Transfer Talk, Rumours and Speculation

[neio]

Would have preferred mauk go to victory, give me another reason not to like him 

[Tangerine]

I don't understand the sudden faith in Mauk's abilities. He was ok with us in his last half season but hadn't cemented a starting spot. Then he suddenly looked really good when he went to Adelaide. That was of course a championship winning team. Everyone knows that individuals look better when surrounded by a team that is clicking and working for each other. And then last year he tanked in Europe.

If he joins us good, he clearly has potential. If not I couldn't care less, there should be similar quality we can source from somewhere (or through a visa spot). Troisi is twice the player Mauk is.

[bt50]

Just now, Tangerine said:

I don't understand the sudden faith in Mauk's abilities. He was ok with us in his last half season but hadn't cemented a starting spot. Then he suddenly looked really good when he went to Adelaide. That was of course a championship winning team. Everyone knows that individuals look better when surrounded by a team that is clicking and working for each other. And then last year he tanked in Europe.

If he joins us good, he clearly has potential. If not I couldn't care less, there should be similar quality we can source from somewhere (or through a visa spot). Troisi is twice the player Mauk is.

100% agree.

[Jovan]

So what Mauk is replacing Caceras. Much of a muchness. 

Brattan played his best soccer last season prior to his Thailand trip and imo that's mainly because of Kilkenny. 

When Kilkenny was playing that second CB role in that 3 man backline it gave Brattan space to operate. Kilkenny and Brattan are very similar and I have a strong belief that you can't play both successfully in a midfield. Kilkenny is the better all round player so I would start him.

Either Kilkenny or Brattan need a more energetic nippy partner in Midfield especially at the base of midfield in a 4 2 3 1 or variant so maybe bringing in Mauk could work. 

It would be a shame if Caceras left as he showed great potential and in the right formation and role he could really dominate. 

I don't rate Mauk and as a player let alone his persona. But if he returns I'll support him until he doesn't deserve it.

[Harrison]

29 minutes ago, bt50 said:

I'm not sure i think Mauk is definitely on bar or better than O'Neill or Brillante but he definitely is capable at the level. IMO Caceres wouldnt have been on any more than 200k, and i suspect that would be more than enough to get Mauk done given he really only has one decent season to his name and flopped heavily last year in Europe.

IMO the midfield will consist of:

Kilkenny          Mauk/Brattan

             Troisi

with Mauk and Brattan both available to rotate in the CAM and/or CDM roles for subs. Arzani, Malik and Genreau also provide midfield cover.

I don't like the combination of Kilkenny and Brattan. One or the other (Kilkenny on last season's form) but not together. The midfield is too one-paced and static when they both play. Mauk and Kilkenny looks like a better and more dynamic combination.

[jw1739]

1 hour ago, Dylan said:

looks like he found an o/s club. Good luck to him

I take it you are referring to Caceres? What's the background to this rumour? We confirmed his loan extension only six weeks ago.
http://www.a-league.com.au/article/signing-news-one-stays-and-one-goes-at-melbourne-city/1cai9zgu1ne3v1q8be0ecoee93

If the rumour is true, seems like we're in a bit of turmoil out there at CFA. Other than Scholarship players we've released more players than we've signed.

[Dylan]

6 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

I take it you are referring to Caceres? What's the background to this rumour? We confirmed his loan extension only six weeks ago.
http://www.a-league.com.au/article/signing-news-one-stays-and-one-goes-at-melbourne-city/1cai9zgu1ne3v1q8be0ecoee93

If the rumour is true, seems like we're in a bit of turmoil out there at CFA. Other than Scholarship players we've released more players than we've signed.

I was just commenting on the posts above... Turmoil is also an overreaction 

[illeatyourheart]

Mauk is an immense upgrade on Caceres. Bring him back!

