Jump to content

Paul Onuachu


niceandfriendly
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...
Just now, swannymere said:

What's Happening?

There was a link of a return to Genk last night, which basically said both parties are interested but they wouldn't want to pay anything near what we're looking for. Their record transfer fee is about a third of what we paid for him 6 months ago.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big Paul feels like the sort of player we will need to loan out or agree to take a massive hit on, just to get him out of the club. We're never going to get anything near what we paid, he's a terrible footballer and has no future here. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, the saint in winchester said:

Yeah, Genk have said 5m EUR is their budget and then player has to accept a low wage.

Let's get him up to speed and playing, would be my advice. There HAS to be a player in there. He scored goals before. We are not going to get much back on the empties.

This might depend on the ability to ‘get him up to speed’. He is such a tall man that I’m not sure he will ever have the fitness or mobility needed for a retention based system…

He could offer an alternative approach, but I can’t see the side being one to get the ball out wide to cross into the box.

Are there any direct sides that need a goal scorer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Dman said:

Big Paul feels like the sort of player we will need to loan out or agree to take a massive hit on, just to get him out of the club. We're never going to get anything near what we paid, he's a terrible footballer and has no future here. 

Like Carrillo, he was bought for a specific manager and a specific type of playing style.

On both occasions the manager and the playing style changed.

Doesn't mean they’re crap players, lots on here saying Onuachu was a crap signing, but as I’ve said previously, you can’t judge him on maybe fifteen minutes of football. 😂

As Dman says, he and the other players surplus to requirements need to be shifted if they’re not part of the clubs plans.
Take the hit and move on.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He won’t have the mobility, durability or ability for us. From the little we saw, he couldn’t jump and offers little aerial threat. Not sure what system he would suit, other than dropping into an inferior league. Dman almost certainly correct that we’ll be subsidising his wages for the rest of his contract one way or the other. Shame. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, FarehamSaintJames said:

Like Carrillo, he was bought for a specific manager and a specific type of playing style.

On both occasions the manager and the playing style changed.

Doesn't mean they’re crap players, lots on here saying Onuachu was a crap signing, but as I’ve said previously, you can’t judge him on maybe fifteen minutes of football. 😂

As Dman says, he and the other players surplus to requirements need to be shifted if they’re not part of the clubs plans.
Take the hit and move on.

I'm not saying he's crap, but Carillo's record since leaving Saints isn't exactly stellar - a couple of goals this season in the Chinese Super League. Onuachu's record pre Saints is far better than Carillo's has been at any time, so there's a chance there's a good player in there with the right system.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, davefizzy14 said:

I still think Onuachu could be an asset. He thrives on balls into the box to attack and head in. 

He could be but I think it's pretty clear he's not in our plans.  In a way I feel sorry for the lad - he's not had much of a chance at all and would have hoped for at least the opportunity to make a difference.  Suspect it'll be a loan back to Genk that's more likely than anything else.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
3 hours ago, Charlie Wayman said:

Especially if we offload that useless prat Adams.

Can see it happening, soon to be out of contract Adams downs tools, Stewart back on the treatment table,  cometh the hour cometh the Tall Paul Southamptons goal machine 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JRM said:

Can see it happening, soon to be out of contract Adams downs tools, Stewart back on the treatment table,  cometh the hour cometh the Tall Paul Southamptons goal machine 

tall Paul is the Jonno Quick 2023/24 version 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never got a fair shake from the manager or fans. He causes panic in the oppo box and is well capable of 15+ goals in this division.

Even though it's against our manager's style, the fact is we are desperate for an outlet for a long ball at times, not having that option even on the bench is ridiculous at any level.

I'd be happy to have him back.

Edited by southamptonfc
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, southamptonfc said:

Never got a fair shake from the manager or fans. He causes panic in the oppo box and is well capable of 15+ goals in this division.

Even though it's against our manager's style, the fact is we are desperate for an outlet for a long ball at times, not having that option even on the bench is ridiculous at any level.

I'd be happy to have him back.

Agreed, something we've fallen foul of over the years is a lack of plan B, because we don't have players who offer anything different. A big lump of a striker to chuck on for the last 20 minutes if you're chasing a game and the opposition are just sitting in is always going to be more useful than someone who plays on the shoulder of the last defender, if the defenders are on their own penalty spot to start with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
5 minutes ago, Maggie May said:

Fair enough but he was garbage for us.

