Jump to content
IGNORED

Henri Lansbury


Fordy62

Recommended Posts

When I read it would be a perm I thought we'd be paying a fee and offering a medium term contract, so I was happy to see his contract terminated and confirmation of a short term deal til the end of the season. There's a good player in there certainly but despite the fact the termination of his contract should reduce the wages we'd otherwise be paying, I can imagine he's added a decent wedge onto the wage bill. There won't be any resale value IF we did extend his contract at the end of the season either. The rest of our business in 2021 will be interesting viewing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please prove me wrong but everything that Henri Lanbury is & was ... has happened in the past.

We are just getting a surplus of over-bloat in a midfield that we didn't ask for now.

Nagy, Bakinson, Vyner & Massengo could keep this wage hogger out of the team anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Prinny said:

Stop with the Robins State TV BS as well.

two seasons after he helped Villa reach the Premier League, while he also helped Norwich and West Ham United to promotion into the top flight.

He played 3 times!

He has a proven track record both in the Premier League

He has like under 20 Premier appearances in his entire career.

"Chris is going to be very useful to us on and off the field,"

“Henri will add to the group both on and off the pitch. "

 

Villa promotion year. It was actually 1 start, 2 subs. Totalling 98 minutes. 
The 1 start was last day of the season and they lost. 

Had more of a hand (slightly) in the Norwich 09/10 and West Ham 10/11 promotions. Norwich, 15 starts, total of 1,405 mins (equivalent of 15.5 games). West Ham, 13 starts, total of 1,304 mins (equivalent of 15 games total). 
Spells at Watford and Forest, generally saw him finish in mid to bottom of the table (16th, 8th, 11th, 14th, 16th, 21st). 
 

Premier league record with Villa. 2 starts, and a total minutes played of 187. 
 

As said in my previous post, he’s a damn fine player. But once again the ‘dressing up’ from the club media is overblown. 
 

Yes, he’s had 3 promotions from the champ, over only 31 games (1 totally non-contributory). He’s then been a player pretty much performing as a mid-table championship player. With 187 minutes of premier league experience (not sure how that has been egged as “proven premier league track record”). 
As said, good player. Let’s not overdo the hype though, hey. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, LocoPal said:

Please prove me wrong but everything that Henri Lanbury is & was ... has happened in the past.

We are just getting a surplus of over-bloat in a midfield that we didn't ask for now.

Nagy, Bakinson, Vyner & Massengo could keep this wage hogger out of the team anyway.

Who was that other midfielder we were linked with for years, Darren Caskey? Hope it don't turn out like that! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bassomylord said:

very happy with this signing.....said we've beaten other clubs to his signature.....Watford Norwich etc, would be interested to know why he chose us over them.

Because he wouldn’t be in their starting line up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Harry said:

Villa promotion year. It was actually 1 start, 2 subs. Totalling 98 minutes. 
The 1 start was last day of the season and they lost. 

Had more of a hand (slightly) in the Norwich 09/10 and West Ham 10/11 promotions. Norwich, 15 starts, total of 1,405 mins (equivalent of 15.5 games). West Ham, 13 starts, total of 1,304 mins (equivalent of 15 games total). 
Spells at Watford and Forest, generally saw him finish in mid to bottom of the table (16th, 8th, 11th, 14th, 16th, 21st). 
 

Premier league record with Villa. 2 starts, and a total minutes played of 187. 
 

As said in my previous post, he’s a damn fine player. But once again the ‘dressing up’ from the club media is overblown. 
 

Yes, he’s had 3 promotions from the champ, over only 31 games (1 totally non-contributory). He’s then been a player pretty much performing as a mid-table championship player. With 187 minutes of premier league experience (not sure how that has been egged as “proven premier league track record”). 
As said, good player. Let’s not overdo the hype though, hey. 

Our official Twitter account makes me want to puke, I've stopped reading it altogether this season

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RedJim said:

Our official Twitter account makes me want to puke, I've stopped reading it altogether this season

It’s not the Twitter account that makes up this bull. It’s our wonderful spiel-meister general. 
He couldn’t just say “he’s a vastly experienced championship player”. That would be the actual truth. And certainly no bad thing. 
No, we gotta ham it right up and say “proven premier league player”. 1 start Mark. 1 start - 187 total minutes - over 2 seasons. And the 1 start was a 3-0 defeat to Watford!! Jeez. There’s just no need. Just be straight and honest. He’s a vastly experienced player at this level. That’s all we need to know. The truth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Harry said:

It’s not the Twitter account that makes up this bull. It’s our wonderful spiel-meister general. 
He couldn’t just say “he’s a vastly experienced championship player”. That would be the actual truth. And certainly no bad thing. 
No, we gotta ham it right up and say “proven premier league player”. 1 start Mark. 1 start - 187 total minutes - over 2 seasons. And the 1 start was a 3-0 defeat to Watford!! Jeez. There’s just no need. Just be straight and honest. He’s a vastly experienced player at this level. That’s all we need to know. The truth. 

