GIALLOROSSI YORKSHIRE Q&A
Today's Q&A focuses on Roma's sporting director, as Beppe Costa provides another question:
Q: Role of Monchi at Roma? It seems obvious to say he was brought in to discover talent as was seen at Sevilla. Though it seems he will be used at Roma to flip players, something Pallotta has been doing since his arrival. Every year he sells a couple of his stars to then reinvest in potential which are then flipped once again. There is no long term strategy to build a strong team. From Marquinhos, Lamela, Pjanic and so on the merry-go-round never stops. Under Pallotta, Roma are a selling club while he uses as little of his own cash for investment. Monchi is performing poor as his buys are not performing. Apart from Kolarov whose arrival is due to Dzeko, not Monchi, all his purchases are poor & inexperienced in Serie A. Monchi is no match for Sabatini, whose contacts are well established in Italy with agents and Monchi is better placed in Spain. A: It’s too early to make a judgement; he’s only had one full transfer window with the club and it’s practically impossible to make the desired impression in just one window. That means it’s also too early to make comparisons to Sabatini. Let’s not forget that not all of Sabatini’s purchases were successful either. He made some good signings that we are still benefiting from, such as Alisson and Nainggolan, but he also made some poor purchases, like Doumbia, Iturbe, etc. Monchi’s first mercato was a mix of both good and bad signings - no different to Sabatini’s legacy at Roma as a whole. The point you make about Monchi's contacts being good for Spain is, to some degree, valid. For example, the rumours that have linked Roma to Guilherme Siqueira today illustrate this - Siqueira would be a good signing for a Spanish club, but isn't what Roma need right now. A similar example from the current squad would be Hector Moreno, who was successful in La Liga with Espanyol, but, for whatever reason, hasn't hit the ground running in Rome. However, it takes time to make the necessary connections. Monchi hasn't been in Italy that long, so naturally he won't have many contacts in the country. Over time, this will start to increase, and the benefits will follow. Is Monchi here to sell players? When he arrived, people were excited because of facts such as: he signed Dani Alves for just €550k - which is remarkable. What they may have overlooked is: he sold Dani Alves for €35.5m. Profit was made at the end and the player moved on, although they did get six years of his playing career. This is longer than Roma kept any of the three players that you mentioned. Bare in mind, Sevilla also won trophies in that time. Perhaps that is the best policy - the club wins trophies, and makes a profit for future investments. Now we will have to wait and see how long the team keeps hold of the likes of Cengiz Under and Lorenzo Pellegrini, or if they will be sold for profit in the future. Also, will they become part of a Roma team that wins trophies? We might not know the answers to those questions for a few years yet. What do you think? What is Monchi's role at Roma? Will he be able to build a successful team in Italy? Have your say with a comment.
0 Comments
The focus on UK Roma fans on the Q&A this week continues with another question from GialloRossiLupo.
Who is a better manager at press conferences? EDF or Spalletti? I prefer EDF, think he handles the press so much better than Spalletti ever did! In my opinion, Di Francesco deals with the press better. Spalletti produced a negative atmosphere at the club, and that was mainly through his press conferences. He appeared frustrated at journalists for doing their jobs and asking the tough questions. He didn't find a way to manipulate the press, but instead let their questions get to him. Whilst there is a negative mood among some fans at present, this hasn't been created by Di Francesco's poor performances at press conferences - it is merely from their own views on him. EDF gives measured responses to the questions he faces. When I mentioned about Spalletti not being able to manipulate the press, I think EDF can. Take his pre-Atalanta conference, for example. A controversial decision was made for that game (leaving Nainggolan out of the squad), but EDF addressed it before any journalist could question him about it. That way, he was able to give the answer he wanted to give, and assert his control over the situation. Later in the conference, he showed he had prepared for it by incorporating statistics into his answer. This shows that he is very careful about what he is saying and his responses are well thought out. In fact, just reading back over that press conference again, with this answer in mind, I'm very impressed by the amount of knowledge he demonstrates. These are the responses of a man comfortable talking to a difficult Roman media. He also defends his players well when questions hint at criticism of them, which is part of his character as a good man-manager. Spalletti also did this to a decent extent. Overall, I think EDF is handling the press better than Spalletti did last year. But that said, we don't know how he would've performed when asked the kind of questions Spalletti was bombarded with about Totti, so in some ways it's a difficult comparison. Which of the two do you think handles the press better? Share your opinions with a comment. Thanks to Joe Costa for providing today’s question.
