• Hey Guest!
    Enjoy the This Is Anfield Forums but want to remove the adverts? Now you can do so by clicking here.
    Thanks for your support!

Nabil Fekir (AM/ST) Lyon

What will Fekir be leaning on?

  • The Wall of Champions, pointing at the newly installed 6

  • A giant screen playing the leaked video from last year which we'll use for VAR

  • The railing at Melwood, looking forlornly at it cos he knackered his knee again

  • A bog standard table, with a bog standard pen, and a sheet of random paper

  • A furious Man City fan demanding to know why THEY aren't in the picture as champions

  • Big Virg, because fucking anyone can lean on him

  • An enormous pile of cash that Mick Edwards saved us

  • The crushed spirit of James Pearce

  • His mum, because he's not fucking coming


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.


gr_sounder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
2,496
I know this is commonly stated, but it doesn't make it true. Would you concede that maybe these things are more complicated than being able to say "this procedure is stronger than that" and that performance of the graft is not the only consideration? For instance, both the Petella tendon and the hamstring tendon play critical roles in the proper functioning of the knee and those are tissues that are permanently weakened as a result of the donation. What do you think the implications of that are for a footballer?
Not exactly sure what your "I know this is commonly stated..." line is about, so I'll try to clarify.

It is absolutely true that using your own patellar tendon graft is the strongest, assured of no disease or body rejection, and quick healing graft you can get to fashion a new ACL. Simply put, the donor graft is weakened by the process of harvesting, storing, and then inserting, and then it also has the highest potential for disease and body rejection. The hamstring graft is good because the hamstring will regenerate but the "new ACL" has more play/plyability in it and the healing process is much longer as you don't have a bone-bone connection.

Now if you were talking about the overall health and return to playing for a high performing professional athlete, then yes there are other considerations than the graft itself. Taking portion of the hamstring or patellar tendon does in fact weaken those other areas, but the hamstring regenerates quickly and the removal of a small portion to fashion an ACL isn't a problem except under very rare cases. Taking a portion of the patellar tendon does weaken the knee as you remove the graft, but it heals. No i'ts never quite as strong as it was before taking the graft, but it is darn close, and seems to work fine in the world of professional athletes compared to the other 2 methods. Now there may be a reason that Nabil used a donor graft, and I would be really interested to find out why. My personal "guess" is that it was the quickest way to get him back on the field and least invasive of the methods. That means it may have been better for that first season back, but possibly not for his long term. I just don't know, but all things considered, it is rarer to use a donor graft than one from your own body. It's possible that Nabil has something else going on in his knees where they couldn't support them taking a graft from his patellar tendon... and if so, that is something that could be worrying to a team looking to buy and insure him. I do think it's important to remember that the issue doesn't seem to be a) can he play and how long, but rather b) what is the insurance policy we have to take out to protect our investment.

Now, I'm not a medical doctor, but I have friends who are, and I have had 2 of these surgeries I have been to multiple othopedic surgeons, and read a ton of information, especially before the 2nd one... and have followed what seems to be done on these injuries because I'm curious. It doesn't mean I'm right or wrong, but I do believe I'm at least in the park on how it works.

Hope that helps.
 

Red over the water

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 13, 2018
Messages
2,286
Fekir is a smashing player... but I don't think we will sign him.

If we pulled out to go for a cheaper option (Shaqiri) because we were also buying a more expensive keeper (Alisson) then I can almost see it, at least from a financial perspective. Karius was a bag of nerves pre-season, and it soon became clear that he wasn't bouncing back quickly, so that meant we had to act decisively. Alisson is in the best three in the world and is already repaying his fee.

But I suspect we pulled out for medical/reasonable risk reasons, which is to say, we already had an attacking midfielder out long term with a knee injury (Ox) and having looked at Fekir, for whatever reason we didn't like what we saw.

At that point as far as I know it's all conjecture, as there has been no definitive statement, but the type of ACL graft rings true to me, as we [surely] would have wanted the strongest option for the long term, knowing that we were spending a pretty penny and also knowing that Fekir is the sort of player that needs nursing along and won't play at a high level week in and week out.

I think the Fekir ship has sailed, but we'll end up fine. There's a crop of fantastic young talent coming through around Europe, with some great players for the final third, and we will be in a strong position to go for one or two of them, depending on whatever outgoings we have in mind.
 



indianscouser

Anything But Normal
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2011
Messages
11,199
Safe to say this won't happen.
Wasn't shaqs the back up?
It would be nice to have him though. But just can't see Lyon letting him go in January. They have a huge clash against Barcelona and Potentially they can get more out of him in summer if he does well.
Any idea when his contract gets over?
 

Alright Now

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2016
Messages
9,217
Safe to say this won't happen.
Wasn't shaqs the back up?
It would be nice to have him though. But just can't see Lyon letting him go in January. They have a huge clash against Barcelona and Potentially they can get more out of him in summer if he does well.
Any idea when his contract gets over?
6/20

I'n not so sure the Cube was a back up.
 

