Indigo Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 In a game that was understandably scrappy at times he was anything but that, he looked extremely comfortable out there. Obviously very little to go off but an encouraging start all the same. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted July 18 VT Supporter Share Posted July 18 5 hours ago, maqroll said: It's called "The Edgar" and is very popular among Latino youth for some reason. It’s no meet me at McDonald’s that’s for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted July 18 VT Supporter Share Posted July 18 kinda begs the question why we weren't in for him in the first place and focussed our efforts in getting mckennie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 18 VT Supporter Share Posted July 18 Pronunciation? I'm guessing 'Barra-NECKY-er? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lerner's Driver Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 13 minutes ago, tomav84 said: kinda begs the question why we weren't in for him in the first place and focussed our efforts in getting mckennie Not sure, but suspect they didn't want to let this kid go and he was only offered to save the deal after McKennie kicked up. We definitely appear to have gotten lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 Who said we weren't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted July 18 VT Supporter Share Posted July 18 1 minute ago, colhint said: Who said we weren't? might have been. but enzo's name wasn't mentioned before mckennie turned us down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 Might have been Monchis tactic all along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 These comments it was a friendly Lets waut and see how he does against better opposition He certainly looked impressive yesterday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one_ian_taylor Posted July 18 VT Supporter Share Posted July 18 3 minutes ago, mjmooney said: Pronunciation? I'm guessing 'Barra-NECKY-er? I would guess it's Barre-ne-TCHAY-a. Looks like a Basque name, in which case the ch would have been a tx at some point and a tch sound I think 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Platt Posted July 18 VT Supporter Share Posted July 18 He looked very tidy and composed don't matter who the opposition are you could see he has what it takes. Impressive and exciting. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 14 minutes ago, tomav84 said: kinda begs the question why we weren't in for him in the first place and focussed our efforts in getting mckennie Were we <really> in for McKennie? It is clear that Juventus offered him to us as part of the Luiz deal but it never seemed to be something that we were going all out to make happen. I suspect that if we really wanted McKennie then we'd have been much more determined to ensure that any of the issues that apparently caused that part of the deal to collapse would have been avoided. As I have said before despite Frosinone being dismissed by UK posters so quickly as a relegated team - they (and a lot of the teams in the bottom half of Serie A) had quite a few highly thought of young players there and so will definitely have been scouted / followed by plenty of people heavily involved in Italian football. My bet is that Monchi has access (at least) to some of those people and will have an extensive data set (including scouting reports) of young prospects in Italy available to him. Enzo would almost certainly have been on this list. It wouldn't overly surprise me if he WAS one of the players we talked about at the start (along with Soule and SIJ) but that Juve were more keen to utilise McKennie in the deal. However, "problems" in agreeing personal terms with McKennie and that threatening the Luiz deal almost certainly then made a deal for Enzo more palatable for Juve to consider. Whilst Juve might have been focussed on McKennie maybe that was never really our main ambition? There was lots of chatter about the deal and what was going on - but almost all of it was coming from Italy rather than Villa. Monchi might just have been playing an exceptional hand of poker. The sense I get is that Juve fans / experts were much more disappointed about Enzo going than they were about the prospect of McKennie leaving. Therefore, maybe we needed to play the game a bit until circumstances meant that we were in a stronger position to reveal the hand we were really playing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 21 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: These comments it was a friendly Lets waut and see how he does against better opposition He certainly looked impressive yesterday Many players have shined in the Walsall friendly on debut in the past and disappeared. Pretty sure Tonev or Helenius was one of them Good start but maybe some of the comments OTT 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alreadyexists Posted July 18 VT Supporter Share Posted July 18 25 minutes ago, mjmooney said: Pronunciation? I'm guessing 'Barra-NECKY-er? I think it’s more “Barren-etch-eya” 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alreadyexists Posted July 18 VT Supporter Share Posted July 18 12 minutes ago, S-Platt said: He looked very tidy and composed don't matter who the opposition are you could see he has what it takes. Impressive and exciting. Absolutely, tidy and composed with a touch of class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 20 minutes ago, Lerner's Driver said: Not sure, but suspect they didn't want to let this kid go and he was only offered to save the deal after McKennie kicked up. We definitely appear to have gotten lucky. I think the first part of this is correct. The second part is (I think) wrong. I don't think Enzo was offered to us. I think he was always on our list. Just look at the profile of the players that we've signed recently - Rogers, SIJ, Maatsen, Onana, etc. McKennie doesn't fit that profile. Enzo does. We definitely wanted SIJ. We definitely asked Juve about Soule. If we wanted Soule then we will absolutely have known about Enzo too. I don't know how serious we were about McKennie but a deal wasn't done. We seem to have a habit of making deals happen at the moment. I just can't help but think that something about McKennie doesn't quite add up and that maybe we were never that keen. Even if we did want McKennie and the deal collapsed despite our best efforts I don't think we'd have just accepted any player instead. I think this was a game we've played brilliantly and that we always wanted SIJ, Soule and / or Enzo. We've landed two of them. I don't think this has anything to do with luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alreadyexists Posted July 18 VT Supporter Share Posted July 18 49 minutes ago, tomav84 said: kinda begs the question why we weren't in for him in the first place and focussed our efforts in getting mckennie There’s so many unknowns, we don’t really know we were after McKennie, it could all have been Agents trying to get moves away when they heard we hade made contact with the club. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 19 minutes ago, allani said: I think the first part of this is correct. The second part is (I think) wrong. I don't think Enzo was offered to us. I think he was always on our list. Just look at the profile of the players that we've signed recently - Rogers, SIJ, Maatsen, Onana, etc. McKennie doesn't fit that profile. Enzo does. We definitely wanted SIJ. We definitely asked Juve about Soule. If we wanted Soule then we will absolutely have known about Enzo too. I don't know how serious we were about McKennie but a deal wasn't done. We seem to have a habit of making deals happen at the moment. I just can't help but think that something about McKennie doesn't quite add up and that maybe we were never that keen. Even if we did want McKennie and the deal collapsed despite our best efforts I don't think we'd have just accepted any player instead. I think this was a game we've played brilliantly and that we always wanted SIJ, Soule and / or Enzo. We've landed two of them. I don't think this has anything to do with luck. You wonder if Juve were the ones trying to push McKennie on us. By all reports Juve were loathe to actually lose Barrenechea. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulMcGrath_5 Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 5 minutes ago, Zatman said: Many players have shined in the Walsall friendly on debut in the past and disappeared. Pretty sure Tonev or Helenius was one of them Good start but maybe some of the comments OTT I think a lot of people have dismissed his season at Frosinone because (a) they've never heard of them, (b) they aren't a "big" team and (c) they got relegated (although they only finished 3 points off 13th which would have been an amazing result). I didn't see much of Frosinone. However, lots of Italian / Serie A people that I follow seem to think that he was really impressive last season. The way that they have talked about his game seems to exactly match what people saw yesterday. So hopefully that can give some reassurance that it's not just down to being Walsall. Obviously whether he can turn his Serie A form into PL form is a different question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts