VDV

[glorygloryeze]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

He had a great half a season with them but maybe he was just on a very hot run of form and this is the real Sig.

Like many others have said, the time to judge will be when he plays with somebody more likely to bring him into the game, like Ade.
Jury still out no doubt

 

[parklane1]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

He wanted to take his family back to Germany and the club let him, nothing more nothing less.

 

[Rossi22]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

He looks like the move is too big for him in my opinion. He played with much more swagger/confidence when he was at Swansea. His body language says to me that he looks frightened of making a mistake.

Can't really blame him considering the constant groans and boos. Swansea were capable of getting the ball to him, we're currently not.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

Can't really blame him considering the constant groans and boos. Swansea were capable of getting the ball to him, we're currently not.

He was more of a focal point at Swansea, whereas in our team, he'll always be behind Bale, Lennon and Dembele in midfield when it comes to importance. I was excited when we signed him as I thought he was exactly what we needed i.e. a goalscoring CM. He scored a lot of goals at Reading and he scored 9 in 36 for Hoffenheim, so he clearly knows where the goal is. I really hope he can find some form because he seems like honest, hardworking player and there's not much of an ego there.

 

[awesome dawson]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

He wanted to take his family back to Germany and the club let him, nothing more nothing less.

His wife never left Hamburg. She came to London on occasion but her job meant she was pretty much stuck there.

Hamburg wanted him back, he had good memories there so it really made sense for him to leave.

Sadly we needed him more than he needed us.

From a player exchange angle it was ridiculous business to replace him with Dempsey.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

He wanted to take his family back to Germany and the club let him, nothing more nothing less.

I'm still not 100% convinced he wanted to leave. What you're saying might be true about his family, but I think the fact that he wasn't in AVB's plans made his mind up for him. I didn't see any quotes from him saying he wanted to go. Plus he and his hot wife had nothing but nice things to say about the club after he left.

 

[metalgear]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

The best pros don't air their dirty laundry. It looked like multiple factors in play, but turned out well for all parties.

Bigger picture - we are a club in transition.

 

[Mulletperm]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

The best pros don't air their dirty laundry. It looked like multiple factors in play, but turned out well for all parties.

Bigger picture - we are a club in transition.

You think?

Oh, and we always seem to be in bloody transition.

 

[metalgear]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

"well" as in "not badly"...

....but really VdV is playing in a smaller club, and we've ended up with less. The club coughed up the dough that most clubs wouldn't pay for and we got more than we imagined. I guess the only winner is Mrs VDV and who knows she might have been behind everything!

 

[ArcspacE]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

I don't think that he has the discipline to fit long term into an AVB team.

I think this whole 'discipline' myth was born out of the fact VdV liked to roam the field, always looking for the ball and wanting to be involved (a positive quality in my books) in addition to Redknapp's default 60min sub of bringing on Defoe.

Personally, I think he would wave flourished under AVB - but I also understand his reasons to leave weren't purely football related per se.

 

[ArcspacE]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

He looks like the move is too big for him in my opinion. He played with much more swagger/confidence when he was at Swansea. His body language says to me that he looks frightened of making a mistake.

Rodgers also looked good at Swansea

On a serious note - I think he's short of confidence at the moment and will hopefully soon turn it around. As for Demspey - I don't think we can expect miracles and simply be realistic about it

 

[tynesidespur]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

It's not a false economy.

Getting a good price for a player is a good thing.

Spending that money on players who have not yet been up to scratch would be the issue.
Disclaimer: I think one of the two of them will come good this season, though i can't yet work out which one.

If the manager didn't want him, I can understand why Levy cashed in when he did. Once VdV passed 30 his value would have declined steeply.

I'd love to still have VdV but I do not think that him and AVB would have worked out (for similar reasons that there are ructions with Ade) can see how it was a good business decision to sell when we did.

How we spent the money is a different matter. I was concerned that we were signing a one (half a) season wonder when we picked up Sig. Dempsey played his best football for Fulham coming in from the left, a position that he was always going to struggle to get with us. I think that Dempsey would probably fair better in 4-3-3 but the rest of the team is not geared up for it.