[Deluka]

I feel like we'll see Troisi announced with the kit unveiling on Thursday

[Embee]

12 minutes ago, Dylan said:

I was just commenting on the posts above... Turmoil is also an overreaction 

Turmoil is a MASSIVE overreaction. If we let Caceres go and bring in Mauk and Troisi you're losing absolutely nothing and freeing up room to move under the cap, quite the opposite to turmoil surely.

[Mr MO]

17 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

I take it you are referring to Caceres? What's the background to this rumour? We confirmed his loan extension only six weeks ago.
http://www.a-league.com.au/article/signing-news-one-stays-and-one-goes-at-melbourne-city/1cai9zgu1ne3v1q8be0ecoee93

If the rumour is true, seems like we're in a bit of turmoil out there at CFA. Other than Scholarship players we've released more players than we've signed.

Not long now and our Wikipedia history section will have another paragraph added "Tim Cahill years and Salary Cap struggles".

If we let Caceras go on feedback of Wazza then I don't have any issues with it.

If we let him go for any other reason then it certainly seems that we don't know what we are doing. Don't announce him, let him trial with Wazza and then make the call, just like with Brattan.

2 minutes ago, Embee said:

Turmoil is a MASSIVE overreaction. If we let Caceres go and bring in Mauk and Troisi you're losing absolutely nothing and freeing up room to move under the cap, quite the opposite to turmoil surely.

100% agree but why announce him?

[jw1739]

2 minutes ago, Embee said:

Turmoil is a MASSIVE overreaction. If we let Caceres go and bring in Mauk and Troisi you're losing absolutely nothing and freeing up room to move under the cap, quite the opposite to turmoil surely.

I think you're ignoring my "if" and "bit of."

[Embee]

2 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

I think you're ignoring my "if" and "bit of."

Not ignoring the if, my assumption is based on the rumour being true as well.

Even a bit of turmoil is an overreaction. Are you telling me you wouldn't be happy with Mauk coming in at the expense of Caceres?

[playmaker]

IMO the Caceres  rumour is bullshit.

It is obvious that he was left out because he dominated the last practice match and Wazza is satisfied with what he saw, and wanted to give the young midfielder a run purely for assessment purposes.  

Tbh they are no where near ready for this level.

[Embee]

6 minutes ago, Mr MO said:

Not long now and our Wikipedia history section will have another paragraph added "Tim Cahill years and Salary Cap struggles".

If we let Caceras go on feedback of Wazza then I don't have any issues with it.

If we let him go for any other reason then it certainly seems that we don't know what we are doing. Don't announce him, let him trial with Wazza and then make the call, just like with Brattan.

100% agree but why announce him?

Circumstances change.

They sign Caceres intending to keep him but then see an opportunity to bring in a guy like Mauk on less money, seeing as we're operating very close to the cap they decide they'd rather fill Caceres' spot with Mauk instead.

I don't really understand why anybody cares about the announcement. What difference does it make to our squad building process? I personally couldn't care less what announcements or comments are made to the media as long as we build the strongest squad possible for the A-League season.

[belaguttman]

Mauk's biggest problem is the red mist: his disciplinary record is poor, his tackles often risky. he has positives too of course but he'd really need a good coach to improve this part of his game. Caceras' biggest problem is that he drifts in and out of games, he has the skills but hasn't ever been able to impose himself on games consistently.

[Embee]

5 minutes ago, belaguttman said:

Mauk's biggest problem is the red mist: his disciplinary record is poor, his tackles often risky. he has positives too of course but he'd really need a good coach to improve this part of his game. Caceras' biggest problem is that he drifts in and out of games, he has the skills but hasn't ever been able to impose himself on games consistently.

Yeah, Mauk's a right little cuntrag, but hopefully the failure overseas will humble him a little. Can't see Wazza putting up with much of that kind of stuff either really.

[japiedog]

3 minutes ago, Embee said:

Yeah, Mauk's a right little cuntrag, but hopefully the failure overseas will humble him a little. Can't see Wazza putting up with much of that kind of stuff either really.

