Marc Cucurella

  • Thread starter Thread starter ElleBla
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cobwebcat said:
I’m hoping…because I don’t think City or Brighton budge and Cucurella is burning his bridges while Bloom makes an example of him.
Click to expand...
Think you are correct....dont think either us or Bloom will budge...dont think it will get done
 
oakiecokie said:
I`ve said it before but I`ll say it again.Anyone who thinks Cancelo is our answer to a left back needs to think again.
Excellent on the offensive but an absolute beginner defensively. Time and time again he was anywhere but out on that left flank and Salah had a fucking field day.God knows why Cancelo has too constantly find himself in the middle of the defence where he marks no fucker.
Not been yelling too much about Txiki and getting Cucoo signed, but by fuck after yesterday this proves beyond doubt we need a natural left sided full back.
Click to expand...
You are spot on about his positioning. He drifted inside for no good reason basically marking no one and allowing Liverpool to actually switch the field directly across the box to Salah who then had miles of space. His earlier attempt to mark Salah was what's known in some youth training sessions as the orange cone technique.
 
I think this situation has got to the stage where it’s now more important for our Club long-term not to pay what Brighton are asking for the player, so I struggle to see this one happening now.

Shame, because I think he’d have been a good fit for our team, and he’s clearly damaged his relationship with Brighton (far from irreparably, so this isn’t is a biggie) to try and push the move through - but our Club are nothing if not strategic planners, and I don’t think they have the appetite to prioritise short-term benefit for long-term damage.

There are a number of factors at play here, of which the need of the team is clearly significant but not the only consideration.

The example we set on how our Club is run is very important to our board and owners. We’ve worked hard to shift the perception that we can easily be pushed beyond our valuation for a player - which was undoubtedly the picture during those first couple of post-takeover years.

I know we care less about all that stuff as fans - we just want the best team possible out there - but we have to accept that perception in some cases takes precedent over the immediate needs of the first team.

I think you’ll see us move on from this deal next week, and bring in an alternative target.

Part of me hopes I’m wrong - but I do support our board in what they’re trying to do for our Club.
 
Nicholas van Whatsisface said:
I think this situation has got to the stage where it’s now more important for our Club long-term not to pay what Brighton are asking for the player, so I struggle to see this one happening now.

Shame, because I think he’d have been a good fit for our team, and he’s clearly damaged his relationship with Brighton (far from irreparably, so this isn’t is a biggie) to try and push the move through - but our Club are nothing if not strategic planners, and I don’t think they have the appetite to prioritise short-term benefit for long-term damage.

There are a number of factors at play here, of which the need of the team is clearly significant but not the only consideration.

The example we set on how our Club is run is very important to our board and owners. We’ve worked hard to shift the perception that we can easily be pushed beyond our valuation for a player - which was undoubtedly the picture during those first couple of post-takeover years.

I know we care less about all that stuff as fans - we just want the best team possible out there - but we have to accept that perception in some cases takes precedent over the immediate needs of the first team.

I think you’ll see us move on from this deal next week, and bring in an alternative target.

Part of me hopes I’m wrong - but I do support our board in what they’re trying to do for our Club.
Click to expand...
That is what is going on. Why City have spent so long to reach this point, where Brighton won’t negotiate at all, is another question. Whatever our tactic it worked on Leeds and didn’t on Brighton.
 
Cobwebcat said:
Arsenal overpaid. Brighton got very lucky there. If Brighton think everyone is as daft as Arsenal they will get a shock!
Click to expand...

Look at Pepe - what a joke Arsenals recent transfer dealing has been. But we are the bad guys ruining football.
 
The whole premise that our behaviour in securing a new player acts as a principle for future selling clubs is nonsense.

Tony Bloom isn't looking at us walking away from the Kane deal and thinking he'd better lower his price anymore than he's looking at our Grealish deal and thinking he needs to raise it.

Every selling club has a price, and if they don't want to lose their player we will have to pay a premium.

Each transfer is down to individual circumstance and nothing more. We are not making a 'rod for our back' anymore than we are 'sending a message'.

If we want Cucurella we pay what Brighton want, with room for a bit of strategic negotiation.
 
not my fault! said:
Just a thought… maybe Pep played him on the left yesterday to send a message to get Cucurella signed? It was clear to anyone watching that we need someone there. Just possibly this was Pep saying look, get this signing over the line so we can stop fucking about.
Click to expand...
I think Pep had no choice. Look at the bench. Foden and Alvarez in reserve for up top (both of whom looked sharp after entering BTW). Gundo available behind KDB and Bernardo. Phillips behind Rodri. And Stones backing up Dias and Ake. Who was backing up Walker and Cancelo? JWE. I really like this kid, but he has all of 3 or 4 appearances over the past two seasons. If that didn't highlight our deficienies at outside back, especially on the left, nothing will.
 
prealish_stan said:
Maybe I'm naive but I didn't see anything from Grealish yesterday. Offensively or defensively. He simply doesn't work hard like Jesus/Sterling and the first goal could very well have been avoided if he could close down Trent.
Click to expand...
To be fair, I noticed our pressing effervescence wasn't up to its usual standards, but that could be down to squad changes, lack of match sharpness, or a combination of the two which is more in-line with my thinking.