OK gents I guess we're talking along similar lines here but you are both separating selling VDV from purchasing Sig/Dempsey.
For me they're inextricably linked because a player's worth is dependent on his value to the team as well as his market value.

Yes his value was depreciating, yes it was good money for a 29 yr old but his presence on the pitch was worth more - and has been proven over the 9 games since he left.
I think the club have looked at things from a purely cash perspective and decided that trading Dempsey for £4M compared with £8M for VDV was excellent business and haven't perhaps looked at the on pitch impact. AVB said himself we were happy to let the player go because he felt we were adequately covered in that position. He clearly felt that Sig and Dempsey would provide the replacement. To me they're a million miles away from the impact VDV has. As an example our possession stats and our ability to control games have dropped because he's been replaced by these two.

Similarly, we'd surely all prefer to still have Modric and even if we got "good money" for him that is no good unless he is adequately replaced. The failure to sign the replacement - Moutinho - was a failure of that policy.

You can separate the buy/sell policy if you like, but if you decide to sell one, you must replace adequately. If you don't line-up suitable replacements then the player in question should simply not be for sale!

To me this goes back to the fact that we changed things too dramatically over the summer. The Modric sale was enforced but we only needed to sell him and replace adequately. We didn't need to sell VDV as well. That could've been done next summer if so desired.

Take your point milo, on the question of if he would actually fit into AVB's ethos. However this is as much a question against the manager as the player for me - you should be able to incorporate world class players into your system.

 

[Spursalot]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

OK gents I guess we're talking along similar lines here but you are both separating selling VDV from purchasing Sig/Dempsey.
For me they're inextricably linked because a player's worth is dependent on his value to the team as well as his market value.

Yes his value was depreciating, yes it was good money for a 29 yr old but his presence on the pitch was worth more - and has been proven over the 9 games since he left.
I think the club have looked at things from a purely cash perspective and decided that trading Dempsey for £4M compared with £8M for VDV was excellent business and haven't perhaps looked at the on pitch impact. AVB said himself we were happy to let the player go because he felt we were adequately covered in that position. He clearly felt that Sig and Dempsey would provide the replacement. To me they're a million miles away from the impact VDV has. As an example our possession stats and our ability to control games have dropped because he's been replaced by these two.

Similarly, we'd surely all prefer to still have Modric and even if we got "good money" for him that is no good unless he is adequately replaced. The failure to sign the replacement - Moutinho - was a failure of that policy.

You can separate the buy/sell policy if you like, but if you decide to sell one, you must replace adequately. If you don't line-up suitable replacements then the player in question should simply not be for sale!

To me this goes back to the fact that we changed things too dramatically over the summer. The Modric sale was enforced but we only needed to sell him and replace adequately. We didn't need to sell VDV as well. That could've been done next summer if so desired.

Take your point milo, on the question of if he would actually fit into AVB's ethos. However this is as much a question against the manager as the player for me - you should be able to incorporate world class players into your system.

Strangely i read this as agreeing with what i said, you are saying that if we sold Vdv we needed to buy a player of the same value, however a players value is not determined by the ££ we spend but their value to the team. Which was exactly the point when i stated that 'the players that we have bought have not been up to scratch' or whatever i said, we bought sig and dempsey assuming they would have a significant value for our team, that has not yet happened.


I think the acts of buying and selling must not be linked because sometimes we sell someone in one position to raise funds for a player for a different position.


I don't think we failed to replace Modric, i rate Dembele pretty highly and he is shown that he works in our team. The difference between them has been thus far that Modric was very rarely injured last season, whilst Dembele has only been available for 4(?)/however many games in the PL. If Modric had been out for a long period last season it would have uncovered exactly the same issues in the midfield section that we are currently suffering from.

 

[tynesidespur]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

Strangely i read this as agreeing with what i said, you are saying that if we sold Vdv we needed to buy a player of the same value, however a players value is not determined by the ££ we spend but their value to the team. Which was exactly the point when i stated that 'the players that we have bought have not been up to scratch' or whatever i said, we bought sig and dempsey assuming they would have a significant value for our team, that has not yet happened.

