Jump to content

England's Lewis Hall


Paully

Recommended Posts

The most logical solution for me is that we signed him not for the immediate future and the first year being a loan helps with that. 
 

he gets 12 months in and around the squad, purely focusing on developing into a full time LB. Then, next season when the actual transfer kicks in, he is ready for regular game time.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The main part I just don’t understand now, is why he can’t be used in PL2 matches. Get him playing games, dealing with defensive situations if that’s the concern. At the moment, it’s just training, which will help technical and fitness, but not that in game experience. 
 

Last season when not playing for first team at Chelsea it was PL2, mostly CM.
 

Is it in deal he can’t play PL2? Or does that also count towards any trigger? 
 

£30m next season for someone who’s essentially had 750 mins of prem football over 2 seasons. You are paying big amounts for a huge talent if that’s the view, but then if such a huge talent, they can surely play good minutes now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The cynic in me thinks Howe didn’t want him, he probably wanted someone else, so is making a point. It happens a lot in football. From the little I’ve seen I don’t believe lack of ability is the issue. Things will be clearer in the summer when we see if there’s an obligation to buy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is mental strange one for me. 
Why oh why put him on the bench? 
Surely some time in reserves to get match fit is better than sitting on bench every night. Its mental..

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Kimbo said:

The cynic in me thinks Howe didn’t want him, he probably wanted someone else, so is making a point. It happens a lot in football. From the little I’ve seen I don’t believe lack of ability is the issue. Things will be clearer in the summer when we see if there’s an obligation to buy.

 

If thars it then ruining a young lads career is a dick move.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Conjo said:

Looked very happy too.

That bits always interesting to me. He seems to chat away happily with younger first team players like Gordon. He doesn't look upset that his career's disintegrating. So there's a chance it isn't, I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, arnonel said:

Also bugs me that reporters don't ask him about it in press conferences.

They do, especially lately. Howe just gives absolutely zilch away on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kimbo said:

The cynic in me thinks Howe didn’t want him, he probably wanted someone else, so is making a point. It happens a lot in football. From the little I’ve seen I don’t believe lack of ability is the issue. Things will be clearer in the summer when we see if there’s an obligation to buy.

 

Ashworth has previously said Howe has to agree to all transfers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly there's so many unknowns here I'm reserving judgment until we see what happens after the season. If we pay the £30m then I will agree there were definitely times in Nov/Dec where we could and should have used him even if he's not fully up to expectations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on all the speculation it appears this will be permanent based on our league position and not Hall’s game time.

We’ve then decided/planned not to use him much this season so that we can claim he’s a youth player signing and we don’t take the hit on FFP. This was raised in a recent interview with Howe and he batted the question away without denying it.
Hopefully we’ll see him feature more next season, but I’m still unsure what his best position is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, arnonel said:

Also bugs me that reporters don't ask him about it in press conferences 

 

They have asked pretty much every week for the last few weeks, think last time it was even brought up twice in the same conference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has this been posted? It’s from a Ryder article after Arsenal:

 

“The criteria to make Hall's move a permanent deal is believed to be based around appearances in a match day squad and United's final league position, to finish in or around the top 10.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, timeEd32 said:

Has this been posted? It’s from a Ryder article after Arsenal:

 

“The criteria to make Hall's move a permanent deal is believed to be based around appearances in a match day squad and United's final league position, to finish in or around the top 10.”

"Is believed" is journalese for "I'm guessing."

(And "criteria" is a plural, but I wouldn't expect Ryder to know that.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, timeEd32 said:

Has this been posted? It’s from a Ryder article after Arsenal:

 

“The criteria to make Hall's move a permanent deal is believed to be based around appearances in a match day squad and United's final league position, to finish in or around the top 10.”

So there may be a positive in us finishing bottom half after all ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, timeEd32 said:

Has this been posted? It’s from a Ryder article after Arsenal:

 

“The criteria to make Hall's move a permanent deal is believed to be based around appearances in a match day squad and United's final league position, to finish in or around the top 10.”

 

:lol:

 

Seems to be a few loopholes in that Lee.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, toonfanman said:

Based on all the speculation it appears this will be permanent based on our league position and not Hall’s game time.

We’ve then decided/planned not to use him much this season so that we can claim he’s a youth player signing and we don’t take the hit on FFP. This was raised in a recent interview with Howe and he batted the question away without denying it.
Hopefully we’ll see him feature more next season, but I’m still unsure what his best position is.


Surely you can’t spend millions on youth players and not have that count towards FFP? Or have I read that wrong. Also he’s not playing in youth games for us is he?

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Kimbo said:


Surely you can’t spend millions on youth players and not have that count towards FFP? Or have I read that wrong. Also he’s not playing in youth games for us is he?

The only information I've seen that defines a youth player is their age. There would need to be a clear FFP limit set on the fee to class as a first teamer or more likely games played for the first team rather than for the u21/u18s

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...