Player watch: Christian Eriksen

[dace]

Eriksen damned if he does .... and .... Damned if he doesn't.

 

[BringBack_leGin]

If Eriksen is to leave for free next summer, the best way to both attract and afford his replacement is by having a great season, therefore if he’s the best option for any given match, he has to play.

Also, while from January he can negotiate with other clubs in Europe, and from June with every club, he can also still negotiate with us that entire time too. There’s still a chance that, this time next summer, signing a contract with THFC will be the best offer available. In his own words, there aren’t many clubs who represent a step up. We may end up being the best club (and best paying club) even interested in Eriksen.

Right now, he’s ours to use and hopefully not abuse, so let’s just get behind him and hope that regardless of what lays in wait, he has a great season for us.

 

[Havre]

There are two possible outcomes to your proposal - selling him, or having him rot in the reserves for a year. You're ignoring one of those outcomes because you think it's unlikely, but there's no way of knowing how the player will react to that situation. Adrien Rabiot had that dilemma at PSG last season and refused to move, was stuck in the reserves for six months and then signed for Juventus. It didn't really hurt him much.

Eriksen has refused to sign a contract extension and has been on much lower wages than many of his team mates for years because he wants to give himself the best opportunity of joining one of his dream clubs and win something. Would he agree to give up that dream to join a smaller club or a team less likely to win trophies? Who knows. Would Eriksen get his agent to speak to Barca & Real and see if they'd sign him on a free in a year in those circumstances? Almost certainly. There's also the possibility that Eriksen could exploit the Webster ruling and buy out the remainder of his contract for £4M if we told him he wouldn't play for the season.

Players leave on free transfers every season. Many of those players are just as committed on the pitch as they were in previous seasons. Lewandowski finished as the Bundesliga top scorer the season he announced that he was going to leave Dortmund to join Bayern. He even played against his new team in the cup final that season. You don't have to punish players just because they've decided that they want a change.

I am ignoring it? Clearly I'm not, but if it helps your argument inventing things then please go ahead. Of course that is a risk, but please show me the solution without no risk or downside?

It didn't hurt Rabiot not playing? You would think he would have preferred playing.

I am also aware that players do leave for free. It doesn't make it less of a mistake that others have made the same mistake we are making (or have made).

 

[Timberwolf]

Can't see Sessegnon playing that far up the pitch, but I agree with the general point.

One of the things that made us so good in 16/17 was the balance we had. Eriksen needs runners to play well. Alli is a runner, Son is a runner, Kane used to be, Lucas somewhat. Lo Celso is not. Neither is Lamela. If you play Eriksen and Lo Celso at the same time who are there to stretch the opposition's defense? Possible to go diamond of course with Eriksen and Lo Celso as no. 8s, but then there is no room for N'Dombele.

To me both Lo Celso and Eriksen are better players than Alli and maybe even Son, but both Alli and Son offers something different. Even Lucas. Lucas is in my opinion a clear level below in overall quality, but he has complementary qualities to Eriksen and Lo Celso.

Lo Celso is A LOT more of a runner than Eriksen is. He's not a runner in the same way Son or Lucas are, in the sense that he's not particularly quick, but is certainly as much of a runner as Alli is, if not more so - for Betis he was continuously breaking the lines and running with the ball in a way that Eriksen practically never does. This is why Lo Celso was fouled about 2/3 times a game whereas Eriksen barely ever gets fouled as he doesn't really dribble.

Eriksen and Lo Celso have some similar traits but in other ways they are very different indeed. I think having 2 intelligent ball playing midfielders on the pitch at the same time would help us a great deal and would certainly be an improvement over playing, say, Lamela and Eriksen together like we did against Arsenal.

 

[DJS]

Some of you lot are reading way too much in those translated comments.....

He basically refused to answer any and all questions about Tottenham and his future because he was with the national team, and that was where focus should be be, and even made a reference saying that whatever I say it will be sensationalised.... Which is then exactly what is happening.

The media are such lazy uninspired bastards today as all they do is ask the same constant boring questions trying to get a rise.

If I was a player or manager I’d be seriously bored with being asked the same crap every week and would just no comment them lol.

 

[wrd]

The media are such lazy uninspired bastards today as all they do is ask the same constant boring questions trying to get a rise.

If I was a player or manager I’d be seriously bored with being asked the same crap every week and would just no comment them lol.

