Believe it or not, i wasn't averse to bringing Vermaelen in initially. But you know, two injuries within the space of Four weeks may have changed my mind somewhat. Iv'e no idea on his latest injury mate, but it doesn't bode well for continuity in defence, that we need.
Thomas Vermaelen
- Thread starter Santos J
- Start date
- Status
Believe it or not, i wasn't averse to bringing Vermaelen in initially. But you know, two injuries within the space of Four weeks may have changed my mind somewhat. Iv'e no idea on his latest injury mate, but it doesn't bode well for continuity in defence, that we need.
We're gonna sign him, aren't we? 
Wenger says it's a 'short term' injury but doesn't specify what.
I think if they know he's definitely not on his way, they're not going to play him in any pre-season games. It makes no sense for them to help get him match fit for somebody else's benefit. Particularly if they think he'll be joining us.
It wouldn't surprise me if that's why he's been sidelined.
I think if they know he's definitely not on his way, they're not going to play him in any pre-season games. It makes no sense for them to help get him match fit for somebody else's benefit. Particularly if they think he'll be joining us.
It wouldn't surprise me if that's why he's been sidelined.
How can one team apparently be getting either Hummels or Vermaelen? They're in different leagues, it's like someone swapping Suarez for Lambert..
NO THANK YOU WENGER
4 oft-injured CBs are better than 3.
Not really, it's like saying we'll buy Suarez &/or Lambert. We're not offering anyone a swap.
hes injured again. whats the fecking point?
I wonder how much input van Persie had in this proposed transfer. Best mates, holidayed together. Van Persie must of told the manger he would be grand in a back Three.
Jokes
Jokes
I didn't literally mean swap like a swap deal...
"It's like selling Suarez then buying Lambert to fill his place"
Better?
What a total waste of space of a player.
If he wasn't so injury prone I'd be happy enough with this signing. As it stands we should leave him well alone.
Totally unrealistic, no club would ever do that.
Oh, okay I gotcha.
But still, Rio and Vidic weren't in their prime like Suarez, so that's no a very fair analogy.
It would be more like replacing Scholes with Cleverley.
Its VermaelON!
He would be a good signing for us. I always rated Vermaelen - can cover at CB and LB which is exactly what we need.
He would be a good signing for us. I always rated Vermaelen - can cover at CB and LB which is exactly what we need.
Well my point was choosing between Hummels or Vermaelen!
I could probably/definitely have worded all this better.
This one does seem much more likely than the Vidal transfer.
Damn, he's getting his medical at Carrington.
Last edited:
Motherfunker. That wouldn't open on my work pc and assumed he really was having a medical until I checked my phone to confirm.
He can't cover anything if he's always injured.
That's true if you look at it from a different perspective. Our new medical facility does need patients.
I actually wouldn't mind this buy. Bit meh but LVG clearly thinks he can be useful.
Either way, not bothered.
Either way, not bothered.
Sorry man, the pic was pretty big so I put it in spoilers to avoid stretching the page.I think people are underestimating the impact that playing fewer games will have on our squad, injury wise.
Not really. Why add to an already problematic situation?. I could think of a dozen capable players who could fill such a position. (as back up).
But he wants both!
This would even put the Hargreaves deal into good light.
The new RedCafe resizes all pics, so you don't have to worry about that anymore.
In what way?
Some players are more injury prone than others its true, but having less games and a generally less taxing schedule next season I think will make a big difference. Point in case Liverpool last year - relied on practically the same XI throughout the season.
Okay. And Vermaelen is injury prone at Arsenal as a bit part player starting 7 times in the league
So as long as we play less games than that he might be less prone to injury?
Imagine that!
I refer you to the first 6 words of my previous post.
So why post that point here when Vermaelen is clearly one of them and playing too often isnt a reason that he's unavailable so often? It just doesn't apply to him.
I don't think it applies to Jones or Rafael either, probably not Smalling or Evans, definitely not RvP.
Would not be excited by this signing if it happens.
But if he can stay injury free he could be a useful addition to the squad.
But if he can stay injury free he could be a useful addition to the squad.
I'm sure LVG will order new medics at the United medical centre that will heal him and make him fit again or something.
- In the 11/12 and 12/13 seasons he had 40 and 39 appearances respectively, last season he had 21. 100 appearances over the past 3 seasons isnt exactly an Owen Hargreaves case, is it?
- We signed RVP off Arsenal despite his injury record and he has been fine.
- Vermaelen would arguably not even be first choice for us, but simply a backup.
- We will be playing fewer games than normal next season, meaning less intensivity which by all accounts is often what leads to injuries. When we only have 1 game per week generally and less/no long distance travel, yes I think this will have a beneficial effect on our squad.
Ultimately only time will tell, and thats IF we sign him, but as usual the caf is blowing things ridiculously out of proportion.
Injured and Wenger say he could leave.This one seems nailed on.
- Status