Another trophy-less season beckons with owners once again selling best players to fund transfers. How many coaches will Roma go through before one realises stability is key? Look at Aurelio De Laurentiis with Napoli & Sarri. Keep your team together & build on squad depth. Time for Pallotta to sell? I can understand fans’ frustration at the poor results recently, but if there was ever a season calling for patience, it was this one. We began it with a new coach and a new sporting director, not to mention it’s the first season without Totti since some of us have been alive, which surely has some significance. It was always going to be a transitory season. It perhaps shouldn’t be too much of a surprise that we aren’t in line for a trophy. We sold Salah to meet Financial Fair Play guidelines; I’m sure the club would’ve loved to keep him. Sure, we’ve sold some of our better players in the past, which is frustrating. But in some of those situations there wasn’t much we could have done about it. Now as a team we have to focus on what we do have, rather than what we don’t. The point you make about stability is exactly why fans should stop getting on Di Francesco’s back. It’s his first big job, and he’s shown more than a few glimpses of doing well in it so far. As you say, we should build on what we have, and that includes getting behind EDF. We’ve touched on the issue of Pallotta selling on here before, and I think that now Stadio Della Roma has been approved, he should see through that project. Stability also goes for the ownership as well as the squad. His decisions may not always be the most popular but we have to trust him. Him selling the club might end up as an unnecessary distraction for the players, further affecting performances on the pitch. So, I don’t think it’s the right time for him to sell the club. The right solution to our current situation, in my eyes, is to build on the squad’s quality by making a couple of good signings - not having the owner put the club up for sale. Leave your views on the topics discussed by posting a comment! Today’s Q&A comes from UK-based fan Ben, asking about the club’s potential decisions in the transfer market.
If we were able to sell Strootman for €40m, and Radja for €50m, and bring in Badelj, Barella, and a winger (my choice would be Bernard), would you take it? I would. Radja will be 30 at the start of next season, Barella is a future star, Badelj showed against Inter just how good he is, and we are crying out for a winger to replace Salah. I think I would actually be open to selling those two players. As much as I appreciate what Kevin and Radja have done for the club, the money we could bring in from selling them could be used to improve the quality of the team. I know some fans are angry about us always selling our best players, but €40m for Strootman would be a great sum of money given his struggles this season. I would definitely be open to that, if we found a proper replacement. As for Radja, it’s a shame to say this, but maybe it’s time for us to move on. He’s not been as effective this season, and as you say, age is not on his side. His New Years’ Eve antics certainly didn’t do him any favours, and it could be time to offload him. There won’t be a shortage of interested clubs - we just have to make sure we don’t undersell him if we come to that decision. Obviously, these sales would have to be replaced with quality. As you mention, bringing in a winger should be a priority. Bernard is a gifted player, but I’m not sure he’s the type of player we need - he’s right-footed, and we’re in desperate need of a left-footer. In midfield, we’d need experienced replacements, which is why Badelj could be a good option. Barella is young but talented - he could have the ability and maturity to make an impact at a big club. However, I would potentially be more willing to look at experienced signings, as the two players who would be sold are experienced, and this is important to the team. We’d also have in-house replacements for the midfield such as Alessandro Florenzi and Lorenzo Pellegrini (if he stays, which I’m hoping he does). So, as long as we reinvest the money wisely, I’m okay with selling those two players. I’d miss them, for sure, but if it’s for the best of the club then why not? Would you sell Nainggolan and Strootman in order to fund new signings? Have your say by commenting on the article. The next UK Roma fan to submit their question this week is Paolo Campbell, who asks about the future of Roma head coach Eusebio Di Francesco.