Unfortunately we allow them to do it by generating the traffic, clicks, reaction they need. If we held them to a higher standard they'd have to change their ways but we drink in the same old shit again and again.

 

[Timberwolf]

I am ignoring it? Clearly I'm not, but if it helps your argument inventing things then please go ahead. Of course that is a risk, but please show me the solution without no risk or downside?

It didn't hurt Rabiot not playing? You would think he would have preferred playing.

I am also aware that players do leave for free. It doesn't make it less of a mistake that others have made the same mistake we are making (or have made).

I think giving Eriksen a "sign or rot" ultimatum is a risky one. Levy has made similar moves before - when we signed Adebayor he told Crouch to leave for Stoke or threatened a season of rotting in the reserves. On that occasion it worked as Crouch gave in and left the club. However, in that situation the club had the upper hand - we'd already signed a better player and could afford to put Crouch in the reserves if we had to.

In the case of Eriksen, he's such an important player for us that if he were to call our bluff (which he probably would) we'd end up sabotaging our own season simply to prove a point. If it was Lamela we could get away with it, but last season Eriksen, despite his poor form, was still a difference maker and the only pure creator in the squad. Without him we certainly wouldn't have finished 4th or reached the CL final so the net loss would've been far greater than whatever fee we might've received for him.

Then there's the issue of clubs coming in for him. Even if we're deperate to sell him we can't conjure huge bids out of thin air. If no-one is offering what he's worth do we still need to force him out of the door just because his contract is winding down.

 

[Havre]

Lo Celso is A LOT more of a runner than Eriksen is. He's not a runner in the same way Son or Lucas are, in the sense that he's not particularly quick, but is certainly as much of a runner as Alli is, if not more so - for Betis he was continuously breaking the lines and running with the ball in a way that Eriksen practically never does. This is why Lo Celso was fouled about 2/3 times a game whereas Eriksen barely ever gets fouled as he doesn't really dribble.

Eriksen and Lo Celso have some similar traits but in other ways they are very different indeed. I think having 2 intelligent ball playing midfielders on the pitch at the same time would help us a great deal and would certainly be an improvement over playing, say, Lamela and Eriksen together like we did against Arsenal.

I agree on the description of Lo Celso, but what I meant was primarily runner off the ball. That is where Eriksen shines - finding players on the move. I cannot see Lo Celso making much of those kind of runs.

Don't get me wrong. I don't necessarily think it is a big problem having Eriksen and Lo Celso. I wish Eriksen would sign a new contract, but I do believe they cancel each other out somewhat. And I do not necessarily believe that our best starting line-up will ever include both of them.

 

[Havre]

I think giving Eriksen a "sign or rot" ultimatum is a risky one. Levy has made similar moves before - when we signed Adebayor he told Crouch to leave for Stoke or threatened a season of rotting in the reserves. On that occasion it worked as Crouch gave in and left the club. However, in that situation the club had the upper hand - we'd already signed a better player and could afford to put Crouch in the reserves if we had to.

In the case of Eriksen, he's such an important player for us that if he were to call our bluff (which he probably would) we'd end up sabotaging our own season simply to prove a point. If it was Lamela we could get away with it, but last season Eriksen, despite his poor form, was still the difference between us coming 4th and coming 6th. The net loss of us not qualifying for the Champions League is greater than us getting a decent fee for Eriksen. It would also cause even more unrest and negativity in the dressing room.

Then there's the issue of clubs coming in for him. Even if we're deperate to sell him we can't conjure huge bids out of thin air. If no-one is offering what he's worth do we still need to force him out of the door just because his contract is winding down.

I don't disagree with that description. I just think it would have been worth the risk - if we had made the decision early enough.

To me, based on ITK and media reports, it sounded like we were to slow to put pressure on Eriksen. We thought he was going to sign later and when he didn't it was too late. Easy for me to say now sitting behind a keyboard far away from Levy's office, but I think we should have given tougher deadlines early. That would have allowed Eriksen time to reflect about what he wanted to do - and he would have had a real decision to make. We never forced him to make any sort of decision and then it is rather obvious he would not sign anything.

Without getting into politics really not that different than what is currently happening with Brexit. After they took away the option of leaving (or are about to take away that option) the UK got 0 leverage towards the EU. The same way we basically have 0 leverage towards Eriksen they way we have dealt with the situation.

