Matchday thread - Toon v Wolves

[Don Sholeone]

Lewis Hall is still a teenager. There's no situation, he's just a teenager. He's younger than Alex Murphy, Michael Ndiweni, Amadou Diallo and Joe White who are all seen as kids that have made their debut this season. He's 2 years younger than Tino who is still seen as a young full back.

Then why is he not even playing for the U-23s?, why does he warm the bench every single week? Why did he not get an opportunity when the team was on the absolute bones of its arse?

And I'm pretty sure that there will have been at least a loan fee paid for him otherwise why would Chelsea agree to him being here for free for a whole year? He's highly regarded I'm pretty sure they could have got money for him or at least a loan elsewhere until someone paid up for him this summer.

[bodacious benny]

Lewis Hall is still a teenager. There's no situation, he's just a teenager. He's younger than Alex Murphy, Michael Ndiweni, Amadou Diallo and Joe White who are all seen as kids that have made their debut this season. He's 2 years younger than Tino who is still seen as a young full back.

Then why is he not even playing for the U-23s?, why does he warm the bench every single week? Why did he not get an opportunity when the team was on the absolute bones of its arse?

And I'm pretty sure that there will have been at least a loan fee paid for him otherwise why would Chelsea agree to him being here for free for a whole year? He's highly regarded I'm pretty sure they could have got money for him or at least a loan elsewhere until someone paid up for him this summer.

Definitely agree with this. All those mentioned play regularly for the u23s or whatever they’re called. If Hall was viewed in the same bracket then surely he’d be played with them. I don’t think any of us thought at the start of the season that Hall was being brought in as a youth team player and while not expected to walk straight into the first team, did expect him to get minutes.

It’s very bizarre that even in the dark months where we could just about field 11 players with absolutely no bench that he still rarely got minutes.

[Colback's Orange Tufts]

Is he in a weird hinterland where too good for u23s but not ready to start yet? Or just Howe has his favourites

[bodacious benny]

Is he in a weird hinterland where too good for u23s but not ready to start yet? Or just Howe has his favourites

He did play quite a few games for Chelsea towards the end of last season, and looked good. So I’d be surprised if was the former. Howe has implied before that it was up to Hall to get himself into the team (which sounded like he wasn't doing it in training).

[Colly]

I still think there's something to how many games he has to play before a permanent move is obligatory, but we won't realistically find out until summer. I don't really see how we're owed an explanation either, should we suddenly really need him it doesn't go well if Howe's already come out and said "he's s***, so we're not playing him to avoid a fee". The alternative is that he's one for the future.

Oh, and he was the only sub at half time wearing a snood, so that's enough of a reason for me to not play...

[ALF]

Is he in a weird hinterland where too good for u23s but not ready to start yet? Or just Howe has his favourites

It is this. If he was s*** he'd be playing u23s. He's in the first team, but he's still a teenager. He is still learning and will be for a while yet.

[ALF]

Lewis Hall is still a teenager. There's no situation, he's just a teenager. He's younger than Alex Murphy, Michael Ndiweni, Amadou Diallo and Joe White who are all seen as kids that have made their debut this season. He's 2 years younger than Tino who is still seen as a young full back.

Then why is he not even playing for the U-23s?, why does he warm the bench every single week? Why did he not get an opportunity when the team was on the absolute bones of its arse?

And I'm pretty sure that there will have been at least a loan fee paid for him otherwise why would Chelsea agree to him being here for free for a whole year? He's highly regarded I'm pretty sure they could have got money for him or at least a loan elsewhere until someone paid up for him this summer.

Minimal.

Made sense for all parties. Chelsea get guaranteed income next summer for an academy player which gives them licence to spend big again. We get our player instantly and don't have to pay until we can afford it.

Also, I wish he did get a chance when we had a mountain of injuries. Full back was an area where we didn't struggle though.

[Don Sholeone]

I still think there's something to how many games he has to play before a permanent move is obligatory, but we won't realistically find out until summer. I don't really see how we're owed an explanation either, should we suddenly really need him it doesn't go well if Howe's already come out and said "he's s***, so we're not playing him to avoid a fee". The alternative is that he's one for the future.

Oh, and he was the only sub at half time wearing a snood, so that's enough of a reason for me to not play...