It'll be interesting to see how these big changes affect us this season & how long it takes for things to settle down before we hopefully move forward...
 
Nicholas van Whatsisface said:
I think this situation has got to the stage where it’s now more important for our Club long-term not to pay what Brighton are asking for the player, so I struggle to see this one happening now.

Shame, because I think he’d have been a good fit for our team, and he’s clearly damaged his relationship with Brighton (far from irreparably, so this isn’t is a biggie) to try and push the move through - but our Club are nothing if not strategic planners, and I don’t think they have the appetite to prioritise short-term benefit for long-term damage.

There are a number of factors at play here, of which the need of the team is clearly significant but not the only consideration.

The example we set on how our Club is run is very important to our board and owners. We’ve worked hard to shift the perception that we can easily be pushed beyond our valuation for a player - which was undoubtedly the picture during those first couple of post-takeover years.

I know we care less about all that stuff as fans - we just want the best team possible out there - but we have to accept that perception in some cases takes precedent over the immediate needs of the first team.

I think you’ll see us move on from this deal next week, and bring in an alternative target.

Part of me hopes I’m wrong - but I do support our board in what they’re trying to do for our Club.
Click to expand...

Think this is correct. I think Bloom has backed himself into a corner and we are not going to play to his rules…. Move on, there’s plenty of left backs out there. Cucurella is technically good but we have no idea how he’ll react when he steps up a few levels…. all signings are a risk but it’s not like he’s a proven international or a proven CL performer or he’s got experience of cup finals or title deciders etc… he represents a risk but Brighton value him as an absolute real deal - which he may be but we are not certain. Time to look elsewhere.
 
Bluewonder said:
The whole premise that our behaviour in securing a new player acts as a principle for future selling clubs is nonsense.

Tony Bloom isn't looking at us walking away from the Kane deal and thinking he'd better lower his price anymore than he's looking at our Grealish deal and thinking he needs to raise it.

Every selling club has a price, and if they don't want to lose their player we will have to pay a premium.

Each transfer is down to individual circumstance and nothing more. We are not making a 'rod for our back' anymore than we are 'sending a message'.

If we want Cucurella we pay what Brighton want, with room for a bit of strategic negotiation.
Click to expand...
Not true
There is no way imo that we would have got the price we did for Torres if we hadn’t played hardball with Barca over Garcia. Put them on notice
 
Bluewonder said:
The whole premise that our behaviour in securing a new player acts as a principle for future selling clubs is nonsense.

Tony Bloom isn't looking at us walking away from the Kane deal and thinking he'd better lower his price anymore than he's looking at our Grealish deal and thinking he needs to raise it.

Every selling club has a price, and if they don't want to lose their player we will have to pay a premium.

Each transfer is down to individual circumstance and nothing more. We are not making a 'rod for our back' anymore than we are 'sending a message'.

If we want Cucurella we pay what Brighton want, with room for a bit of strategic negotiation.
Click to expand...

Your logic works for a sack of spuds… but where people are concerned - it will depend to some extent on how much the player and agent push it… Kane didn’t but as we saw with Lescott - players can force a move.
 
Bluewonder said:
The whole premise that our behaviour in securing a new player acts as a principle for future selling clubs is nonsense.

Tony Bloom isn't looking at us walking away from the Kane deal and thinking he'd better lower his price anymore than he's looking at our Grealish deal and thinking he needs to raise it.

Every selling club has a price, and if they don't want to lose their player we will have to pay a premium.

Each transfer is down to individual circumstance and nothing more. We are not making a 'rod for our back' anymore than we are 'sending a message'.

If we want Cucurella we pay what Brighton want, with room for a bit of strategic negotiation.
Click to expand...
Disagree. City had to pay whatever clubs wanted when we were growing and we just had to accept it. That could not carry on forever and we moved to a position of sustainability. City have a lot to offer now and virtually every player wants to come here. We have no need to overpay anymore so now we move on. We have done this a lot recently and reputation is important in transfer dealings.
 
Bluewonder said:
The whole premise that our behaviour in securing a new player acts as a principle for future selling clubs is nonsense.

Tony Bloom isn't looking at us walking away from the Kane deal and thinking he'd better lower his price anymore than he's looking at our Grealish deal and thinking he needs to raise it.

Every selling club has a price, and if they don't want to lose their player we will have to pay a premium.

Each transfer is down to individual circumstance and nothing more. We are not making a 'rod for our back' anymore than we are 'sending a message'.

If we want Cucurella we pay what Brighton want, with room for a bit of strategic negotiation.
Click to expand...

Mate - if you don’t think an analysis of previous buyer behaviour is a huge factor in any complex negotiation then you’re being very naive.

You’re talking about this in a case by case basis - in which I can see your logic - but the point I was making was reputational, which is cumulative and based on perception.

And that is absolutely part of the thinking in a seller setting their price.

Arguably we have created this problem for ourselves by paying £50m for Walker and Mendy. That’s created a perception that we’ll go to that level for a fullback.

So when Bloom set his price - I’d be amazed if he didn’t absolutely have our previous on paying for fullbacks in his thinking.

Brighton’s position seems to be citing the Ben White transfer as a precedent - which clearly demonstrates the central role previous behaviour plays in setting a price.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top