A lot of noise around some fans wanting EDF to leave already, good or bad decision? Bad decision. Getting rid of Di Francesco midway through the season would create instability, which is not what we need. Yes, the performances have been poor since the start of December, but that doesn’t mean changing coach is the best solution. How much can EDF take the blame for players underperforming? You could say he needs to change his tactics - something I would support - but nonetheless, some of the players who aren’t doing so well this year are experienced enough to be playing better regardless of what the tactics are. Strootman, Gonalons, Dzeko... the coach can’t be held fully responsible for the way these players have played in recent weeks. It may be the case that in the end, we discover Eusebio Di Francesco isn’t the right man for the job. But, in my view, he hasn’t had anywhere near enough time for us to have reached that decision now. He has every chance of turning it around before the end of the season, certainly if his squad is strengthened in the January window, so it’s too early to call for his sacking. Do you agree or disagree? Would sacking Di Francesco be a good or bad decision for Roma? Join in the discussion by commenting below. This week on the Q&A, there’s a focus on Roma fans in the UK providing the questions. The first comes from Tom Woods, who is from the north west of England.
With no Coppa Italia, another bad result in the league and virtually zero chance the Champions League trophy will be coming to Rome in May - is the season pretty much over? I wouldn’t go as far as saying the season is over this soon. Yes, we’re all disappointed about how the team have been doing recently, and it’s highly unlikely we’ll be bringing a trophy home this season. However, whilst this is disappointing, it doesn’t mean the season is over for us yet. We have a very good chance of matching our best ever performance in the Champions League (since it changed from the European Cup), and this would be an incredible achievement. The Round of 16 tie against Shakhtar is something we all have to look forward to still. It’s not as if we don’t have anything to play for in the league either. I think the Atalanta result put the nail in the coffin for our Scudetto chances, but we still have to ensure we finish as high in the table as possible. It’s vital that we finish in the top four again, and this means the team have to play well and with a lot of effort over the remaining months. If our season was over, this wouldn’t be the case. On the flipside, if we lose to Shakhtar and happen to continue the poor run of form in the league, I think the season would then be over. Then it would be written off as a poor campaign. However, if things can start to click on the field again, then hopefully we won’t find ourselves in that situation. Let’s see how we react after the winter break. What are your thoughts? Is Roma’s season over already? Or is there still something to play for? Leave a comment to share your views! The first question of 2018 comes from GialloRossiLupo. Let's start the New Year well with a big discussion!
Now the transfer market is open and seeing rumours Roma are after Simone Verdi, Federico Di Francesco or Domenico Berardi, would another Italian player be what Roma is looking for, or is it time to follow Juventus and Inter and spend money abroad? At this stage of the season, I think it would be best to buy Italian. Whilst I would usually say it doesn't matter where a player is from as long as they're of the required quality, in January we need someone to come in who is already familiar with the league and the language, as they are more likely to make a good impression and hit the ground running. If we look at someone like Cengiz Under, who was signed in the summer without any knowledge of Italian, we can see it takes time for foreign players to make themselves at home in their new league/country. This is fine when it's in the summer, as the player has an initial time to settle in. However, in January, clubs already have momentum in the current season and they need players who can complement that; players who can come in and start well immediately, as they are already familiar with the requirements of the league. Perhaps even more suitable would be someone that the coach has already worked with - for example, Berardi or Matteo Politano - as they wouldn't need time to get used to new ideas. This is what would be most beneficial to the team part way through a season. Whilst I am open to the possibility of foreign players joining to strengthen the team, it's important that anyone arriving makes as smooth a transition as possible into the squad. And, I believe, this is more likely to be the case for an Italian player than a foreigner. Now it's time for your say. Do you think Roma should buy Italian, or from abroad? Join the discussion in the comments section and use social media to help get more people involved! Today's Q&A comes from Amos Fiocchi, who, for his second question, asks:
If Juventus activate Strootman's release clause, do you think he is out? Or do you see him being loyal? Do the new talks of Fellaini coming to Roma mean it's close to a done deal? On a similar note, what do you think is the future for our midfield? I believe Strootman is of the character that would stay loyal. I think he is grateful to the club for standing by him through his injury years, and for the amount of trust that has been placed in him since then. He doesn't seem to be the kind of player who would accept a move to his club's rivals lightly. Having said this, I would be open to him leaving if his release clause is met. The only issue is, we can't keep selling players to our direct rivals. Juventus already have Pjanic, Benatia and Szczesny, and all played well against us when we faced off last week. If we want to compete with them, we can't keep helping them to deplete our own squad and add to theirs. I would hope Strootman recognises this, and that he would refuse any offer from Juventus. If another club came in for him from abroad, then maybe he could leave, because the price of his release clause (€45m) seems generous in comparison to his performances this season. Would Fellaini be the ideal replacement? I think he would be a good addition, although from what I have read, any deal would more likely be a pre-contract agreement, for him to join in the summer when his current Manchester United deal expires. Looking at it from the player's perspective, I think Fellaini needs a fresh challenge and Roma could be the ideal solution for him. One thing I do want to see in our existing midfield, though, is more of Lorenzo Pellegrini. He hasn't been used as often in the past month or so and despite his young age, he has shown enough promise and quality when he has featured. I think we should put more trust in him and give him more starts. Alternatively, I'd love to see Alessandro Florenzi playing in central midfield. There are many fans who argue that he shouldn't be playing at right back, but I don't think he's a winger either. For me, he's best in central midfield, but he hasn't played in that position for Roma in a while. Perhaps a sale of Strootman and the purchase of a new right back (which might be Aleix Vidal) would open up an opportunity for Florenzi to return to this position. Florenzi and Pellegrini would be two in-house solutions to our midfield, and both are hopefully long-term prospects. Signing Fellaini could be another good option, to add experience to the position. It is an area of the pitch that needs improvement, whoever comes into it, because we aren't seeing much creativity or goalscoring threat from midfield, which is needed for when our strikers are out of form. That may mean making signings, or trusting our current players, like Pellegrini, to step up and increase their contributions. What are your thoughts? What is the future of Roma's midfield, relating to these players? Would Strootman leave? Would Fellaini be a good replacement? Leave a comment with your opinions, then share the article on social media! Today's question comes from Craig Bannister, returning for a second time.
Do you think if Mohamed Salah had stayed at Roma this season, Roma would have won Serie A? It's difficult to say. Obviously the team would be better with Salah in it, as we are really missing his influence on that right wing. His pace, ability to carve open defences with his forward runs, and his goalscoring output from wide are absent from the team this season. This is also hindering the form of Edin Dzeko, who linked up well with the Egyptian, but has hit a stumbling block recently. Having Salah there could have improved Edin's form, and we would have been a lot more clinical in front of goal, in turn delivering more convincing results. Despite these points, it's still only December, and I think it's far too early to rule this team without Salah out of the race for the Scudetto. I think Napoli and Juventus are ahead of us in terms of ability, but it is tight at the top, and we have the opportunity to contend with them. We're four points off top with one game in hand, and the January transfer window is just around the corner. Although recent performances have been uninspiring offensively, we have the opportunity to put that right with some smart moves in the market. As you are hinting at, keeping Salah would have improved this attack, definitely, and we would have been a force to be reckoned with - but I still believe we're in with a chance with this squad, as long as we do things right in January. It's better to focus on what we can add rather than what we have lost - we should be turning our attention to finding the next signing who can have the same impact Salah had. How do you think Roma's season would have been different if Mohamed Salah had stayed at the club? Leave your comments below! Franco Ficetola supplies another question, this time regarding the defensive midfield role at Roma.
If Monchi really gets Badelj in the summer, who do you think will go through the exit door between De Rossi and Gonalons? For me, unless his performances drastically improve, it would have to be Gonalons. He hasn’t quite delivered since he’s been at Roma, certainly given he came with a decent reputation and experience. He doesn’t have the benefit of the years of loyalty and quality that De Rossi has given Roma, which can be used to justify keeping him here. Another thing: Gonalons and Badelj are the same age. I don’t think keeping two players of the same age in the same position is necessarily a good idea. It’s usually better to have one player more experienced than his competitor for the role. I do think Badelj is of the quality Roma need and could be our starting defensive midfielder if he was to be signed. De Rossi would be there as a competent, experienced backup. Finally, something I’ve always said is that De Rossi deserves the decision on whether or not he wants to retire with Roma, and so he shouldn’t be forced to leave. That’s why I think, performance depending, Gonalons would be the one shown the door. Which of the two players do you think would leave if the club signed another defensive midfielder, such as Milan Badelj? |
SamueL BannisterEnglish Roma fan and sports journalist. Archives
February 2019
Categories |