 

[Timberwolf]

I agree on the description of Lo Celso, but what I meant was primarily runner off the ball. That is where Eriksen shines - finding players on the move. I cannot see Lo Celso making much of those kind of runs.

Don't get me wrong. I don't necessarily think it is a big problem having Eriksen and Lo Celso. I wish Eriksen would sign a new contract, but I do believe they cancel each other out somewhat. And I do not necessarily believe that our best starting line-up will ever include both of them.

I agree that could be the case against certain teams, but watching our recent games I think playing both Lo Celso and Eriksen would've helped a lot. Against Villa and Newcastle we needed more intelligent, creative, technical players to break them down. Eriksen and Lo Celso together would've helped to no end. Then against Arsenal we seriously lacked game management and control - something Lo Celso and Eriksen would be able to add. Having two of them on the pitch would mean we're more likely to pick out runners on the break, as the opposition can't simply mark one of them out of the game. I agree that getting Ndombele, Lo Celso and Eriksen on the pitch together might take a little experimentation, but in my mind the more the better.

Man City regularly play with 2 or 3 players of that ilk and it doesn't hold them back in any way. Why not us?

 

[nailsy]

I am ignoring it? Clearly I'm not, but if it helps your argument inventing things then please go ahead. Of course that is a risk, but please show me the solution without no risk or downside?

It didn't hurt Rabiot not playing? You would think he would have preferred playing.

I am also aware that players do leave for free. It doesn't make it less of a mistake that others have made the same mistake we are making (or have made).

I'm not sure if you're just trolling now. There's obviously no solution without risk or a downside. The question for me is do we want him to stay or go? I can't speak for most people, but personally I'd like him to sign a new contract. He won't do that if we stick him in the reserves. Is there the risk that he will leave on a free? Yes, but that's there whatever we do. We just don't have the power in this situation. I know you think it's a mistake by the club, but the power is really with the player in this situation.

And I'm sure Rabiot would have preferred playing, but he still got a move to one of the biggest clubs in the world which has a good outcome for him. PSG definitely missed him when they crashed out of the Champions League so they probably would've preferred him to be playing too. It was a bad situation for both parties which is why I'd like to avoid it here.

Anyway I'm done. These are all just hypotheticals. No-one will ever know what the right thing to do would've been. For all I know you could be right and if we'd threatened him with the reserves he could be playing for Man Utd now and we could be £50M richer.

 

[Havre]

I agree that could be the case against certain teams, but watching our recent games I think playing both Lo Celso and Eriksen would've helped a lot. Against Villa and Newcastle we needed more intelligent, creative, technical players to break them down. Eriksen and Lo Celso together would've helped to no end. Then against Arsenal we seriously lacked game management and control - something Lo Celso and Eriksen would be able to add. Having two of them on the pitch would mean we're more likely to pick out runners on the break, as the opposition can't simply mark one of them out of the game. I agree that getting Ndombele, Lo Celso and Eriksen on the pitch together might take a little experimentation, but in my mind the more the better.

Man City regularly play with 2 or 3 players of that ilk and it doesn't hold them back in any way. Why not us?

Mainly because KDB and D. Silva are better than Eriksen - and more versatile I would argue - certainly KDB.

Have we ever seen Eriksen make the kind of run KDB made before Aguero's goal against us? Aguero will also make a lot more of those runs than the current Kane will.

So I'm not sure if we are that similar.

 

[Havre]

I'm not sure if you're just trolling now. There's obviously no solution without risk or a downside. The question for me is do we want him to stay or go? I can't speak for most people, but personally I'd like him to sign a new contract. He won't do that if we stick him in the reserves. Is there the risk that he will leave on a free? Yes, but that's there whatever we do. We just don't have the power in this situation. I know you think it's a mistake by the club, but the power is really with the player in this situation.

And I'm sure Rabiot would have preferred playing, but he still got a move to one of the biggest clubs in the world which has a good outcome for him. PSG definitely missed him when they crashed out of the Champions League so they probably would've preferred him to be playing too. It was a bad situation for both parties which is why I'd like to avoid it here.

Anyway I'm done. These are all just hypotheticals. No-one will ever know what the right thing to do would've been. For all I know you could be right and if we'd threatened him with the reserves he could be playing for Man Utd now and we could be £50M richer.

But still you claim I believe so by ignoring the downside in my position? Funny.