Its a funny thing to say isn’t it? “Proven Premier League Player”. 

Why say it? As you say, tell it like it is. Almost like he is convincing himself. Don’t get it. Lansbury is a decent player and may knit our lot together bit this hyperbole is patronising.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fordy62 said:

Steve Lansdown told us we needed a breath of fresh air. We all got excited. We appointed Dean Holden. 

Im not sure anyone would have been particularly upset with Holden if it hadn’t been for SL’s wise words. 

Signing Lansbury is similar in my opinion. No one would complain about us signing him if Ashton hadn’t just pleaded poverty in respect of offering Walsh a contract. 

What is going on?

Future Financial Information and March FFP submissions could be one of the factors here- the two do overlap and 6 month deal is a lot easier to fit into that framework given the lack of revenue.

*Wages permitting of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

Couldn't care less what he's done in his career before today, my only interest is what he does in a City shirt.

Like most footballers at our level they've had up and down careers, give him a chance and hopefully he'll improve the side over the remainder of the season 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happier now I've seen it's an initial 6 months. Always considered him a decent player at this level, but hes not played much. 

 

Reading between the lines I'm guessing this means Liam Walsh is still a long way off being ready to play. If he can hit some form and get the midfield going then it could be a very exciting signing indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
5 minutes ago, Kempson said:

Happier now I've seen it's an initial 6 months. Always considered him a decent player at this level, but hes not played much. 

 

Reading between the lines I'm guessing this means Liam Walsh is still a long way off being ready to play. If he can hit some form and get the midfield going then it could be a very exciting signing indeed.

My thoughts too but our subs bench is still very light each week. 

Ideally we need a squad full of top players  and fringe players filling in when required 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, phantom said:

My thoughts too but our subs bench is still very light each week. 

That's one part I find funny about this, seeing comments in previous weeks about resorting to the players recalled from loan/academy players on the bench. So when we bring in someone with a lot of experience for this level where either he's on the bench or pushes one of our starters there its still a bad thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

@DaveF @steviestevieneville

I'm assuming that's the Aston Villa wages we're referring to- nothing like that here in this climate surely??

40k pw at Villa according to a number of readily available sources.

But having been paid off by Villa he won't be on anywhere near that here imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s an odd one all right. I suppose it’s just possible he wants to be in the shop window for a few months, will give it his all, in the hope of attracting attention for one last good deal somewhere. He has shown a fair bit of commitment here to getting on the pitch. Equally, a lot more reassured it is a short term deal.

Equally there is a big part of me that is pretty sure we are not going down or up this season. I would rather save what we can in this climate and use the rest of the season to have a good look at what we have and decide who can make it or not.

Good luck!
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

6 hours ago, steviestevieneville said:

Would it be possible , if villa paid him up the rest of his contract on a weekly/ monthly basis and we pay him a lower basic plus signing on fee . Just thinking out loud really 

Sounds good - but I don't think we'd pay him a signing on fee after he's been paid up by Villa.

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Let’s just say he’s on £40k per week as above.

He might say to Villa - “I can sit on my arse for the next 5 months (+1 month pay off) and it’ll cost you £1m, I’m not in your squad, nobody is gonna pay my loan wages, so let’s agree a mutual termination....it’ll save you some money, and I can get fixed up elsewhere”.

Lets just say he takes a 60% pay off, £600k, he’s then opening his options up get picked up, because his new club have no fee to pay.

Say we offered him a deal to summer 22 with a year option, so a 17 month deal at £15k per week.  He’s gonna earn about £1.1m in that time.  No fee for City, no ongoing amortisation.

Im not saying I’m fully backing this, but trying to explain the finances.  At those kind of figures it’s cheaper than trying to pay a fee and wages for a player.

You weren't too far off.

Seems a good deal all round.

3 hours ago, petehinton said:

Signing on fee £££££

Signing off fee more like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...