Anguissa: Merged

[Sammyffc]

I think it will be a good move for all. I struggled with him last season. Some say it was because of Parker, which I could agree with, but at the same time - he really did not perform his best. There were too many brain-fleeting moments for me that stacked up against his good play. Such as absent-mindedly one-time passing to the other team happened on more than one occasion. Trying stepovers in advanced positions only to take one too many and lose control of the ball. His very wild shooting and lack of composure. His overconfident dribbling and demeanor, very similar to how Pogba will look at times, hurt a lot more than it helped.

He wants to be at Lazio, and it was fairly clear he didn't want to be at Fulham when he put on the shirt. I understand the world isn't fair, but it's a joke to me that he waltzed into the first team last year and would've tried to do the same this year. We call AK a passion merchant, well to me Zambo is a leech who only plays for himself. I think it's a good thing to distance ourselves from such a player, and fill in the role with someone who wants to be at the club full-time rather than rented-time.

Interesting character assassination. You must be a very good reader of personalities, or know a huge amount more than what has been made publicly available. At least to me none of what you wrote in your second paragraph was fairly clear, or even a little clear.

Just give it up, what is your agenda here exactly?

I nearly spat my drink out at the fact you just had the nerve to ask someone else what their agenda is with everything you have been writing

[FreiBird]

Can easily tell who knows ball by how they rate Anguissa.

Yer da's mate hates him because they want goals goals goals, and don't understand the game.

[toshes mate]

Anguissa has not been in a position to come and go as he likes, as he has been under contract. The club could have kindly told him to stay, and he would likely have played as is indicated by him doing just that before he was loaned out (by the club, imagine that). Similarly, the club didn't have to put him in the starting eleven once he was back, it was not Anguissa's choice, so what do you mean that he "waltzed into the first team"? Blame that Parker guy then if anyone. Or do you think that Anguissa should have refused to play (I mean of course he wouldn't, because he obviously honors his contract, unlike said manager, allegedly)?

I am sure that many of our players would have been interested to join Napoli or a similar level of club on loan, but I suspect few attracted any such interest. I think very few players are loyal if they think they have better opportunities elsewhere. And why would they? It's not as if clubs show much loyalty.

This whole discussion is utterly bizarre to me, like from an alternate universe where Anguissa holds all the cards with a gun to the club's head. Maybe there is indeed a lot more to this that only a select few here is aware of, although I doubt that is the case.

But we all obviously view things very differently.

But everything you have written and Matt10 has written can exist in the same universe, and even on the same planet, simply as statements that are not in conflict but simple alternative explanations about the 'big unknown' - Anguissa himself and what he feels most comfortable about.  He got a good deal coming to FFC with exposure in the PL but was he ever really in demand or did our recruitment guy have his head truned by the same act that lead him to Seri?  I don't have the facts but there appears to be some collaboration in the stories that lay claim to being evidence.  There have been plemty of threads about this in the past because of the controversy involving both players for differing reasons. 

There are facets of Anguissa that ooze quality but there are other facets that suggest deep flaws too.       

[FFC1987]

I think it will be a good move for all. I struggled with him last season. Some say it was because of Parker, which I could agree with, but at the same time - he really did not perform his best. There were too many brain-fleeting moments for me that stacked up against his good play. Such as absent-mindedly one-time passing to the other team happened on more than one occasion. Trying stepovers in advanced positions only to take one too many and lose control of the ball. His very wild shooting and lack of composure. His overconfident dribbling and demeanor, very similar to how Pogba will look at times, hurt a lot more than it helped.

He wants to be at Lazio, and it was fairly clear he didn't want to be at Fulham when he put on the shirt. I understand the world isn't fair, but it's a joke to me that he waltzed into the first team last year and would've tried to do the same this year. We call AK a passion merchant, well to me Zambo is a leech who only plays for himself. I think it's a good thing to distance ourselves from such a player, and fill in the role with someone who wants to be at the club full-time rather than rented-time.

Interesting character assassination. You must be a very good reader of personalities, or know a huge amount more than what has been made publicly available. At least to me none of what you wrote in your second paragraph was fairly clear, or even a little clear.

Just give it up, what is your agenda here exactly?

I nearly spat my drink out at the fact you just had the nerve to ask someone else what their agenda is with everything you have been writing

Yep, had a similar reaction here. SoTN clearly has an agenda....are you his agent or summit!? 