Best Description of Mauk EVER

 

Edited July 26, 2017 by japiedog

[playmaker]

4 minutes ago, belaguttman said:

Mauk's biggest problem is the red mist: his disciplinary record is poor, his tackles often risky. he has positives too of course but he'd really need a good coach to improve this part of his game. Caceras' biggest problem is that he drifts in and out of games, he has the skills but hasn't ever been able to impose himself on games consistently.

Disagree.

He had no continuity last season and yet opened up the opposition defence on many occasions where no other of our players could, with limited time on the pitch, and with a game plan that was substandard. 

Caceres and Troisi in the middle would be dynamite.

[Mr MO]

I'm sorry guys I struggle to forgive him for what happened in the Adelaide away game. I still can't believe no action was taken considering the seriousness.

[belaguttman]

2 minutes ago, playmaker said:

Disagree.

He had no continuity last season and yet opened up the opposition defence on many occasions where no other of our players could, with limited time on the pitch, and with a game plan that was substandard. 

Caceres and Troisi in the middle would be dynamite.

I agree with you on that, however the following game he'd just as likely be anonymous. There's no doubting his ability.

[bt50]

2 minutes ago, playmaker said:

Disagree.

He had no continuity last season and yet opened up the opposition defence on many occasions where no other of our players could, with limited time on the pitch, and with a game plan that was substandard. 

Caceres and Troisi in the middle would be dynamite.

Lol you and @DAM10 have some serious blinkers on when it comes to Caceres. He's alright and appears to have terrific potential, but bar a month in around March last year and last week's friendly he's hardly belted down the door for selection.
I was looking forward to seeing him take the next step this season, but imo he's no better than Mauk on exposed form.

[Jovan]

6 minutes ago, bt50 said:

Lol you and @DAM10 have some serious blinkers on when it comes to Caceres. He's alright and appears to have terrific potential, but bar a month in around March last year and last week's friendly he's hardly belted down the door for selection.
I was looking forward to seeing him take the next step this season, but imo he's no better than Mauk on exposed form.

Totally agree.

Both are far from being genuine starting A League players. For periods maybe but consistently no. Alot of it not their doing but that's another argument. So they are both pretty much at the same level 4th in a 3 man midfield. Do we need both? Probably not. 

[Mr MO]

8 minutes ago, Jovan said:

Totally agree.

Both are far from being genuine starting A League players. For periods maybe but consistently no. Alot of it not their doing but that's another argument. So they are both pretty much at the same level 4th in a 3 man midfield. Do we need both? Probably not. 

and if the both on the same level, what you reckon is other most important comparing players in this league?

[rass]

14 minutes ago, playmaker said:

Disagree.

He had no continuity last season and yet opened up the opposition defence on many occasions where no other of our players could, with limited time on the pitch, and with a game plan that was substandard. 

Caceres and Troisi in the middle would be dynamite.

Sorry but this is just plain wrong.

Caceres is undoubtedly skilful but the only time he ever looked likely is when he came on late in games we were in a commanding position. He had multiple opportunities when asked to run that CAM role, the year before with Mooy around and last season and never once took it in my opinion.

This flows onto the argument about whether Kilkenny and Brattan can play together as anchors. Of course they can in a 4-2-3-1/4-2-1-3/def 4-3-3 formation. That's a no brainer but it relies heavily on who the CAM/#10 is. It flopped last season because that player was either Caceres, Cahill or a lazy Colazo generally - players who aren't good enough on that role. You can't expect Kilkenny or Brattan to play the killer unlocking balls in that setup so dont judge their performances on that.  

...but throw in a proven A-League #10 like Troisi on there (or as an example, Mooy) then this midfield would be very hard to contain. 

[Jovan]

2 minutes ago, Mr MO said:

and if the both on the same level, what you reckon is other most important comparing players in this league?

? Most important what?

[Jovan]

4 minutes ago, rass said:

Sorry but this is just plain wrong.