GermanRed

from doubters to believers to sky-high achievers
Joined
Jan 26, 2017
Messages
3,273
Where the hell should Fekir get enough playing time from when we already have so many players (Shaqiri, Sturridge, Origi, Lallana) who are not getting enough minutes?

From the moment Shaqiri was used as a #10 / CAM the first time it was clear to me that he IS the Fekir alternative.
 



kiwiredman

This is my serious face
Joined
Sep 16, 2016
Messages
541
Are these rumours of links to competitors being put out there to create a bidding war because we are actually going back in for him? I have written it off completely yet.
 
C

Caradoc

Guest
One of the issues with somebody like Fekir is managing his post-recovery. I would have thought that LFC would be perfect for this. There would be plenty of opportunity for the lad to be rested with the squad we have. This deal may be ‘dead’ but I would love to see the boulder rolled away and this deal come back to life. If we signed Fekir we would be on another level squad wise.
 

GaryBarlow99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
597
Are these rumours of links to competitors being put out there to create a bidding war because we are actually going back in for him? I have written it off completely yet.
I think he still wants us hence not signing a new contract and regular stories stating he has been "offered" to Real Madrid, Chelsea, etc. As I have been saying for a while the whole thing is just weird!
 

T.C.B

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
7,449
Chelsea are looking at replacing Hazard hence the interest in Fekir and Pulisic. Klopp wanted both in the past, made a bid on Pulisic, spoke publically how he rated him, made a huge offer on Fekir which went as far as him posing in club gear before the medical issues so we know Liverpool rate both.
In the meantime Shaquiri has blown his critics away arguably becoming 1st choice when most saw him as a squad player. Young Wilson has to figure in the mix and Ox is also a Klopp favourite. My point is that we are sorted for attacking midfield players next season and Lallana provides an option until the summer.
Maybe Klopp sees it differently and he might take the option of a quality upgrade but while City, UTD, Spurs and Arsenal might panic buy in January I think we keep our powder dry until June and then reassess the situation.
Injury to a key player might force a change however.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
Chelsea are looking at replacing Hazard hence the interest in Fekir and Pulisic. Klopp wanted both in the past, made a bid on Pulisic, spoke publically how he rated him, made a huge offer on Fekir which went as far as him posing in club gear before the medical issues so we know Liverpool rate both.
In the meantime Shaquiri has blown his critics away arguably becoming 1st choice when most saw him as a squad player. Young Wilson has to figure in the mix and Ox is also a Klopp favourite. My point is that we are sorted for attacking midfield players next season and Lallana provides an option until the summer.
Maybe Klopp sees it differently and he might take the option of a quality upgrade but while City, UTD, Spurs and Arsenal might panic buy in January I think we keep our powder dry until June and then reassess the situation.
Injury to a key player might force a change however.
I agree with most but I'm not convinced we will keep our powder dry. I suspect the plan is to move Origi and Markovic on and loan out Solanke. I also think we are so defensively stable that we are gravitating from 3 midfielders (one attacking) and 3 forwards to 2 midfielders and 4 forwards. So we were coping with a decent midfield with a few questions over the most attacking role and Shaqiri and Sturridge offering cover to a front 3. In emergencies we also had Origi and Solanke. Now we are looking at an overflowing midfield two of which (Keita and Lallana, possibly Milner too at a push) can "do a job" in the front 4 but aren't ideal. Then we have a front 4 of Shaqiri, Salah, Mane and Firmino. As a back up we have Sturridge, 2 players yet to return from injury (Ox and Brewster), midfielders "doing a job" and players we no longer want around and will probably leave soon. It's not ideal as far as strength in depth goes and certainly nowhere near the options we have in defence and centre mid. I could definitely see at least one 0payer coming in this window or next to rectify this even if only Wilson coming back from loan. One thing is for sure though in my opinion. Anyone who comes in this winter was planned to for a long time and won't be the result of an injury or departure of a squad player. It might come across that way. But only because Klopp and the club keep their cards close to their chests and don't let anyone know what's going on. Nobody knew about Fabinho till just before it happened and that was being arranged for a whole year.
 



