@Fortitude What impressed me most is his ability to play all across the front. He wasn't getting much joy vs Shaw - though his technical ability was still evident - then he seamlessly switched to the right and boom. He even spoke about this in his post-match:
Mohammed Kudus | Watch
- Thread starter TsuWave
- Start date
Yeah, seamless play. Also looked like a player we were struggling to contain. I was out and watching on my phone, so only caught glimpses.
Don't know if I want to watch the match through when I get home.
Break the bank for him. Give them Antony + £40m.
How you can work so closely with both players and yet still choose Antony over Kudus is a special kind of stupid.
Watching him tonight and I'm not all that impressed. I know Antony is way off but this guy isn’t United level either.
Agree. He's putting up good numbers now, but I don't see him as a certain profile in a big team, like some make him out to be.
He's got a better physical package than Antony and seems more suited to the league for now. He seems a better fit than Antony so far, but I don't see him elevating us as a team.
From comments he was misused at Ajax, so he shouldn't be a player the club should be targeting if under Eth. A wide player who's creative and dynamic would be Olise a far better fit.
Yeah think that's spot on.
He's best as a roaming/free midfielder to run forward with the ball through the middle... Not a pure 10, but the hybrid 8/10/mezzala type. Capable of being a false 9 or a inverted winger but not a natural there.
Huge potential IMO, consistency can improve.
This is him all over though, one game he'll run the show and the next he won't find a team mate. When he is on form, he's far more effective than Anthony, his floor is much lower though.
Wtf was ETH thinking.
Antony £86m
God dammit
The one that got away. Been wanting him since WC but now we'll have to pay a monstrous fee if we want him.
Special player
Kudus, Bowen, Paqueta.
£250m-£300m.
£250m-£300m.
What's he done now?
Scored twice against Egypt (AFCON)
ugh....don't get me started as people were saying he doesn't fit bc of where he plays
ffs....he'd walk into our First XI
ffs....he'd walk into our First XI
Cheers.
Let's see how he does by the end of the tournament.
Looks like another stack of value added to what's already gone on this season.
We are absolutely useless at judging which player is ready to explode. The fact that we hired an Ajax manager who couldn’t tell among the players he himself coached is just so us.
I find it concerning he couldn't assess between the two when it takes less than a minute to see the gulf between them; Kudus is better than him at everything except maybe defensive work; faster, stronger and smarter, too.
I don't know if Kudus has taken some kind of quantum leap and blown by Antony, but even by potential and raw tools to thrive, how could he not see who was better suited to the league and who would be a better player to go for? Who makes more sense: Antony at a marquee price or Kudus at a fraction of that?
There's a lot to doubt ten Hag for, but this is the worst of it because a huge part of his job is supposed to be the analysis of talent and the potential it carries and had these players right there in front of him day in and day out. It's a real mark against him.
ETH didn't really rate Kudus. In fact him leaving Ajax and taking Antony with him allowed Kudus to step into the team to show the talent he always had. That's the irony of it all.
That’s just false, but ok.
Yeah but that's not ok, what's this thing where people want to challenge your ideas but then don't want to put theirs on the table. If what I said is false, come with examples and reasons why. I may learn a thing or 2 and could even change my supposedly wrong assumption.
Because when the crux of your comment is to throw slights at the other two it makes it seem as if you’re just posting with an agenda. And that’s ok, but tiresome. But here is what actually happened if you do want to know: He used him more as an 8/10 than out wide on the wings, meaning his competition was Gravenberch, Klaassen, and to a lesser extent Berghuis and Tadic. His true rise to glory was being used as a F9, in the CL, by Megamind. Schreuder was using him in parts as a 10 early in the season but to overall less team success, then when he got fired the caretakers shifted him out wide moreso, where he continued and arguably was better than in his role as a F9. On top of that, he was healthy for the full season, and didn’t deal with knee issues like at the start of year one or rib issues in year two (I may be switching the years) where he missed large chunks of the season under Erik. If you want to bury EtH for failing to recognize the position he’d excel more at, by all means, but it has nothing to do with Antony.
This lad was neither available for transfer nor had he reached the required development level to leave Ajax, by the time ETH left Holland and took Martinez and Antony with him. The myth ETH "chose" Antony over him" needs to perish. For it's pure lies and disingenous.
well said
How is saying ETH and Antony leaving Ajax paved the way for Kudus a slight on those 2. At worst your can call it a blessing in disguise for Kudus career. I've followed Kudus career so I'm aware of the injury issues during ETH time. I'm not one those who say ETH should've signed Kudus over Antony as their career timelines aren't comparable. Antony was a better prospect than Kudus when he was signed but if ETH really rated Kudus he would have gone back to Ajax again and bought him. Evidently he was available for just over half what we paid for Antony. Instead he decided to spend more on Mason Mount. That is the indictment on ETH.
A year later Kudus was available at a very affordable price and was at the right development level and we still didn't sign him. What was the excuse then?
ETH chose to sign Mason Mount who many prefer pretending is rubbish, who doesn't play the same role as Kudus currently. You'd have grounds to complain and claim ETH is indicted by the decision if Kudus was excelling as a center midfielder at West Ham. Yet he operates at right wing for them, a role Garnacho is occupying with increasing aplomb currently. A role Mount was NEVER purchased to occupy.
Which serves to show this "ETH chose Antony over Kudus, he is a fool" narrative is disingenous and a blatant case of making things up to suit an agenda.