[The Old Count]

Anguissa has not been in a position to come and go as he likes, as he has been under contract. The club could have kindly told him to stay, and he would likely have played as is indicated by him doing just that before he was loaned out (by the club, imagine that). Similarly, the club didn't have to put him in the starting eleven once he was back, it was not Anguissa's choice, so what do you mean that he "waltzed into the first team"? Blame that Parker guy then if anyone. Or do you think that Anguissa should have refused to play (I mean of course he wouldn't, because he obviously honors his contract, unlike said manager, allegedly)?

I am sure that many of our players would have been interested to join Napoli or a similar level of club on loan, but I suspect few attracted any such interest. I think very few players are loyal if they think they have better opportunities elsewhere. And why would they? It's not as if clubs show much loyalty.

This whole discussion is utterly bizarre to me, like from an alternate universe where Anguissa holds all the cards with a gun to the club's head. Maybe there is indeed a lot more to this that only a select few here is aware of, although I doubt that is the case.

But we all obviously view things very differently.

But everything you have written and Matt10 has written can exist in the same universe, and even on the same planet, simply as statements that are not in conflict but simple alternative explanations about the 'big unknown' - Anguissa himself and what he feels most comfortable about.  He got a good deal coming to FFC with exposure in the PL but was he ever really in demand or did our recruitment guy have his head truned by the same act that lead him to Seri?  I don't have the facts but there appears to be some collaboration in the stories that lay claim to being evidence.  There have been plemty of threads about this in the past because of the controversy involving both players for differing reasons. 

There are facets of Anguissa that ooze quality but there are other facets that suggest deep flaws too.       

A simply brilliant observation from TM.

[HV71]

Quote" A simply brilliant observation from TM."


Yes - spot on

[Woolly Mammoth]

Yes i concur, the voice of reason.

[Sting of the North]

Anguissa has not been in a position to come and go as he likes, as he has been under contract. The club could have kindly told him to stay, and he would likely have played as is indicated by him doing just that before he was loaned out (by the club, imagine that). Similarly, the club didn't have to put him in the starting eleven once he was back, it was not Anguissa's choice, so what do you mean that he "waltzed into the first team"? Blame that Parker guy then if anyone. Or do you think that Anguissa should have refused to play (I mean of course he wouldn't, because he obviously honors his contract, unlike said manager, allegedly)?

I am sure that many of our players would have been interested to join Napoli or a similar level of club on loan, but I suspect few attracted any such interest. I think very few players are loyal if they think they have better opportunities elsewhere. And why would they? It's not as if clubs show much loyalty.

This whole discussion is utterly bizarre to me, like from an alternate universe where Anguissa holds all the cards with a gun to the club's head. Maybe there is indeed a lot more to this that only a select few here is aware of, although I doubt that is the case.

But we all obviously view things very differently.

But everything you have written and Matt10 has written can exist in the same universe, and even on the same planet, simply as statements that are not in conflict but simple alternative explanations about the 'big unknown' - Anguissa himself and what he feels most comfortable about.  He got a good deal coming to FFC with exposure in the PL but was he ever really in demand or did our recruitment guy have his head truned by the same act that lead him to Seri?  I don't have the facts but there appears to be some collaboration in the stories that lay claim to being evidence.  There have been plemty of threads about this in the past because of the controversy involving both players for differing reasons. 

There are facets of Anguissa that ooze quality but there are other facets that suggest deep flaws too.     

I do agree that the last part of my comment was a bit over the top, and quite frankly a bit unnecessary as it didn't really add anything to my argument. I also agree in general on your observations of Anguissa, and I don't really think that I have stated otherwise (not that you implied it either, for the record).

What I find a bit strange sometimes is when people venture quite far from what is observable or reported. We all know that Anguissa played no (or, most recently very little) part in both of our recent Championship seasons. We don't know that this was fully, or even mostly, because Anguissa couldn't be bothered. Everyone is of course entitled to conjure their own reasons based on observations made however scarce they can possibly be, but personally I don't really see the meaning to ascribe certain personal qualities to someone when we seemingly have almost no idea about the reasons for behind what happened. BUt I understand that others put more trust in things that I don't give much credence to, which is fair enough.

One thing I just can't understand at all however, why blame a player under contract for playing when being selected by the manager. That makes no sense at all to me. If a player can waltz into a team then that is on management, not on the player. In my world. But again, views on that can seemingly also differ quite a lot.

Anyway, TM, this was not really aimed at you. I do concur with the posters above me that your post was a good one.

[70sPimlico]

shall we move on?

[bog]

Yes please.

[Somerset Fulham]

That would be good. 

