[Archived] Roque Santa Cruz Thread

[T4E]

Den, RSC made his debut for Paraguay 10 years ago. In that time he's earned 64 caps - and he'll be the first name on the team sheet when fit. I'm not sure that proves he doesn't have fitness problems.

As far as his injuries prior to Rovers goes, I think you may be underestimating the knowledge of European football of some of the posters on here.

Here's a few links with reference to his injuries prior to coming to Rovers -

Bayern Munich's Paraguayan striker Roque Santa Cruz is facing months on the sidelines with an ankle injury (14/07/2002)

The 24-year-old Santa Cruz sustained a cruciate ligament injury on Saturday (02/11/2005)

His tenure with Bayern, however, has been marred by a series of injuries that have sidelined him for long stretches of time........Cruz sustained a cruciate ligament injury to his right knee last October......Bayern should cut the injury-plagued forward loose (World Cup 2006 preview blog)

Tim Vickery: The principal problem, of course, was injuries. The beanpole frame of Santa Cruz has broken down time and time again (04/09/2007)

[RevidgeBlue]

That reads rather awkwardly Rev - do you mean that you still believe we'll get a decent amount in the Summer, just not as much as we would in Jan?

Yep, can't see the problem - might have got 20m in Jan, might get 15m in August, might have scored the goals which kept us up and saved us 40m.

It was a no brainer for me in January, without the luxury of a crystal ball to anticipate this new injury.

[den]

OK T4E, we're going off track here.

I'm not really trying to say he hasn't had injuries. I'm saying it wasn't obvious and it's wrong for Eddie to say the club were somehow negligent in not knowing that he would inevitably miss a large part of this season.

I haven't read the links you posted, but the titles suggest cruciate knee problems, ankle injuries etc. None of those could have been foreseen could they? Nor could rovers coaching staff have seen this seasons problems with floating cartilage [or whatever it was].

As Nicko says, this problem is the other knee and no-one could have predicted that. Eddies stance is that because of previous lay offs, it was inevitable that this season would have meant another one. - Wrong. We really couldn't be selling our best striker by a mile, just in case he got injured again - could we?

[RevidgeBlue]

Roque's latest knee injury is a NEW problem and in the other leg to the last injury.

Nobody could guess this would happen...

Ssshhhhh.......... don't spoil Eddie's "logic" with facts..............

[Eddie]

Nicko, you mean that Santa Cruz's injury is not related to the problems he had earlier in the season. He has had problems with both of his knees during his career.

It appears that this current problem is also in his left knee, which historically has been his main problem.

[nicko]

Nicko, you mean that Santa Cruz's injury is not related to the problems he had earlier in the season. He has had problems with both of his knees during his career.

He had no immediate problem with that knee up until January.

I see your point about his track record, but the fact remains that you could not predict a bit of bone would flake off like this.

If Rovers had been able to coincide a big offer with a good replacement it would have been terrific business.

That would have been the ideal world.

But January transfer windows are nobody's ideal world.

[T4E]

OK T4E, we're going off track here.

I'm not really trying to say he hasn't had injuries. I'm saying it wasn't obvious and it's wrong for Eddie to say the club were somehow negligent in not knowing that he would inevitably miss a large part of this season.

I haven't read the links you posted, but the titles suggest cruciate knee problems, ankle injuries etc. None of those could have been foreseen could they? Nor could rovers coaching staff have seen this seasons problems with floating cartilage [or whatever it was].

As Nicko says, this problem is the other knee and no-one could have predicted that. Eddies stance is that because of previous lay offs, it was inevitable that this season would have meant another one. - Wrong. We really couldn't be selling our best striker by a mile, just in case he got injured again - could we?

Sorry, was not my intention to take this off track - the links were more to give you/anyone who didn't know RSC's injury history a feeling for what Eddie is getting at.

I'm siding with him on this. The best point that has been made was the "I can't think of any player who has been injury prone in their early years who managed to shake it off as they got older". I can't think of any either. Would love to hear example from anyone who can.

Pretty sure no one used the word "inevitible" btw.

[T4E]

I see your point about his track record, but the fact remains that you could not predict a bit of bone would flake off like this.

Granted predicting the exact injury would not have been possible, but it did not take a genius to see that eventually a disjointed, injury disrupted season would come. £20m of anything anywhere near it for a player who had never played a complete season before last year was crazy money.

[den]

Sorry, was not my intention to take this off track.

The best point that has been made was the "I can't think of any player who has been injury prone in their early years who managed to shake it off as they got older". I can't think of any either. Would love to hear example from anyone who can.

Nor me.

