Jump to content
Bovril

Quintilla - Why he is not playing despite being on the bench

Recommended Posts

If he was fit enough to play 90 minutes I don't doubt Farke would've been starting him. But with the cup game and a 2 week break from the league on the horizon, there was no point throwing him back into the action when we've generally been fine with Sorenson at left back. Plus, playing him in a cup game that allows him to ease back into things after such a long time out.

If Sorenson needed to come off during a game because of an injury then I imagine Farke would've bought him on, which is why he was on the bench, but unless we absolutely need to we're better off letting him get back to 100% fitness.

I can't wait to have him back though, could be a huge player for us in the second half of the season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bovril said:

@Nuff Said Here is the article noting the obligation to buy due to appearances made. Article from Sky Sports also states it, but presume they took the info from one another.

https://www.pinkun.com/sport/norwich-city/norwich-hoping-to-avoid-january-transfer-window-dramas-6878626

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11709/12166395/xavi-qunitilla-fitness-concerns-may-see-norwich-sign-january-replacement

"His situation is complicated further by an obligation to buy - reportedly for a fee of £2.7m - if he has made a significant amount of appearances in a promotion season and by both Sam Byram and Bali Mumba hoping to return to fitness this month.

Spanish left-back Xavi Quintilla made his Norwich City debut at Huddersfield Picture: Paul Chester

Left-back Xavi Quintilla has returned to City's matchday squads recently - Credit: Paul Chesterton/Focus Images Ltd

Sam McCallum could return from Coventry if needed but it's understood sporting director Stuart Webber and Farke would prefer the 20-year-old to keep developing as he is playing regularly, so a Premier League loan could be considered if things don't work out with Quintilla, Byram and Mumba."

TBF, that’s hardly proof of any contractual trigger is it? The article you quote from says “obligation to buy”, but it links to an article from when he signed that only uses the word option, not obligation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We do need a left sided player on the left. That is becoming more obvious by the game despite the fact Sorensen has done very well. More than anything though if we are going to fall out with Quintilla can we wait til after the transfer window as he’s Emis mate!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

The reason Quintilla isn't playing at the moment is because Sorenson has done superbly at left back and is fully deserving of his place in the side. 

He's done OK. 

Certainly not 'superbly' for me. 

He's stifled our attack on that side and been diliberatley attacked by our opponents for a reason. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, CDMullins said:

He's done OK. 

Certainly not 'superbly' for me. 

He's stifled our attack on that side and been diliberatley attacked by our opponents for a reason. 

I think he has done a very fine job there. 

It's only more recently with the return of Cantwell to the side that you can see what we lack in an attacking sense (Through no fault of either player that is) but even then he has found his way onto the end of crosses from the right, resulting in a goal and very unlucky not to have a few more. I also had started to take issue with Quintilla's crossing, often high from positions deeper than the box, with Hugill in the side this may be an option, but Pukki isn't the type of striker to win those duels.

Lastly I think he has been very solid defensively, and is not attacked by the opposition much more than Aarons, who himself is hardly the best defensively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, CDMullins said:

He's done OK. 

Certainly not 'superbly' for me. 

He's stifled our attack on that side and been diliberatley attacked by our opponents for a reason. 

How many goals have we conceded since he’s being playing in these games where our opponents have deliberately attacked him?  If that’s not superb, it’s at least bloody impressive.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, CDMullins said:

He's done OK. 

Certainly not 'superbly' for me. 

He's stifled our attack on that side and been diliberatley attacked by our opponents for a reason. 

Did you watch the game yesterday? Sorensen was very good.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

The reason Quintilla isn't playing at the moment is because Sorenson has done superbly at left back and is fully deserving of his place in the side. 

I totally agree. Quintilla played until he got injured. Sorenson, playing out of position has  done exceptionally well and looks a good player and adds physicality to the the back 4. In addition our really good run has coincided with Sorensons spell so i see no way he will make way unless injuries dictate he can be better used at CB or midfield

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 goal and 2 good chances in the last few games, Sorensen has given more threatening plays than Quintella in his first 7, and looks a better defender even if in an unfamiliar position.  And does anyone really believes he will accompany Skipp when Rupp returns from injury maybe would have played there during Rupp's absence.  He must be happy at LB where he has proved is a player earlier than he could have proved in his City career. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Looks like the theory put forward in this thread was true.

Apart from only Championship games count towards the threshold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

Apart from only Championship games count towards the threshold.

Well, that wasn't actually mentioned in the opening post.

But yes, Michael Bailey has reported that we are obligated to sign Quintilla permanently if we are promoted and he plays in at least half of our Championship games.

To be honest though, even if the obligation becomes an option, would £2.3m for Quintilla be a bad deal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Well, that wasn't actually mentioned in the opening post.

But yes, Michael Bailey has reported that we are obligated to sign Quintilla permanently if we are promoted and he plays in at least half of our Championship games.

To be honest though, even if the obligation becomes an option, would £2.3m for Quintilla be a bad deal?

I’d agree with you if he’s versatile, but we haven’t seen any evidence of that yet. I guess it’s partly what we’ve agreed for wages that matters too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

I’d agree with you if he’s versatile, but we haven’t seen any evidence of that yet. I guess it’s partly what we’ve agreed for wages that matters too.

I was thinking just as a backup left back for next season if we go up, because I'm not sure if McCallum would be deemed ready so we'd probably want to bring in someone to compete with Giannoulis. Quintilla for £2.3m would be a relatively cheap option in terms of transfer fee, but like you say, wages could be an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot could also depend on Byram and his return from injury, I find it hard to believe the club will trust in him to be first choice due to his injury history but he could easily be a back up option. Add Mumba or Sorensen as further options and you are reasonably well stocked, albeit no 'true' left back you could say. At this point, it seems unlikely that Quintilla will feature in half of our league games this season. He has 7 out of 24 so far, so making 16 in 22 with a new left back will be tricky. I presume an option to buy would still exist if he didn't hit the appearance marker, which would put the deal into our hands. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

×
×
  • Create New...