Cristiano Biraghi

[Harpsabu]

Yeah, Biraghi, a left wing back, was replaced by a guy who came to play wide center back and a guy who played right wing back.
All while Dimarco returned.

Come on, eliminate your friggin biases and use your mind.

You're arguing with the man in the situation lmao think about who might be bias here...

 

[brehme1989]

You're arguing with the man in the situation lmao think about who might be bias here...

Yeah and Vieri keeps bringing up the Nesta story and omits that it was Cannavaro who we signed and not Gamarra who arrived on a Bosman and was already at the club for 2 months when he talked to Angelo Moratti. Makes for a better story, right?
And also misses that Ronaldo left, too...


So your argument now is that Biraghi was told that we're not signing a left wing back because we got a left back to play center back and a backup right wing back, who ca.e on top of Hakimi, and we're all gonna play along?

Biraghi was not signed because Biraghi was not wanted. That's the end of it. Surely the monetary factor played a part, but he was surplus and we had 5 other players who could play there. It's ridiculous that you're still going on here.


You realize that most players have zero clue on how their own team operates and why they're signed or sold? There are only a handful that do and they're typically the superstar players. Provided that they also care about that shit.

Biraghi is rather bitter and he swallowed the fact that Inter didn't want to spend money. That's the story. Kolarov and Darmian are two imaginary characters in it to add flavor.

 

[ADRossi]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1641134088638681090

I always assumed it was because Dalbert refused to join Fiorentina permanently.

 

[Harpsabu]

Yeah and Vieri keeps bringing up the Nesta story and omits that it was Cannavaro who we signed and not Gamarra who arrived on a Bosman and was already at the club for 2 months when he talked to Angelo Moratti. Makes for a better story, right?
And also misses that Ronaldo left, too...


So your argument now is that Biraghi was told that we're not signing a left wing back because we got a left back to play center back and a backup right wing back, who ca.e on top of Hakimi, and we're all gonna play along?

Biraghi was not signed because Biraghi was not wanted. That's the end of it. Surely the monetary factor played a part, but he was surplus and we had 5 other players who could play there. It's ridiculous that you're still going on here.


You realize that most players have zero clue on how their own team operates and why they're signed or sold? There are only a handful that do and they're typically the superstar players. Provided that they also care about that shit.

Biraghi is rather bitter and he swallowed the fact that Inter didn't want to spend money. That's the story. Kolarov and Darmian are two imaginary characters in it to add flavor.

Both darmian and kolarov played left wing back at points throughout that season.

People keep trying to push "conte wanted old player over young player", buts it's simply not true and this is another first hand source stating the fact.

Dalbert-Biraghi loan renewal with Fiorentina is off, but Inter will try to keep Biraghi in separate negotiation — FedeNerazzurra - https://www.fedenerazzurra.net/news...l-try-to-keep-biraghi-in-separate-negotiation

Inter Milan fullback Cristiano Biraghi willing to return to Fiorentina - Tribal Football - https://www.tribalfootball.com/arti...raghi-willing-to-return-to-fiorentina-4338691

We were negotiating deep into the transfer market to keep Biraghi. To say he wasn't wanted just isn't true.

 

[brehme1989]

He was by no means a priority. And signing Kolarov or Darmian had nothing to do with that. And ironically your links prove that.
So decide which narrative you want to follow.

I even forgot about fucking Dalbert. Thanks for reminding me...

Btw, the window opened in September, it wasn't deep, that was pre season.

 

[varmin]

Yeah, Biraghi, a left wing back, was replaced by a guy who came to play wide center back and a guy who played right wing back.
All while Dimarco returned.

Come on, eliminate your friggin biases and use your mind.

I'm not biased. Biraghi just said that we brought some guys, only because they were free. And, Perisic returned because no one wanted to pay 15-20mln for him. With that money, we could have redeemed Biraghi.
I don't recall Dimarco even featured one game. Young and Perisic were on the left. Kolarov came as supplement to Bastoni and LWB position, exactly due to lack of money. If we had, an another player would have been bought.

 

[brehme1989]

I'm not biased. Biraghi just said that we brought some guys, only because they were free. And, Perisic returned because no one wanted to pay 15-20mln for him. With that money, we could have redeemed Biraghi.
I don't recall Dimarco even featured one game. Young and Perisic were on the left. Kolarov came as supplement to Bastoni and LWB position, exactly due to lack of money. If we had, an another player would have been bought.

Darmian cost us 5m and another 6m in salaries.
Kolarov cost 2m and 7m in salaries.