 

[SpartanSpur]

I agree that could be the case against certain teams, but watching our recent games I think playing both Lo Celso and Eriksen would've helped a lot. Against Villa and Newcastle we needed more intelligent, creative, technical players to break them down. Eriksen and Lo Celso together would've helped to no end. Then against Arsenal we seriously lacked game management and control - something Lo Celso and Eriksen would be able to add. Having two of them on the pitch would mean we're more likely to pick out runners on the break, as the opposition can't simply mark one of them out of the game. I agree that getting Ndombele, Lo Celso and Eriksen on the pitch together might take a little experimentation, but in my mind the more the better.

Man City regularly play with 2 or 3 players of that ilk and it doesn't hold them back in any way. Why not us?

City also for all their brilliance fall to pieces without a Fernandinho/Rodri to help shut down teams on the counter. It's going to be a tricky balance as while we have a lot of quality options now, DM looks very light (unless Dier comes back firing). Totally agree that we need to be getting more creative players on the pitch against Palace, and I believe we will if all are fit.

I'm hopeful that a Winks, Ndombele and GLC midfield 3 could have enough collective bite for it to work, but time will tell. That said playing those 3 in midfield means we can only play two out of Son, Eriksen, Dele, Moura and Lamela to support Kane. In fact this kind of proves to me we'll be reaching City levels of attacking options once everyone is fit and firing. Exciting times ahead hopefully, would be nice to enjoy watching us play again!

 

[nailsy]

Eriksen has just been put on the 55 man shortlist for the FIFA Fifpro Men's World11. Son and Kane are also on the list.

 

[nailsy]

But still you claim I believe so by ignoring the downside in my position? Funny.

I haven't claimed that you believe anything.

You have just ignored the bit where I said you might be right though.

As I said I'm done.

 

[ClintEastwould]

Mainly because KDB and D. Silva are better than Eriksen - and more versatile I would argue - certainly KDB.

Have we ever seen Eriksen make the kind of run KDB made before Aguero's goal against us? Aguero will also make a lot more of those runs than the current Kane will.

So I'm not sure if we are that similar.

KDB yes, Silva no. In my opinion of course.

 

[Timberwolf]

City also for all their brilliance fall to pieces without a Fernandinho/Rodri to help shut down teams on the counter. It's going to be a tricky balance as while we have a lot of quality options now, DM looks very light (unless Dier comes back firing). Totally agree that we need to be getting more creative players on the pitch against Palace, and I believe we will if all are fit.

I'm hopeful that a Winks, Ndombele and GLC midfield 3 could have enough collective bite for it to work, but time will tell. That said playing those 3 in midfield means we can only play two out of Son, Eriksen, Dele, Moura and Lamela to support Kane. In fact this kind of proves to me we'll be reaching City levels of attacking options once everyone is fit and firing. Exciting times ahead hopefully, would be nice to enjoy watching us play again!

Yeah completely agree. I don't think it's a coincidence that our defensive solidity in the league tailed off right around the time we stopped playing with a DM. Dier probably isn't the answer long term and has a lot of flaws to his game, but I think we're crying out for someone in that position - either a proper destroyer who can just lay the ball to Ndombele/Winks, or someone more in the mould of Fernandinho or Rodri who is a big tough bastard that also knows how to play. Preferably the latter.

This season I think we'll have a lot of teething problems trying to balance the midfield, but at least in Ndombele and Lo Celso we have 2 players who are technically sound that also don't mind footing a foot in. As you said, hopefully a midfield 3 of them + Winks will give us just enough bite against attacking teams, while we can play a pivot against the more defensive ones.

 

[jamesinashby]

To be honest, none of us have a clue about what he’s actually thinking.

During the season, almost without exception, there will be a player being criticised for a lacklustre performance. Even our superhero Harry has had an adverse comment on how he played. Of course, they are only human and we all can have those type of days when somehow, we cannot get it to together. I wonder whether if when this happens, it is as much to do with the makeup of the side. On some of our bad days when we have performed poorly, I sometimes feel that certain pairings or who is alongside him, there is a lack of understanding. Often when EC is quiet it seems to me he is not being drawn into the game by his teammates. Or his teammates are not getting into positions to pass to or not switched on to notice the spaces where he can put the ball in. It is a team game and unless the side is working on the same wavelength, getting things together becomes difficult.
Just a thought in defence of CE as I find it difficult to pin down what the problem is when his performance is below that which we know he is capable of.

COYS

 

[Khilari]

Dude says some weird things, IMO.