T.C.B

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
7,449
I agree with most but I'm not convinced we will keep our powder dry. I suspect the plan is to move Origi and Markovic on and loan out Solanke. I also think we are so defensively stable that we are gravitating from 3 midfielders (one attacking) and 3 forwards to 2 midfielders and 4 forwards. So we were coping with a decent midfield with a few questions over the most attacking role and Shaqiri and Sturridge offering cover to a front 3. In emergencies we also had Origi and Solanke. Now we are looking at an overflowing midfield two of which (Keita and Lallana, possibly Milner too at a push) can "do a job" in the front 4 but aren't ideal. Then we have a front 4 of Shaqiri, Salah, Mane and Firmino. As a back up we have Sturridge, 2 players yet to return from injury (Ox and Brewster), midfielders "doing a job" and players we no longer want around and will probably leave soon. It's not ideal as far as strength in depth goes and certainly nowhere near the options we have in defence and centre mid. I could definitely see at least one 0payer coming in this window or next to rectify this even if only Wilson coming back from loan. One thing is for sure though in my opinion. Anyone who comes in this winter was planned to for a long time and won't be the result of an injury or departure of a squad player. It might come across that way. But only because Klopp and the club keep their cards close to their chests and don't let anyone know what's going on. Nobody knew about Fabinho till just before it happened and that was being arranged for a whole year.
Yeah you could be right. Solanke will be loaned for sure I think and the same for Markovic if anyone can be bothered to take him. I think we keep Origi until the summer unless a big offer comes in which could see him sold meaning your theory of a planned signing coming in correct mate.
Moreno is likely a gonner if an offer materialises but he's hardly a loss really. Clyne and Milner can fill in at left full anyway.
I think you are on track with "long term" plans rather that short term measures too which is refreshing to see.
 

Kopstar

★★★★★★
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
13,923
I agree with most but I'm not convinced we will keep our powder dry. I suspect the plan is to move Origi and Markovic on and loan out Solanke. I also think we are so defensively stable that we are gravitating from 3 midfielders (one attacking) and 3 forwards to 2 midfielders and 4 forwards. So we were coping with a decent midfield with a few questions over the most attacking role and Shaqiri and Sturridge offering cover to a front 3. In emergencies we also had Origi and Solanke. Now we are looking at an overflowing midfield two of which (Keita and Lallana, possibly Milner too at a push) can "do a job" in the front 4 but aren't ideal. Then we have a front 4 of Shaqiri, Salah, Mane and Firmino. As a back up we have Sturridge, 2 players yet to return from injury (Ox and Brewster), midfielders "doing a job" and players we no longer want around and will probably leave soon. It's not ideal as far as strength in depth goes and certainly nowhere near the options we have in defence and centre mid. I could definitely see at least one 0payer coming in this window or next to rectify this even if only Wilson coming back from loan. One thing is for sure though in my opinion. Anyone who comes in this winter was planned to for a long time and won't be the result of an injury or departure of a squad player. It might come across that way. But only because Klopp and the club keep their cards close to their chests and don't let anyone know what's going on. Nobody knew about Fabinho till just before it happened and that was being arranged for a whole year.
Wilson coming back from being on loan in January wouldn't help us as we'd have to loan him out again elsewhere. Things are going brilliantly for him at Derby so I wouldn't change it.
 

big noyd

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
2,147
doubt we go back for him, sadly

don't doubt for one moment that they'll heat it back up for the january window and i'll be feverishly scouring twitter in spite of myself
 

JustHitMyHead

TIA Reserve Team
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
2,041
doubt we go back for him, sadly

don't doubt for one moment that they'll heat it back up for the january window and i'll be feverishly scouring twitter in spite of myself
I think, situationally, if Fekir is the best person available and the deal is doable... that now... given we are in first, we do the deal to avoid messing up if one of our front 3 gets injured.

That could be one reason for going back in for him.
 



big noyd

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
2,147
all for it, personally. nominally slot him in behind bob in the 4 2 3 1, and you'd have a ton of interchange between those two & mo, plus 5 extremely dangerous players to rotate at 4 spots
 



AussieLad

TIA Regular
Ad-free Member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
5,198
Yeah you could be right. Solanke will be loaned for sure I think and the same for Markovic if anyone can be bothered to take him. I think we keep Origi until the summer unless a big offer comes in which could see him sold meaning your theory of a planned signing coming in correct mate.
Moreno is likely a gonner if an offer materialises but he's hardly a loss really. Clyne and Milner can fill in at left full anyway.
I think you are on track with "long term" plans rather that short term measures too which is refreshing to see.
I agree with selling Markovic and Moreno and loaning Solanke it the right club puts in an offer.

Personally though, I'd keep Origi purely for his Everton goals.
 
C

Caradoc

Guest
The more I think about this the more I come to the conclusion that we should go back in for this lad and get the deal done.

Edit: may as well sign Mendy at the same time.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
Wilson coming back from being on loan in January wouldn't help us as we'd have to loan him out again elsewhere. Things are going brilliantly for him at Derby so I wouldn't change it.
Why would we have to loan him out again? He's a free option on both domestic and European rules isn't he? And Lampard seemed sure us calling Wilson back to Liverpool in Jan was an option. I suspect he could have a similar impact as Shaqiri had.
 

Limiescouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
13,823
Why would we have to loan him out again? He's a free option on both domestic and European rules isn't he? And Lampard seemed sure us calling Wilson back to Liverpool in Jan was an option. I suspect he could have a similar impact as Shaqiri had.
You cannot use a player you have committed to loaning for the season (I am sure there are caveats and exceptions). We may have the right to break his loan at Derby, but that is inserted into the deal to protect us from a Woodburn type situation. It would not allow him to then come back and play for the first team.
 



Status
Not open for further replies.