[Sting of the North]

Good idea. I guess a good start would be to stop posting in a thread dedicated to the subject. If anyone wishes to keep discussing, this would likely be a good place however.

[Woolly Mammoth]

Good idea. I guess a good start would be to stop posting in a thread dedicated to the subject. If anyone wishes to keep discussing, this would likely be a good place however.

I take your point S of the N and if posters wish to continue to debate on the subject of the headline, then why not, " free speech " providing it is civilised.

This is not North Korea or Russia or Saudi Arabia, well not yet anyway.
If others are fed up or find it boring then move on without a sound as they are free to do so in the same way others are free to continue to debate, as it is currently not mandatory to read every thread until the cows come home, well not yet anyway.

[toshes mate]

Thank you for your kind comments guys and I am happy that this thread has proven so controversial in a world where it seems we must all agree with the euphemistic so called 'group think/opinion' and never risk displeasing or upsetting those who believe they know 'the truth', and, because of that, leave us all without hope of ever finding or knowing 'the truth'.   I don't subscribe to group think/opinion in any shape or form because it really can be very dangerous for society in the large.   For my sins I have been called a tin hatter and flat earther on this forum when I am nowhere near close to being either, but that is social media for you.  I put my tin hat on and play with my pancake Earth at least once a day just to remind myself what it feels like.

I agree with Woolly Mammoth about free speech; I absolutely endorse S-o-T- N's right to go over the top whenever he wants to; I will try not to lose my rag when comments 'ding my bell' and I'll admit to having had one such an inappropriate reaction retort moderated but not deleted because the Mods are the good guys even when they may appear not to be.  S-o-T-N is absolutely correct about the manager being the culpable individual for starting a player who others do not rate, but I would suggest that Marco Silva's immediate predecessor had a habit of not following his own logic most of the time he was with us.  I am also convincing myself that when players suddenly broke rank and sprung into unusual activity under his stewardship that was because they were fed up to the back teeth with insanely doing the same thing ad nauseum and getting nowhere fast.  That thought makes it easier for me to understand B&B (but absolutely no evening meal) guy's MO but I could be very wrong about that in that the prognosis could be even worse.

As a final comment I would have loved to have seen both Anguissa and Seri being absolute success stories to the point where I could come on here and ask the question 'Why the hell are we selling them?' which is pretty normal stuff for FFC supporters.  The profit really doesn't make up for the sadness of losing a player you liked watching and the worries about who arrives as 'the' replacement.  I think there is a reason that didn't happen with Anguissa and Seri and that reason remains central to the theme in this thread IMO.     

[bobbo]

Reading BBC  web page today it says anguish is staying at Napoli .

[MartyFFC]

Looking on the brighter side of things, at least this will be the last Zambo-themed thread on here. Whether someone doesn't know ball and dislikes him, or whether you think he's a modern-day Patrick Vieira; I think we're all a tad bored of it now

[HV71]

Reading BBC  web page today it says anguish is staying at Napoli .

Either the best joke or malapropism on this thread .Thank you

[Surlyc]

I can't help but feel we never saw the best from Anguissa. We needed him to be more like an Idrissa Gueye, but that is not who he is. Wasted time for both parties and certainly lots of wasted money for us. Wouldn't be surprised to see a top half PL team sign him next season for twice what we sold him for, its the modern way.

We now need to invest the money in a ball-winning defensive midfielder who isn't scarred by two relegations with us.

[StuinSalop]

During his first underwhelming season I stood up for Frank and made many an argument why he should be given time, I could see his talent but he didn't impact the games enough.  During his second spell there were times when people were ringing his praises and saying what a great player he was however he faded, rather like the whole team and we were again relegated.

Looking back on it all now I would sum him up by saying he has great ability but was generally not up for the fight.  I will never forget Ruiz saying that he was a lover not a fighter, and there in lies the problem with Frank.  A talented player who tended to play the game on his own terms, did not battle hard enough and became a bit of a luxury we certainly could not afford.   

[Woolly Mammoth]

During his first underwhelming season I stood up for Frank and made many an argument why he should be given time, I could see his talent but he didn't impact the games enough.  During his second spell there were times when people were ringing his praises and saying what a great player he was however he faded, rather like the whole team and we were again relegated.

Looking back on it all now I would sum him up by saying he has great ability but was generally not up for the fight.  I will never forget Ruiz saying that he was a lover not a fighter, and there in lies the problem with Frank.  A talented player who tended to play the game on his own terms, did not battle hard enough and became a bit of a luxury we certainly could not afford.   

A well balanced analogy, fair weather players are never any use to anyone, not even to themselves.