If he'd had as many chances as Adams did become he came "good" (by which I mean slightly less bad) he may have done something. 

You can't judge him on 5 minute cameos when the team had given up in the game anyway.

I only remember him having two actual games. Chelsea away which he was very good and Fulham at home which admittedly he was shocking.

I still think he'd have been a better option in this league than Adams.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bad Wolf said:

If he'd had as many chances as Adams did become he came "good" (by which I mean slightly less bad) he may have done something. 

You can't judge him on 5 minute cameos when the team had given up in the game anyway.

I only remember him having two actual games. Chelsea away which he was very good and Fulham at home which admittedly he was shocking.

I still think he'd have been a better option in this league than Adams.

Agreed, especially for the games where we need to dig in and require a shithouse up top.

The amount of times the opposition have bought on a player like that against us and ended up benefiting…..he could have been really important to us in this league.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bpsaint said:

Agreed, especially for the games where we need to dig in and require a shithouse up top.

The amount of times the opposition have bought on a player like that against us and ended up benefiting…..he could have been really important to us in this league.

We needed a shithouse at Gillingham. That game demonstrated the gulf in attitude and athleticism between Charlie & Tall Paul.  Both came on as subs, one was a spectator and one was a game changer.

Watch that acrobatic goal video back and watch his movement into the box - reminds me of the "It's..." man at the start of Monty Python!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's afforded loads more space on the pitch in Turkey than he'd get in the PL or Championship, which will be much easier for his game. I believe the Belgian league is the same.

Rather than pay him for years while he learns how to manage in a congested box I think we were better to loan him out to a league that suits his game better, and get in a player who knows how to manage in that environment (Ross Stewart).

At the pre-WBA press conference RM was asked about him and the first description that came to mind was "He's massive!" and that's not a metaphorical term; he was meaning physically a big bloke. That footage of him scoring after 9 minutes for the Under 21s made him look like he'd gone back to play for his school team!

There would seem to be no lack of effort on Paul's part. I just think it was a wrong choice for all parties. It might have worked if we had dramatically changed our playing style but Selles wasn't wiling.

I'll bet by the time January comes around we'll all be much more confident about which big bloke we loaned out and which one we signed.

Edited by Patches O Houlihan
bloody spell check
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maggie May said:

Lots of rose tinted glasses being worn I’m afraid. He’s currently impressing in a very poor league. You only have to go back to page three to see how most fans were feeling about his performances for us.

Haaland would have been garbage for Man City if they'd signed him and played him at LB the entire time. He had limited opportunities under 2 of the worst managers the premier league has ever seen. No target man would flourish in a team who either passed the ball 5 yards sideways/backwards or gave the ball away.

It's less him being a poor player and more him wondering what the hell he came in to at that time, HCDAJFU in the Championship, but very much doubt he'll be back.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Patches O Houlihan said:

He's afforded loads more space on the pitch in Turkey than he'd get in the PL or Championship, which will be much easier for his game. I believe the Belgian league is the same.

Rather than pay him for years while he learns how to manage in a congested box I think we were better to loan him out to a league that suits his game better, and get in a player who knows how to manage in that environment (Ross Stewart).

At the pre-WBA press conference RM was asked about him and the first description that came to mind was "He's massive!" and that's not a metaphorical term; he was meaning physically a big bloke. That footage of him scoring after 9 minutes for the Under 21s made him look like he'd gone back to play for his school team!

There would seem to be no lack of effort on Paul's part. I just think it was a wrong choice for all parties. It might have worked if we had dramatically changed our playing style but Selles wasn't wiling.

I'll bet by the time January comes around we'll all be much more confident about which big bloke we loaned out and which one we signed.

Tell me you didn't watch the goal without telling me you didn't watch the goal.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair to the man, he operates in the penalty area, that's it. It's the way he has always played. The dumb asses at Saints tried to be different. Forget him let him play around the penalty area and he will get goals. If your looking for a pressing, passing defensive tracker you don't sign him.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never thought we gave him enough of an opportunity or even played to his strengths, so he was pretty much null and void here without even playing. I don't have anything against him in any way.

There is no agreed fee in the loan, so this is only going to bump up his value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...