End of the day if you are not sure about a player then don't insert an obligation clause. If they dont want to pay the fee and want him cheaper.. then don't agree to a higher fee.
The explanation is necessary in my opinion, we have been constantly told we cannot spend to improve the team yet we can afford to lock up funds on players we dont want to give minutes to or don't even intend to buy at the end.

If the club was unsure then why bother? We have probably just given Chelsea around £5m-£10m to watch a lad train for 8 months.

[Valentino's fast feet]

I still think there's something to how many games he has to play before a permanent move is obligatory, but we won't realistically find out until summer. I don't really see how we're owed an explanation either, should we suddenly really need him it doesn't go well if Howe's already come out and said "he's s***, so we're not playing him to avoid a fee". The alternative is that he's one for the future.

Oh, and he was the only sub at half time wearing a snood, so that's enough of a reason for me to not play...

End of the day if you are not sure about a player then don't insert an obligation clause. If they dont want to pay the fee and want him cheaper.. then don't agree to a higher fee.
The explanation is necessary in my opinion, we have been constantly told we cannot spend to improve the team yet we can afford to lock up funds on players we dont want to give minutes to or don't even intend to buy at the end.

If the club was unsure then why bother? We have probably just given Chelsea around £5m-£10m to watch a lad train for 8 months.

Where have you got that fee from though? No way would it be that steep for a kid with less than a dozen senior appearances to his name at the time. Not to mention we wouldn't okay it. We baulked at a similar line fee for Phillips, who is an experienced senior bro and established international player. Admittedly that loan would've been for less time, but still. I imagine some kind d of nominal fee would have been paid for the loan, probably factored into the eventual obligation fee.

[Blue & Maroon]

Hall has had zero impact this season but any loan fee would have come nowhere near close to covering any other signings had we not gone for him. He dosent even take a squad place does he?

Such a strange thing to be debating, if he wasnt here nothing would have changed, we wouldnt have signed anyone else, bizarre to be chatting about him as if he is symptomatic of a wider problem.

[bodacious benny]

I don’t think it’s unreasonable at all to debate. He’s an apparent left full back, in our first team squad (wether he takes up a squad place or not), and for a sustained period where our preferred left back and backup left back (targett) were out injured and/or out of form he never got a sniff despite one of the worst injury crisis the club has seen. Even if he is one for the future it’s an unusual situation.

[beatski]

I can see a bit of both sides. I understand making the deal: highly rated youngster that we wouldnt have been able to get under any other circumstances (i.e. we wouldnt have singned anyone else cos we had no money, but deferring it to next season allowed us, and no club but chelsea would have gone for it because of their heavily stacked future FFP bill), and we possibly wouldnt have been able to get him at any other time.

Plus he's 'one for the future' so you wouldnt expect him to be coming straight in to the side either.

on the flip side though, if he's so expensive and highly rated, how isnt he getting a look in?

Though on the flip-flip side, with the situation we're in and all the tough cup draws there hasnt really been a very good opportunity to give him some games

Hopefully next season he'll start to get some game time, start to justify his fee, and the constant debate about him will go away

[bodacious benny]

He’s the new Jamal Lewis

[Colly]

It's fine to debate, but when it's full of so much conjecture and assumption I don't think we're really taking it anywhere. Maybe we've just made a rare error in our transfer dealings?

Also, snood.

[Blue & Maroon]

It's fine to debate, but when it's full of so much conjecture and assumption I don't think we're really taking it anywhere. Maybe we've just made a rare error in our transfer dealings?

Also, snood.

Maybe I was being vague or should have phrased it better. Another example of someone writing down my thoughts better than myself

[Blue & Maroon]

Also nowt wrong with a snood

[Colly]

It's fine to debate, but when it's full of so much conjecture and assumption I don't think we're really taking it anywhere. Maybe we've just made a rare error in our transfer dealings?

Also, snood.

Maybe I was being vague or should have phrased it better. Another example of someone writing down my thoughts better than myself

I think I agree with you, I was more responding to Benny.

Snoods are awful. Run if you're cold. Half of Chelsea's team were wearing them at SJP earlier this season and we battered them. And everyone knows correlation = causation.

[bodacious benny]

Also nowt wrong with a snood

They remind me of Samir Nasri and his annoying face

[beatski]

It's fine to debate, but when it's full of so much conjecture and assumption I don't think we're really taking it anywhere. Maybe we've just made a rare error in our transfer dealings?

Also, snood.

Also a good point! definitely just a case of wait and see