Nabil Fekir (AM/ST) Lyon

What will Nabil be leaning on?

  • The executive wall. With the Shankly quote. In a suit.

  • A giant pile of knee scans

  • Aulas' ego

  • A crutch or walking stick

  • A television playing the leaked video of himself

  • The contract table of course

  • Fabinho, Naby, Shaqiri, and Alisson arranged in a pile

  • His World Cup medal

  • A gibbering Dejan Lovren, looking sullenly at said World Cup medal

  • Michael Edwards' laptop, which has gained sentience and rules us all

  • Leans are so 2017 - it's all about the posed screaming and badge grabbing

  • Red wall, looking like a moody, hard bastard.


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

Foldy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
1,211
See, that's worrying. A hell of a lot of coin to spend on a potential bench warmer. There are cheaper options, whether they're better or not who can say but I think the ship has left port for Fekir.
 

ubermick

Willing to drive Lovren to the airport
Admin
Joined
Jan 22, 2007
Messages
11,332
See, that's worrying. A hell of a lot of coin to spend on a potential bench warmer. There are cheaper options, whether they're better or not who can say but I think the ship has left port for Fekir.
He missed games this season due to his involvement in the World Cup, and then having his ankle mashed by someone in a Ligue 1 game. Nothing to do with his "injury worries."
 

Foldy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
1,211
He missed games this season due to his involvement in the World Cup, and then having his ankle mashed by someone in a Ligue 1 game. Nothing to do with his "injury worries."
Well that's what you'd expect any player to possibly suffer with each season, the worry is the failed medical.
 

ubermick

Willing to drive Lovren to the airport
Admin
Joined
Jan 22, 2007
Messages
11,332
Well that's what you'd expect any player to possibly suffer with each season, the worry is the failed medical.
From what I've repeatedly heard and read, Fekir didn't fail the medical - it was more down to the fact that it revealed that the knee operation he had a few seasons ago was performed using cadaver material versus a graft from his own tissue, which is apparently more prone to failure, and as such we wanted to restructure the deal and/or the insurance underwriters wouldn't go for it at the original agreed fee.

To this day, there has been absolutely zero word from our club as to why we backed out of it, Fekir has said that he has no idea why the deal fell through, and Aulas is claiming that it's all down to him deciding to do it. (Cough...)
 

Herb

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2013
Messages
5,861
Still not convinced anything will happen personally, and definitely not in January. Pulling out of a deal that was all but done at the eleventh hour to me was a clear indicator that the state of his knee was a major worry for us and we aren’t convinced he will be a worthwhile long term investment. Maybe I’m not reading the situation right but I don’t see the logic in it being about restructuring the deal financially if we were already aware of the issues surrounding how his knee was lashed back together.

Would also say that at present we do have a pretty decent amount of options in the roles he plays. Always nice to add some more quality but I feel like we’d have to get one or two out if he arrived which I can’t see us being willing to do in January. We’ve had the emergence of Salah as a striker, Firmino being deployed in a slightly deeper role, Shaqiri exceeding expectations, Sturridge proving to be a somewhat useful back option, Keita now coming into some form, Lallana still being around and Oxlade-Chamberlain potentially returning before the season ends. Would presume Solanke goes out on loan and maybe we’ll shift Origi if a decent offer comes in. Brewster was also supposedly promised some amount of game time in order to convince him to stay, will be interesting to see what happens with him after Christmas when he’s back in contention.

Given the position we are currently in as well, I do wonder if Klopp would would be willing to bring any player in if there was even the slightest risk of it having a negative effect on the harmony within the squad.
 

Foldy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
1,211
From what I've repeatedly heard and read, Fekir didn't fail the medical - it was more down to the fact that it revealed that the knee operation he had a few seasons ago was performed using cadaver material versus a graft from his own tissue, which is apparently more prone to failure, and as such we wanted to restructure the deal and/or the insurance underwriters wouldn't go for it at the original agreed fee.

To this day, there has been absolutely zero word from our club as to why we backed out of it, Fekir has said that he has no idea why the deal fell through, and Aulas is claiming that it's all down to him deciding to do it. (Cough...)
Fair one Uber I didn’t know that
 

Zoran

Fighting like beavers.
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
17,022
Speaking of Lyon, saw him only twice but Ferland Mendy is pretty good going forward from LB (although today he was LWB). Just made his debut for France too.
 

big noyd

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
1,796
maybe our pulling out had something to do with the realization that we had a chance to sign the best keeper in the world?
 

JustHitMyHead

TIA Reserve Team
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
1,982
How often have we returned for a player we decided not to buy?

(under the same manager that is)

...

I really think this is dead.

He is a good player though and I'll enjoy watching him play.
 

Walshy07

In Klopp we trust
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
1,014
From what I've repeatedly heard and read, Fekir didn't fail the medical - it was more down to the fact that it revealed that the knee operation he had a few seasons ago was performed using cadaver material versus a graft from his own tissue, which is apparently more prone to failure, and as such we wanted to restructure the deal and/or the insurance underwriters wouldn't go for it at the original agreed fee.

To this day, there has been absolutely zero word from our club as to why we backed out of it, Fekir has said that he has no idea why the deal fell through, and Aulas is claiming that it's all down to him deciding to do it. (Cough...)
This is what im led to believe from reliable journos.
 

Limiescouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
12,605
From what I've repeatedly heard and read, Fekir didn't fail the medical

...it revealed [something] as such we wanted to restructure the deal
That is precisely what it means to fail a medical.

As for the type of graft, there was a lot of nonsense written about it at the time. There are pros and cons of each type of procedure, which is why there are several different approaches. None is universally and undeniably better than the other and it is not reasonable to think we backed away because of the type of graft.
 

SpecialK210

New Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
7
That is precisely what it means to fail a medical.

As for the type of graft, there was a lot of nonsense written about it at the time. There are pros and cons of each type of procedure, which is why there are several different approaches. None is universally and undeniably better than the other and it is not reasonable to think we backed away because of the type of graft.
Having unfortunately had to have an ACL repaired myself, maybe I can shed some light on this. There are (or at least were 3 years ago) 3 main types of grafts that can be done to repair an ACL. 1) using an ACL from a cadaver 2) using a hamstring tendon 3) using a section to the Patella Tendon

The cadaver method has the highest chance of a re-tear, something like 15-20% chance. Hamstring tendon was closer to 5% while Patella Tendon was 1-2% chance. (Going from memory of what my surgeon told me). Recovery wise, the cadaver method and the hamstring tendon method are both quicker recovery times than the Patella Tendon method. My surgeon was a former NFL team doctor and uses the Patella Tendon method as it has the lowest frequency of re-injury.

Maybe my surgeon was blowing smoke, but take it for what its worth. If Fekir had his replaced using a cadaver ACL, its entirely reasonable that the club docs might not be comfortable with that given the demands of the way we play and the higher frequency of that type of repair being re-injured.
 

gr_sounder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
2,466
From what I've repeatedly heard and read, Fekir didn't fail the medical - it was more down to the fact that it revealed that the knee operation he had a few seasons ago was performed using cadaver material versus a graft from his own tissue, which is apparently more prone to failure, and as such we wanted to restructure the deal and/or the insurance underwriters wouldn't go for it at the original agreed fee.

To this day, there has been absolutely zero word from our club as to why we backed out of it, Fekir has said that he has no idea why the deal fell through, and Aulas is claiming that it's all down to him deciding to do it. (Cough...)
Just from having 2 ACL surgeries on a single knee (which is why I don't play the beautiful game anymore competitively)... I will comment that both times I've done it they have used grafts from my own body - both patella tendon grafts (one from either knee). There are positives and negatives to all types of grafts. Historically using a donor graft was not ideal for high level athletes as they were considered weaker, lower quality grafts and there were concerns of diseases and rejection by your body. These donor grafts have become MUCH better in quality, but I think during preparation there are cells killed through freezing and this also can weaken the graft. I am very surprised that they would have used a donor graft for Fekir. The only reasons I can think of not to use part of his patella tendon (from either knee).

When you take a patella graft from your own body, it should end up being stronger than the original ACL, but it does weaken your knee and could cause problems with the knees down the road. However I would have thought this would have been minimal with proper surgery which I am sure would have been done by better surgeons and more completely than mine was.

I could see how the underwriters and club could believe that the method used "could" have higher risk of future injury associated with it and need to take steps accordingly. That said, it's also extremely likely that he'll never tear it again and all will be well with him.

I wish Nabil all the best, but don't expect we'll ever find him here in a Liverpool shirt. His numbers in the Champions League have been excellent. His numbers in the league not so much, but that could be as he's only managed 8 league matches.
 

gr_sounder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
2,466
That is precisely what it means to fail a medical.

As for the type of graft, there was a lot of nonsense written about it at the time. There are pros and cons of each type of procedure, which is why there are several different approaches. None is universally and undeniably better than the other and it is not reasonable to think we backed away because of the type of graft.
I don't think that's necessarily true. For a high performing athlete, I've not heard of anyone recommending use of a cadaver graft (they are weaker) unless there is a reason you can't use a graft from your own body. Of the grafts from your own body, there is an advantage of using your patellar tendon as opposed to a hamstring tendon is because with the patellar tendon, you can attach bone to bone. The hamstring graft has a longer healing time, and it is typically a weaker attachment. Now if you don't mind sidelining the player for a much longer time frame, then it can be similar to the patellar graft, though many doctors still think it's a weaker attachment.
 

Last edited:

Limiescouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
12,605
I don't think that's necessarily true. For a high performing athlete, I've not heard of anyone recommending use of a cadaver graft (they are weaker) unless there is a reason you can't use a graft from your own body. Of the grafts from your own body, there is an advantage of using your patellar tendon as opposed to a hamstring tendon is because with the patellar tendon, you can attach bone to bone, which is a longer healing time, and it is typically a weaker attachment. Now if you don't mind sidelining the player for a much longer time frame, then it can be similar to the patellar graft, though many doctors still think it's a weaker attachment.
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?
 
Last edited:

gr_sounder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
2,466
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
1,231
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.
 

Walshy07

In Klopp we trust
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
1,014
This will either be like VVD and bang its done or it wont happen.
 



indianscouser

Anything But Normal
Joined
Jan 6, 2011
Messages
8,408
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
7,144
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

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2017
Messages
2,341
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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.