Biraghi would have cost 12m and 5m in salary.

So the cost was pretty much the same between these guys. If you went by that, sure. But they weren't some kind of direct replacement. Economically they were alternatives, but there's no sporting decision to make this claim valid.

Dimarco was in the roster, Conte played him once or twice as a sub.

Kolarov came to replace Diego Godin and add width to our center backs. Then Conte changed his mind because we conceded over two goals per game with his lunatic tactics and reverted to the sit back and throw the ball forward strategy.

 

[Harpsabu]

He was by no means a priority. And signing Kolarov or Darmian had nothing to do with that. And ironically your links prove that.
So decide which narrative you want to follow.

I even forgot about fucking Dalbert. Thanks for reminding me...

Btw, the window opened in September, it wasn't deep, that was pre season.

But you said he wasn't wanted which isn't true.

And no the links don't prove that. If dalbert had of fucked off or been any use at all Biraghi would still be here. He absolutely was wanted and we got kolarov because we couldn't strike a deal for Biraghi. Yeah the window was fucked that year but he was our first priority for that role. As varmin says we were hoping perisic would be sold.

Again, I will believe Biraghi to know more about the situation than any of us on the Internet.

 

[varmin]

Darmian cost us 5m and another 6m in salaries.
Kolarov cost 2m and 7m in salaries.

Biraghi would have cost 12m and 5m in salary.

So the cost was pretty much the same between these guys. If you went by that, sure. But they weren't some kind of direct replacement. Economically they were alternatives, but there's no sporting decision to make this claim valid.

Dimarco was in the roster, Conte played him once or twice as a sub.

Kolarov came to replace Diego Godin and add width to our center backs. Then Conte changed his mind because we conceded over two goals per game with his lunatic tactics and reverted to the sit back and throw the ball forward strategy.

Young was 1.5 mln and Darmian 2.5 mln. It's total of 4 mln. When finances are locked, and the team requires self financing, it's much easier to find 4 mln (selling some young players), than 12 mln. It was same about Vidal. Marotta had arranged Tonali, but due to lack of money, we got Vidal.

 

[brehme1989]

Young was 1.5 mln and Darmian 2.5 mln. It's total of 4 mln. When finances are locked, and the team requires self financing, it's much easier to find 4 mln (selling some young players), than 12 mln. It was same about Vidal. Marotta had arranged Tonali, but due to lack of money, we got Vidal.

We got Vidal instead of Tonali due to Conte.

 

[varmin]

We got Vidal instead of Tonali due to Conte.

😄

 

[forzainter257]

Every time I see brehme arguing:

 

[Harpsabu]

We got Vidal instead of Tonali due to Conte.

Cellino explains how Inter got it wrong with Tonali - https://acefootball.com/football-news/cellino-explains-how-inter-got-it-wrong-with-tonali/

Cellino, the president of brescia, saying that's not true.

Inter couldn't invest in Tonali - Football Italia - https://football-italia.net/inter-couldnt-invest-in-tonali/

Ausilio saying we couldn't invest

Not one actual good source saying that Conte pulled the plug.

People think we could make a big investment that year, even though we had to sell hakimi and lukaku and still had like a - 200mln loss. Conte be blamed for the weather soon.

 

[brehme1989]

Yet the reason was that Inter didn't conclude the deal because Conte wanted Vidal. Money wasn't flowing. We couldn't get both. We prioritized Vidal. Hence, Conte wanted Vidal over Tonali. Simple as.

 

[Javier'sSon]

Every time I see brehme arguing:

View attachment 8109

But why? He seems very calm while posting.

 

[CafeCordoba]

Cellino explains how Inter got it wrong with Tonali - https://acefootball.com/football-news/cellino-explains-how-inter-got-it-wrong-with-tonali/

Cellino, the president of brescia, saying that's not true.

Inter couldn't invest in Tonali - Football Italia - https://football-italia.net/inter-couldnt-invest-in-tonali/

Ausilio saying we couldn't invest

Not one actual good source saying that Conte pulled the plug.

People think we could make a big investment that year, even though we had to sell hakimi and lukaku and still had like a - 200mln loss. Conte be blamed for the weather soon.

Now you are confusing the years or what are you talking about. It was the summer of 2020 when we were after Tonali and Vidal. Same summer we signed Hakimi. After Hakimi however the money dried up and we couldn't sign Tonali, we couldn't sign Kumbulla. We ended up with Vidal, Kolarov, Darmian.