When good players are available at fair prices, you buy them. It's called squad building. Do Madrid need Endrick right now? No, but they're still buying him. Did they need Vinicius when they bought him? again no but they can't do without him now. The reason we're playing Garnacho in the right position is because the player we signed to play there has been underwhelming at best. Signing Kudus even as cover for Antony would leave Garnacho free to compete on the left with Rashford. Feck who knows it would have even allowed us to play Sancho on his preferred position on the left, moving Rashford to compete up top with Hojlund. You now have decent cover and competition in all areas upfront.
Kudus incidentally can also play as a False 9 and as a 10. So cover for even Bruno. It just makes all the sense on paper. It's why many are baffled we let such a player go.
I like Antony & Mount and I would give them more time to settle still but this is not a mutually exclusive debate from signing Kudus. People are bringing up Kudus because he was available for a reasonable price so the only reason not buy him is if he didn't fit into the managers plans or was not of the required quality to play for the club. It's EtH prerogative to sign players he likes and thinks will work in his system. The indictment is Eth believing Mount over Kudus was the best decision for our squad at the time. Many of us raised eyebrows over the Mount signing not because Mount is shit but we did not see how he fitted into the manager's plans based on how he'd played the season before and the profile of players we already had. The evidence so far is proving us right and Eth wrong!
I agree. Thats what we did with likes of Mount and THEN run out of money. I have almost no doubt if we didn't we'd have signed Kudus in addition to Rasmus for our attack at the price he went for to West Ham
All true. Yet still you are comparing fruit with animals. Real Madrid are a club with no debt, excellent recruitment practice, top end negotiation skill and long term planning. Manchester United in comparison have heavy debt, poor recruitment practice, low end negotiation skill and no discernable long term planning till now. Its like judging fish on tree climbing.
The ONLY reason they are baflled are based on two false premises: the first being he was both ready and available for transfer by the time we signed Antony. The second being we chose to bag others over him rather than simply running out of money due to our poor negoation skills with deals
I get why some feel that way. But as I said earlier, Kudus isn't excelling in the league in the role Mount was bought for. Neither is the sample size of play time for Mount big enough for ANYONE to soundly claim his signing was wrong.
Furthermore to me, running out of money to sign a reasonably priced player am sure was a target is proof why our footballing department and recruiting wing needs a serious over haul. Rather than be used as a stick to beat ETH like its he who negotiates for players.
Its amazing people overlook we were linked with cheap Amrabat and Kudus all summer, when it had been said our targets on top of what we ended with was another winger(kudus), a striker (brobbey who turned us down) and a DM (Amrabat) Yet in the end we almost failed to get a mere Amrabat over the line yet he was a loan! Thus I don't get why folks prefer to believe ETH "overlooked*" Kudus
Last edited:
I agree that saying we should've signed Kudus instead of Antony at the time he was signed is dealing in hindsight. But given that a year later Kudus had come on leaps and could have also been got easily is so disappointing. It stems from the issues you listed above. We had open channel to Ajax and Ajax were willing to sell unlike with Antony. It was much easier transfer to make so the fact that we didn't push when we did for many others including Mount & Amrabat tells me the manager didn't rate Kudus that much or Kudus didn't want to come here - which is untrue.
We might be skint but still overpaid for a player we didn't need. No one was after Mount so we could've even gotten him for free this summer and use the money elsewhere. We have to be more astute in the market due to our lack of funds. Mount might still come good but doesn't detract from the fact that we massively overpaid for him leaving us short in other areas.
All indicators show Eth is acting as head of recruitment. He's the only manager in recent times who's gotten almost every player he wanted (F de Jong aside) so if we are making poor recruitment decisions then he deserves the criticism. This is even separate from his performance as manager.
I'd buy the 'he deserves criticism " yet he doesn't do negotations. His list had Kim Nin jae, Amrabat, Kudus and a striker on it. All players we needed in addition to what we got. So to blame him "for running out of money" of 'having poor recruitment choices' makes no sense. Even for the Antony transfer. It's not he who wanted to go back late in the window to bag him for 80m. That decision was taken above his head!
To then blame him for getting a player he and his scouts knew to be worth 25m, is kinda disingenous and refusing to place blame where it should lie. A coach isn't going to refuse a player on his list because his club insists on over paying.
Its our recruitment practice above the managers that has consistently been shocking. Hopefully INEOS fix it.
Last edited:
He's better than Antony from what I have seen so far.
Not a top class player, but a useful one.
Leon Bailey would have been a better option than Antony tbh.
I'd say none of them are United quality wingers, but Antony is the worst of the lot and just abysmal as a winger.
Should have kept Elanga as a budget option (he's decent) until our finances have been sorted, then buy a genuine class player for the amount we paid for Antony, but an actual world class winger.
Not a top class player, but a useful one.
Leon Bailey would have been a better option than Antony tbh.
I'd say none of them are United quality wingers, but Antony is the worst of the lot and just abysmal as a winger.
Should have kept Elanga as a budget option (he's decent) until our finances have been sorted, then buy a genuine class player for the amount we paid for Antony, but an actual world class winger.
assisted the third and was involved in the build up for Emerson's screamer
He was shit, greedy shooting from everywhere. Should have conceded a pen too.
2 more goals for West Ham tonight, thats 12 in 32 so far this season.
I wonder what made Erik feel Antony was a better option than him.
I wonder what made Erik feel Antony was a better option than him.
He's got a release clause doesn't he?