If it was one particular, serious, recurring injury, then no - they would miss games very regularly. Roque isn't in this position though, otherwise he couldn't have played a full season last year. Nor would he have 64 caps for Paraguay. Ledley King's knees are knackered - he wouldn't pass a medical anywhere - Roques apparently aren't. Hughes would have signed him last season, so City don't think he's knackered and I assume nothing too serious would show up on a medical.

Anyway, someone else's turn!

[T4E]

Not sure it works like that. Did Darren Anderton always have the same injury? Are all of Grella's injuries the same? Some players are just injury prone - history suggests Roque is one of them.

Rovers future in this league will always depend on the ability to buy low and sell high. That means picking your moments. Unforunately in the last two seasons we've missed opportunities to do so with both Benni and RSC. It's not a mistake we can afford to keep on making.

[Exiled in Toronto]

I think our own Dunn and Reid demonstrate that injury prone-ness can accumulate over time. The longer they miss with injuries, the more likely it is that something else goes wrong because they spend so much time in rehab and so little playing games. None of the injuries are inevitable but the odds seem much higher for some players than others. I think that's all Eddie was saying - that RSC was due another one sometime soon.

[Eddie]

Pretty much. Also, knee injuries tend to never fully go away, so it was always likely to become an issue at some point.

[Hughesy]

Im pretty sure Roque would fail a standard medical too.....

[CAPT KAYOS]

He had no immediate problem with that knee up until January.

Indeed NickO .. but then what happened to February and March - we are in April and still no nearer to a performing Santa.

As I have already stated - nobody is telling me that this has only just happened/been diagnosed - and if not its all been false dawns (lies) about him starting maybe to justify the none selling given our shortage of funds.

Don't get me wrong, I think the club was right not to sell if what has been said with regard to Citeh being correct and there being no time to find a replacement but something is amiss somewhere and Eddie does have a case.

[DE.]

How much of the 20M, if we had sold RSC, would have actually gone into the team? We didn't see too much of Duff or Bentley's cash. From what I read City's cash would have come through in 3 year installments, or something similar, and such an agreement wouldn't have given our finances an immediate boost anyway.

Unless they did at one point offer 15 - 20M upfront, in which case we probably should have let Roque go and prayed that whoever was in charge of the money actually allowed Sam to use it in the summer.

With Matt Derbyshire and Paul Gallagher away from Ewood Park on loan deals they can not be recalled from this season

Shocked that we loaned out two strikers without the ability to recall them, knowing RSC's injury-prone nature and Benni's love of all things fattening.

[RibbleValleyRover]

How much of the 20M, if we had sold RSC, would have actually gone into the team? We didn't see too much of Duff or Bentley's cash. From what I read City's cash would have come through in 3 year installments, or something similar, and such an agreement wouldn't have given our finances an immediate boost anyway.

That’s one of the huge problems; you just know that most of that money is going to disappear. If the trust/board is serious about rebuilding then all funds need to be available from the sale.

[T4E]

That’s one of the huge problems; you just know that most of that money is going to disappear. If the trust/board is serious about rebuilding then all funds need to be available from the sale.

There was of course one way to guarantee that none of the money went towards rebuilding the squad........

[RevidgeBlue]

Rovers future in this league will always depend on the ability to buy low and sell high.

Not necessarily.

In pure footballing terms we'd have been far better off had we not sold Duff, Shearer and Bentley. Doing so nearly got us relegated three times.

I can't actually believe people are criticising the Club for in this instance showing a bit of ambition and wanting to keep our best player.

As I have already stated - nobody is telling me that this has only just happened/been diagnosed - and if not its all been false dawns (lies) about him starting maybe to justify the none selling given our shortage of funds.

Fair point Capt. but if that is indeed a failing it is surely is a failing on the part of the medical staff, and not a reflection on the decision not to sell in Jan.

[T4E]

Not necessarily.

In pure footballing terms we'd have been far better off had we not sold Duff, Shearer and Bentley. Doing so nearly got us relegated three times.

I can't actually believe people are criticising the Club for in this instance showing a bit of ambition and wanting to keep our best player.

All 3 of those players were sold under poor managers who weren't capable of reinvesting the cash.

As far as "wanting to keep our best player" goes - what on Earth has Roque done since January to earn that title?

[Majiball]

Not necessarily.

In pure footballing terms we'd have been far better off had we not sold Duff, Shearer and Bentley. Doing so nearly got us relegated three times.

I can't actually believe people are criticising the Club for in this instance showing a bit of ambition and wanting to keep our best player.

Selling is the only way we will stay in this league.

[RibbleValleyRover]

Selling is the only way we will stay in this league.

Only if the money from sales is made available to the manager... And given our recent history when it comes to selling off our best players I wouldn't count on that.

Sell Roque and use the full £15 million to buy a new striker and strengthen the midfield.

or

Sell Roque and spend £7 million on a new striker and strengthen other areas like the midfield.