Caceres is undoubtedly skilful but the only time he ever looked likely is when he came on late in games we were in a commanding position. He had multiple opportunities when asked to run that CAM role, the year before with Mooy around and last season and never once took it in my opinion.

This flows onto the argument about whether Kilkenny and Brattan can play together as anchors. Of course they can in a 4-2-3-1/4-2-1-3/def 4-3-3 formation. That's a no brainer but it relies heavily on who the CAM/#10 is. It flopped last season because that player was either Caceres, Cahill or a lazy Colazo generally - players who aren't good enough on that role. You can't expect Kilkenny or Brattan to play the killer unlocking balls in that setup so dont judge their performances on that.  

...but throw in a proven A-League #10 like Troisi on there (or as an example, Mooy) then this midfield would be very hard to contain. 

Maybe true. I hadn't thought about the #10 directly when watching both Kilkenny and Brattan. Great point!

But what was very evident without a balanced midfield Brattan was awful atleast Kilkenny maintained a very high level inspite of others.

You might be right. Brattan Kilkenny and Troisi is the answer. 

[Mr MO]

7 minutes ago, Jovan said:

? Most important what?

If two players are similar the other most important thing is $$$$$$$$$

[rass]

1 minute ago, Jovan said:

Maybe true. I hadn't thought about the #10 directly when watching both Kilkenny and Brattan. Great point!

But what was very evident without a balanced midfield Brattan was awful atleast Kilkenny maintained a very high level inspite of others.

You might be right. Brattan Kilkenny and Troisi is the answer. 

Personally I'd prefer a proven visa #10 but Troisi at least has runs on the board in that position here. 

[Jovan]

15 minutes ago, Mr MO said:

If two players are similar the other most important thing is $$$$$$$$$

Okay. 

I wasn't sure of your previous point. 👌

[DFG_82]

On 09/07/2017 at 4:29 PM, nah brah said:

just because i was right.... 

arnie is looking at birrighitti or federici as replacements for vukovic.

sauce..  https://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/article/2017/07/07/arnold-sizes-birighitti-fill-vukovic-void-sydney-fc

Sydney ended up signing Alex Cisk better or worse than Galekovic in your opinion? 

Edited July 26, 2017 by DFG_82

[Jovan]

17 minutes ago, rass said:

Personally I'd prefer a proven visa #10 but Troisi at least has runs on the board in that position here. 

Maybe a naturalized Carusca would be better suited. On and off the pitch(being Argentinian). 33 years old is a concern though. 

[bt50]

5 minutes ago, Jovan said:

Maybe a naturalized Carusca would be better suited. On and off the pitch(being Argentinian). 33 years old is a concern though. 

IMO Troisi has Carrusca covered in just about every respect.

[Jovan]

4 minutes ago, bt50 said:

IMO Troisi has Carrusca covered in just about every respect.

He wouldn't use a Marquee spot.

[Embee]

24 minutes ago, Jovan said:

He wouldn't use a Marquee spot.

Yeah but he wouldn't be as good as the player we'd be using the marquee spot on.

I'd rather use an under the cap spot on a CB and marquee on a #10 than the other way around.

[n i k o]

1 hour ago, bt50 said:

Lol you and @DAM10 have some serious blinkers on when it comes to Caceres. He's alright and appears to have terrific potential, but bar a month in around March last year and last week's friendly he's hardly belted down the door for selection.
I was looking forward to seeing him take the next step this season, but imo he's no better than Mauk on exposed form.

No comment on his comparison to Mauk but I completely disagree with the rest of your post in terms of what your insinuating. My opinion of the situation is at that exact point when we all wanted him to take that 'next step' what happened? More often than not he was given what appeared to be a role change or he was benched. And his terrific performances extend beyond just his month in March and last week.

