• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Richarlison

Bishop said:
And loads of players who don't get their moves. It's not a one size fits all reality. Richy wouldn't be the first nor the last to over play their hand. It happens every summer and to some names more notable than his.
Click to expand...

But this shouldn't have been about him getting his move, thats the point, we should have forced the issue way before it got to the stage it did. Maybe we did, but piecing together the interviews it seems we allowed him to d1ck us around for long enough for this situation to manifest as it has. Ultimately its embarrassing for all involved
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
But this shouldn't have been about him getting his move, thats the point, we should have forced the issue way before it got to the stage it did. Maybe we did, but piecing together the interviews it seems we allowed him to d1ck us around for long enough for this situation to manifest as it has. Ultimately its embarrassing for all involved
Click to expand...
Personally I'm not surprised it was difficult to move him on. Why would anyone want to pay good money for him?
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
Then I would question his judgement on what the club needs in front of goal, more so than I do already
Click to expand...

I don’t really disagree with you there. I’m kind of surprised RDZ wanted to keep him, given how bad Richy has been in build up for quite a long time.

OTOH, it seems like RDZ thinks he can work with anyone, so long as they buy in. And to the extent that RDZ’s system relies on rehearsed moves or plans that need to be followed more strictly, Richy did ok under Conte in that respect.

But that’s what it feels like. They wanted to keep him (and there’s certainly a debate about whether he’s been good enough to be kept) but accepting that they wanted to keep him, I think it makes the club’s actions look perfectly sensible. They weren’t trying to bomb anyone out. Anyone who wanted to go, could. And anyone who wanted to commit seemingly had a home.
 
Baleforce said:
If he wanted to keep Richie he could have, you can be “bought in” and also not want to extend your contract.
Click to expand...

Quite possibly true. But it doesn’t sound very “bought in” to change your mind, and then change it again does it? If there is any truth to what RDZ was saying about that, I think it goes a long way to explaining why the club were getting so frustrated. And then I think the blasting on social media during the Everton deal was the thing that saw him not get registered.
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
Quite possibly true. But it doesn’t sound very “bought in” to change your mind, and then change it again does it? If there is any truth to what RDZ was saying about that, I think it goes a long way to explaining why the club were getting so frustrated. And then I think the blasting on social media during the Everton deal was the thing that saw him not get registered.
Click to expand...

without knowing what was said by who and when and which clubs showed an interest we will never know what, if any, mind changing went on

seems the club were not exactly clear on their plan either
 
Baleforce said:
without knowing what was said by who and when and which clubs showed an interest we will never know what, if any, mind changing went on

seems the club were not exactly clear on their plan either
Click to expand...

Quite! But a lot of the Richy-sympathetic debate here seems to completely underweight the idea that he might have kept changing his mind, and what that may have done to the club’s planning, and confidence in his actual commitment.

I also find the criticism of the club’s handling of him early in the summer to be a bit strange. It seems to be that we should have ‘been clear’ with him then, and forced him out. So where as with every other player we were engaging in good faith, agreeing to the best move for them at below market rates, and taking on the commitment of the players who wanted to stay, I think that’s a completely fair way for the club to engage, and it’s a good way to build a two way street of trust between players and club. We didn’t force anyone to stay, we didn’t drag out a deal. We just got them done swiftly.

Why should we have forced Richy out earlier? Especially if we wanted to actually keep him? And why would we suddenly want to sell even though we didn’t actually sign another replacement? Danso decided he wanted to leave pretty late in the window and was gone. I would assume we arranged deals for Richy because he again said he wanted to go.

It seems like the feeling is Richy would be surprised / hurt / upset by the fact that we tried to sell him, rather than allowing him to see out his contract. As if he’d been a picture of commitment all summer. But even if we take just a kernel of what RDZ has said, clearly they were not sure of his commitment.

He also references ‘threats’ in his instagram post. Maybe one of those threats was that if he didn’t move, he wouldn’t be registered. He said that didn’t scare him. But now he’s living with the consequence.

(Pinch of salt on the last point, because again we don’t know who exactly said what, and he references ‘outside parties’ too. But he also says that the deal must work for Tottenham, and I’m not sure why a 35m sale to Everton would not have worked for us!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back