Which if the better option? The first one of course. Which is the one most likeliest to happen? The second one.

We’ve been in decline since the end of the 2005-2006 season and it’s obvious that we need to seriously invest in the midfield. Unless Sam finds some gems on the shoestring budget we have we will have the same problems next season.

[Eddie]

I think we have to accept that the best plan for us is to buy and look to sell on for a profit. Very few players in the world are irreplaceable, so as long as the scouting is there then we should be fine. I don't think there are many clubs that can point specifically at the sale of a particular player for why things fell apart for them; it may well lead to a slight drop off the following season as the squad and team adapts and adjusts to a new player and possibly even a new style or formation, but it shouldn't see a team drop from the top half straight to the relegation zone unless other factors are involved.

Since our return to the premiership we've had several opportunities to sell players for large sums and large profits and on the occasions that we have I think it is fair to say that the move has worked out better for us (Duff and Bentley were both very good players for us, but their form after leaving the club in no way lived up to their fees) and in the instances where we have decided to hold onto the players I think you can say that it hasn't completely worked out for us (MGP, Benni and Santa Cruz could all have been shifted for decent fees and whilst all contribute to the side at the moment and make up some of our best players, they will probably not hit the form that they once had again and we will probably never see that sort of money for them offered again).

[allanncd]

I,m not medically-trained but I doubt that bits of bone come off a healthy knee. Sounds like another worn-out knee going arthritic.

[Majiball]

Only if the money from sales is made available to the manager... And given our recent history when it comes to selling off our best players I wouldn't count on that.

Sell Roque and use the full £15 million to buy a new striker and strengthen the midfield.

or

Sell Roque and spend £7 million on a new striker and strengthen other areas like the midfield.

Which if the better option? The first one of course. Which is the one most likeliest to happen? The second one.

We’ve been in decline since the end of the 2005-2006 season and it’s obvious that we need to seriously invest in the midfield. Unless Sam finds some gems on the shoestring budget we have we will have the same problems next season.

Your dead right with the last paragraph we have been in decline for a while.

Trouble is our club cannot decide what it is, selling or keeping.

We always hark on about how we are not a selling club and then what do we do? Sell. Trouble is we're not set-up to be a selling club most selling clubs have a constant supply via their youth set-up, our youth set-up is one of the worst in the country.

Midfield is just the tip of the iceberg, and whilst I don't disagree its the area we must look at in the summer, yet again we will weaken one area to improve another.

TBH honest I reckon we could buy a serious striker with 7M one who would score goals, trouble I think we've missed the boat with RSC, hindsight wonderfully useless.

I think we have to accept that the best plan for us is to buy and look to sell on for a profit. Very few players in the world are irreplaceable, so as long as the scouting is there then we should be fine. I don't think there are many clubs that can point specifically at the sale of a particular player for why things fell apart for them; it may well lead to a slight drop off the following season as the squad and team adapts and adjusts to a new player and possibly even a new style or formation, but it shouldn't see a team drop from the top half straight to the relegation zone unless other factors are involved.

Since our return to the premiership we've had several opportunities to sell players for large sums and large profits and on the occasions that we have I think it is fair to say that the move has worked out better for us (Duff and Bentley were both very good players for us, but their form after leaving the club in no way lived up to their fees) and in the instances where we have decided to hold onto the players I think you can say that it hasn't completely worked out for us (MGP, Benni and Santa Cruz could all have been shifted for decent fees and whilst all contribute to the side at the moment and make up some of our best players, they will probably not hit the form that they once had again and we will probably never see that sort of money for them offered again).

But is the scouting network there????

We need to be looking in South america, africa and so on I doubt we are.

We need to adopt this approach, there is no-way we can survive spending a paltry 5M every year, even championship clubs can do that, so what hope rovers?

Staying in this league is more important than anything else and if we have to sell to buy so be it, SELL. 20M for RSC we paid 3.5M happy days.

I am very worried about next season, I have faith Sam will keep us up, but 18 players and then the youths backing it up, WE WILL HAVE NO CHANCE.

Sign a bloody token or not asian player start making our club known around the globe and bringing in some cash.

I refuse to believe we cannot compete in our current predicament we just need to clear out the crap and get in better coaches and start signing players who can make money for us, so we can buy more. Look at Porto and Lisbon there is no money in portugese football yet they do OK why, they sign promising players and sell them for stupid money.

Once you've done that a few times you can stand your ground, trouble is every club knows we need money and as such we will be stuck like this for ever.

Its time for a complete overhaul this summer top to toe, new structure, new men in the right positions so we can progress under Sam.

Sorry for the rant but its obvious the model is broken.

[T4E]

Decent post Majiball, but doesn't Porto/Sporting being able to sign these promising young players say more about the differences in visa/work permit regulations in the two countries than anything else?