Yes I think we are broadly agreeing here. I just think we've got it badly wrong by not replacing with someone better. My reason for saying the buy-sell is linked is that there was clearly no-one out there who could have the same influence on the pitch as VDV from the same position; therefore he should not have been sold.

I don't think we failed to replace Modric, i rate Dembele pretty highly and he is shown that he works in our team. The difference between them has been thus far that Modric was very rarely injured last season, whilst Dembele has only been available for 4(?)/however many games in the PL. If Modric had been out for a long period last season it would have uncovered exactly the same issues in the midfield section that we are currently suffering from.

Yep, a very fair point.

 

[SW4 Yid]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

Its not just his ability as a player that we miss, i think we miss his character. He had a bit of passion, something which i think is massively lacking with most of our squad.

He will always be a legend for his attitude towards Arsenal if nothing else

 

[Alex]

Re: VdV - what was the story?

We miss him big time. I can't believe we sold him. His class, his vision, his goal record, his passion, his know how... and we're not even talking about Luka Modric yet...!

 

[diego_maradona]

O/T (kind of) Rafa and Sylvie split up

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...van-der-Vaart-split-up.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Shock split: 'Rafael and Sylvie van der Vaart announce their marriage is over just days after celebrating Christmas together with their son'
By SARAH FITZMAURICE
PUBLISHED: 08:59, 2 January 2013 | UPDATED: 09:05, 2 January 2013
Comments (0)
Share

The couple dubbed the new Beckhams, Sylvie and Rafael van der Vaart are said, to have split.
The Hamburg SV footballer and his model wife are said to have ended their marriage, despite spending Christmas together with their son Damian, according to Bild newspaper.
Rafael told the paper: 'I am very sad that it did not work with us. We are the culprits. Sylvie alone and I have to answer for it, that our marriage does not work.'

Shock split: Rafel van der Vaart and wife Sylvie have split up, according to reports. The footballer posted a picture of the couple with their son Damian on Christmas Day
Meanwhile Sylvie said: 'We have unfortunately drifted apart over time. It was a gradual process that was not easy to stop. Even though it sounds weird, but we love and respect us.'
The shock split comes just a few days after the 29-year-old footballer posted a snap of his family celebrating Christmas together.
In the picture he is seen sharing a warm embrace with Sylvie, with their son stood smiling in front of them.
Bild reports that during a heated argument on New Year's Eve, Rafael allegedly hit his wife a day later they announced their split.

Group hug: The couple were seen sharing a hug with a friend on New Year's Eve before the footballer allegedly hit his wife
A spokesperson for the couple was unavailable for comment earlier today.
The couple wed in 2005, before welcoming their son the following year.
In 2009 Sylvie revealed she was suffering from breast cancer and underwent surgery and chemotherapy to fight the disease.
Speaking about being diangosed at the time she said: 'All the luxuries in the world are no protection against that moment when you are told the diagnosis. Then you are just a woman.'
After losing her hair Sylvie wore a wig, before her husband persuaded her to appear on the German version of Strictly without it.
She said: ''I was at home *without a wig and my husband told me, '‘You know what, *Sylvie, I just love your short hair. I think you look way more beautiful than with your wig on. You should put wax in it."
'So he took his wax out of his wash bag, stood behind me in front of the mirror and did my hair. That was one of the most romantic things he has ever done for me. I looked at myself and I thought, "You’re right".’


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...vie-van-der-Vaart-split-up.html#ixzz2GoOj6wlE
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


------

Dam Rafa was a lucky guy... check out their friend too! Allegedly hit his mrs? WTF?

 

[Jurgen the German]

Re: O/T (kind of) Rafa and Sylvie split up

Get him back here sharpish!

 

[Dicko]

Re: O/T (kind of) Rafa and Sylvie split up

Pretty sad really, sounds like they were a great couple..

The way he says Sylvie alone and I have to answer for it, that our marriage does not work is a bit weird though??
My first thought was that if he hit her it's all his fault and he's a bit of a dingdong but there must be more to it for him to say they share the blame?

 

[Robbo]

Re: O/T (kind of) Rafa and Sylvie split up

No reason for him to stay in Hamburg then...well, except for the kid. But that can be sorted out.

January bargain return...?