Douglas Luiz Soares de Paulo

Notcher

Ian Bowyer
For me it was structured correctly to protect the club. It was well known he had been struggling with injury last season. The sensible option was to take him on loan and see if he could prove his fitness.
He has been fit for the last 6-8 weeks and been given opportunities - but unfortunately for all parties he hasn't delivered.
So we cut our losses and move on.
I understand mistakes have been made on some of our signings - but sometimes you have to give the club credit when they get things right.
So the sensible option was to not have an obligation to buy because you end up in this carousel clusterf*ck. If a club wants an obligation to buy then move on.

Like I said, it was a mistake and I just hope they've learned from it.
 

Matt

Stuart Pearce
So the sensible option was to not have an obligation to buy because you end up in this carousel clusterf*ck. If a club wants an obligation to buy then move on.

Like I said, it was a mistake and I just hope they've learned from it.
I’d argue that we’ve done very well by brokering the OTB out to Villa. Mariankis and his team ****in love doing deals, and this just feels like another deal we’ve done that’s ended in our favour.
 

Notcher

Ian Bowyer
I’d argue that we’ve done very well by brokering the OTB out to Villa. Mariankis and his team ****in love doing deals, and this just feels like another deal we’ve done that’s ended in our favour.
I'd say it's more fortunate than anything Matt. I'm not quite sure how it's ended up in our favour though. At best it's ended neutral I'd say
 

Templeton

Viv Anderson
I’d argue that we’ve done very well by brokering the OTB out to Villa. Mariankis and his team ****in love doing deals, and this just feels like another deal we’ve done that’s ended in our favour.
We've done well to cut our losses and get rid, but we put ourselves in this position in the first place. Doubts over the fitness of a player that we can't play and get fit to really see what he can offer as then we a lumped with having to pay £30m+ for him, and by the time we've activated the clause and realised he isn't going to get back to the player he was it's all too late.
 

PlayedOnGrass

Geoff Thomas
I'm inclined to agree.

it would have been a bad move it we ended up being stuck with him, so its turned out ok.

I am interested to see if we actually replace him, I am not convinced we will.
I think we have to
If we are going 3 in the middle - Sangare/Ando/Dom - we only have Yates as back-up and that is clearly not enough
 

PlayedOnGrass

Geoff Thomas
So the sensible option was to not have an obligation to buy because you end up in this carousel clusterf*ck. If a club wants an obligation to buy then move on.

Like I said, it was a mistake and I just hope they've learned from it.
But it wasn't an obligation to buy - we haven't bought him!
He hasn't been good enough so we have sent him back - How is that a mistake?
 

Trents

Stuart Pearce
Once it was obvious we didn't want to pay for him, he showed us the same sort of commitment in return. Complete waste of everyone's time.

I fully expect to see him roll back the years wherever he ends up next.
 

Notcher

Ian Bowyer
But it wasn't an obligation to buy - we haven't bought him!
He hasn't been good enough so we have sent him back - How is that a mistake?
It was an obligation to buy not an option to buy. 15 games/halves triggered the obligation. I thought this was common knowledge?

The mistake was making it an obligation
 

Baronvon

John Robertson
Once it was obvious we didn't want to pay for him, he showed us the same sort of commitment in return. Complete waste of everyone's time.

I fully expect to see him roll back the years wherever he ends up next.
He'll inevitably score when we play them at the City Ground.
 

JonnoSnr

Grenville Morris
Luiz to score in the last 16 of the Europa League to knock us out now. It's written just to compound the shitshow of a season.
 

PlayedOnGrass

Geoff Thomas
It was an obligation to buy not an option to buy. 15 games/halves triggered the obligation. I thought this was common knowledge?

The mistake was making it an obligation
The 15 game trigger is common knowledge
It was a conditional obligation to buy.
He didn't meet the conditions - so we sent him back.
 

Otis Redding

Try A Little Tenderness
Yeah the ambition was there but as is the forest way it was executed poorly. At least we do act decisively to try and rectify the situations as you say.
I'd agree that the Zinchenko deal now clearly looks like it was a rushed, last-minute decision.
 

Alpha Fail

Jack Burkitt
I suppose the great unanswered now is would his performances have differed if he was signed for us outright?

That should keep the thread going for a couple more pages.
 

PlayedOnGrass

Geoff Thomas
Luiz to score in the last 16 of the Europa League to knock us out now. It's written just to compound the shitshow of a season.
I am not sure of the rules - when can you draw a team from your country - Is it last 16 or last 8? Or did I just dream that one?
 

Templeton

Viv Anderson
The 15 game trigger is common knowledge
It was a conditional obligation to buy.
He didn't meet the conditions - so we sent him back.
The point is that Forest were never in a position give him plenty of game time to see if he was still a top player because of the obligation clause. Without that clause Forest may well have been able to get him fully fit and then decide whether to buy or not.
 

Notcher

Ian Bowyer
The 15 game trigger is common knowledge
It was a conditional obligation to buy.
He didn't meet the conditions - so we sent him back.
But that's my point. We had a deal which backed the club and player into this doom loop.

Player struggling for fitness ➡️can't give player a run of games to get fit ➡️Player can't get fit ➡️can't give player a run of games to get fit ➡️ etc, etc.

It goes back to my point of that it benefitted nobody.
 

PlayedOnGrass

Geoff Thomas
The point is that Forest were never in a position give him plenty of game time to see if he was still a top player because of the obligation clause. Without that clause Forest may well have been able to get him fully fit and then decide whether to buy or not.
No - the point is if he was good enough he would have played the last 6-8 weeks whilst he had been fit, he would now be a regular in the team and we would have bought him at the end of the season
Every time he played - against the might of Wrexham, Fulham. Sturm Graz and Braga - he didn't play well enough
 

Beasty

Rice 34
It's a shame, I was so excited when we signed him, felt like it was a clear signing of the club going in the right direction and evolving its style, then he never appeared under Nuno, got injured quite quickly under Ange and then again under Dyche. He's never kicked on or looked even half fit since then.
 

Monkman

John Robertson
The point is that Forest were never in a position give him plenty of game time to see if he was still a top player because of the obligation clause. Without that clause Forest may well have been able to get him fully fit and then decide whether to buy or not.
But it's doubtful that Juventus would have agreed on those terms.
 

Monkman

John Robertson
But that's my point. We had a deal which backed the club and player into this doom loop.

Player struggling for fitness ➡️can't give player a run of games to get fit ➡️Player can't get fit ➡️can't give player a run of games to get fit ➡️ etc, etc.

It goes back to my point of that it benefitted nobody.
Players can get fit in training - he lacked general aerobic fitness, not so much match sharpness.
 
Top Bottom