Think back to preseason lasted year and put yourself in his position...in that playmaker role you single handedly stand out and carry us through some of our earlier FFA Cup games. Throughout the season when you've taken on this same role you shine through and are the spark to our forward attack.  Then you get jerked around throughout the season whenever youve shown your capabilities because of brain dead 'tactical' reasons cause the coach wants you to impact the game later. What would go through your head knowing you've shown your capabilities to impact games when given faith to do so. I know I would be screaming out to just give me a chance, give me some consistency to do this again and again. And don't bench me if I have one game a little bit off cause I know I'll produce. This was another problem that also impacted other players, this chopping and changing based on one average prior performance. 

I don't promise anything with where or how good Caceras would be. He could flop for all I know. But with the evidence that was at hand he deserved more consistent opportunity to prove himself capable. 

Edited July 26, 2017 by n i k o

[playmaker]

1 hour ago, bt50 said:

Lol you and @DAM10 have some serious blinkers on when it comes to Caceres. He's alright and appears to have terrific potential, but bar a month in around March last year and last week's friendly he's hardly belted down the door for selection.
I was looking forward to seeing him take the next step this season, but imo he's no better than Mauk on exposed form.

I have no preference for any player tbh.

An AMF's job is to create chances on goal, which he does well. If he gets the ball 5 times and creates 5  chances and works hard off the ball then he has done his job. That's the difference between the bullshit possession based measure and the relevant efficiency measures. 

I don't want him to chase possession as that's not what attacking playmakers do, and that is why most AMFs always seem to drift in and out of games even though they work hard off the ball.

 

1 hour ago, rass said:

Sorry but this is just plain wrong.

Caceres is undoubtedly skilful but the only time he ever looked likely is when he came on late in games we were in a commanding position. He had multiple opportunities when asked to run that CAM role, the year before with Mooy around and last season and never once took it in my opinion.

This flows onto the argument about whether Kilkenny and Brattan can play together as anchors. Of course they can in a 4-2-3-1/4-2-1-3/def 4-3-3 formation. That's a no brainer but it relies heavily on who the CAM/#10 is. It flopped last season because that player was either Caceres, Cahill or a lazy Colazo generally - players who aren't good enough on that role. You can't expect Kilkenny or Brattan to play the killer unlocking balls in that setup so dont judge their performances on that.  

...but throw in a proven A-League #10 like Troisi on there (or as an example, Mooy) then this midfield would be very hard to contain. 

Firstly, we were never in commanding positions because our game plan was rubbish, secondly a CAM needs to link up and given his lack of on field time I think he did well, especially with Fitzy. If they were smart they would have played him as a traditional position rather than Cahill and instead of making him chase the ball out wide all the time. Just remember that our attacks were wide 90 % of the time and setup to bomb into the box with Timmy running in, so as a result there was no CAM role so to speak. But what he did do well was link with the forwards and track back to stop the opposition's DM. And the slowness of ball movement out of defence was a joke.

If a traditional CAM role is in our game plan then Caceres has the game. He needs to be played for the most part of 90 mins at least up until Christmas to get a fair indication of if he is average or a match winner. He at least deserves an opportunity, and if he doesn't take the opportunity then trade him off in January.

 

Edited July 26, 2017 by playmaker

[jw1739]

1 hour ago, Embee said:

Not ignoring the if, my assumption is based on the rumour being true as well.

Even a bit of turmoil is an overreaction. Are you telling me you wouldn't be happy with Mauk coming in at the expense of Caceres?

I wouldn't be particularly happy, no. IMO Mauk is a dirty little shit of a player who left us on acrimonious terms and later hurt Wade Dekker.

Maybe I need to learn to live with it, but my frustration is a general one rather than with any particular player. We looked to have a reasonably stable squad for the coming season, and suddenly we've let both Retre and Franjic go and I don't see their replacements, whether they're already here or still coming, as being significantly better. We need to stiffen the defence, but we haven't done it yet, because our back line was pretty ordinary last night against an NPL side - I hate to think what Perth, Victory or Sydney would do to us if we played them with last night's defensive  line-up.

