior pros, so looked to further his career elsewhere. We must never repeat this atrocity. A proper, modern manager has to look to the future of the club as well as attempt instant success. It's a balancing act that doesn't always pay off, but when it does, a Jack Grealish, and what looks like a Jacob Ramsey comes through and we start to look like a proper club that knows what it is doing. I really hope we're at the beginning of something of a dynasty here with these young players, as we all do, so think it's well worth sacrificing the likes of punt-signing Morgan Sanson for the huge potential elsewhere.

Your confused? I'm confused reading your posts. You started a rant because of something I stated was just a feeling and therefore completely hypothetical anyway. A throw away comment I made that I hoped we weren't giving Carney minutes just to keep him happy. And then try to drag me into an argument because I mentioned I felt Sanson would have been the better option Weds night. Which incidentally had absolutely zero to do with long term potential and just the game itself in that moment. If that wasn't enough you then start going about Cahill and the connection with Carney like we should be noshing him off to convince him to stay because Sanson is desperately average in your eyes. You say your not trying to be a dick but you've come across as one because my comments were never derogatory towards Carney. "remember my opening sentence" FFS haha!

 

[CVByrne]

2 hours ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

It's starting to look like those 2 players, are players managers love, which will frustrate the hell out of fans at times.

Problem is, we all know on his day, McGinn is outstanding, however are " the days " too inconsistent?

I reckon Ollie is in a similar camo to McGinn.

There should be a point where they can at least be subbed though.

In the same vein, whenever either of those two are out, we usually miss them.

 

Watkins was going to be subbed for Ings. The issue was we had to use subs for Buendia and Coutinho. Then it was when do you use your last sub, too quickly and injury or red card and you are in trouble. Too late and he can't have an impact.