If we're having to release players and sign cheaper ones because of salary cap problems then I'm not impressed, because that's what Petrillo is here for - to manage that. No blame can be attached to Warren Joyce because he wasn't even here.

I'm afraid that none of what I'm seeing gives me confidence for the coming season. Maybe I'm alone in that feeling, but if so, so be it. Perhaps it's all being managed brilliantly out there at CFA and all I'm missing is the confirmatory announcements. But I'm not convinced about that. Sorry.

[Embee]

1 minute ago, jw1739 said:

I wouldn't be particularly happy, no. IMO Mauk is a dirty little shit of a player who left us on acrimonious terms and later hurt Wade Dekker.

Maybe I need to learn to live with it, but my frustration is a general one rather than with any particular player. We looked to have a reasonably stable squad for the coming season, and suddenly we've let both Retre and Franjic go and I don't see their replacements, whether they're already here or still coming, as being significantly better. We need to stiffen the defence, but we haven't done it yet, because our back line was pretty ordinary last night against an NPL side - I hate to think what Perth, Victory or Sydney would do to us if we played them with last night's defensive  line-up.

If we're having to release players and sign cheaper ones because of salary cap problems then I'm not impressed, because that's what Petrillo is here for - to manage that. No blame can be attached to Warren Joyce because he wasn't even here.

I'm afraid that none of what I'm seeing gives me confidence for the coming season. Maybe I'm alone in that feeling, but if so, so be it. Perhaps it's all being managed brilliantly out there at CFA and all I'm missing is the confirmatory announcements. But I'm not convinced about that. Sorry.

I just think you're impossible to please to be honest. "If we're having to release players and sign cheaper ones because of salary cap problems then I'm not impressed", so you'd rather us not address issues or try to improve the squad? I just don't get it. Regardless of what the club seems to do you find a negative in it and if they then adjust what they've done and try to correct the negative you've complained about you then complain about the solution, it's an endless circle of moaning

I can't stand Mauk and regardless of what he does for the club that won't change too much, but I can also put those feelings aside to admit that he's a good enough player that if we can get him in on a lowish wage and move out an equivalent level player on higher wages then it's a solid move.

I'm not going to go sifting through posts but I'm going to go out on a limb (although I don't think it's a very long shot) and say that you were probably one of the dissenting voices when it came to Franjic's return compared to expectation, as I was, and now you're complaining he hasn't been replaced a week after he left? And as far as Retre, I didn't mind him but he was simply squad filler, a replacement for Retre is effectively a body.

Victory are about to lose two of their best players from last season (Troisi and Rojas), Sydney sold the best keeper in the league and currently only posses Redmayne, every squad has issues they still need to be addressed. If we had some of those issues in our squad you'd probably be as much if not more than you are now.

[Mr MO]

13 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

I wouldn't be particularly happy, no. IMO Mauk is a dirty little shit of a player who left us on acrimonious terms and later hurt Wade Dekker.

Maybe I need to learn to live with it, but my frustration is a general one rather than with any particular player. We looked to have a reasonably stable squad for the coming season, and suddenly we've let both Retre and Franjic go and I don't see their replacements, whether they're already here or still coming, as being significantly better. We need to stiffen the defence, but we haven't done it yet, because our back line was pretty ordinary last night against an NPL side - I hate to think what Perth, Victory or Sydney would do to us if we played them with last night's defensive  line-up.

If we're having to release players and sign cheaper ones because of salary cap problems then I'm not impressed, because that's what Petrillo is here for - to manage that. No blame can be attached to Warren Joyce because he wasn't even here.

I'm afraid that none of what I'm seeing gives me confidence for the coming season. Maybe I'm alone in that feeling, but if so, so be it. Perhaps it's all being managed brilliantly out there at CFA and all I'm missing is the confirmatory announcements. But I'm not convinced about that. Sorry.

You aren't alone JW, welcome to team Pessimist! Haha.