The Chilean returns a year after he left slamming the door, after Arnautovic he is the second recycled in attack. The department weakens but invests in the defender: Pavard. A difficult philosophy to understand
When El Nino Maravilla, born Alexis Sanchez, left Inter, he delivered messages full of poison to posterity against the Nerazzurri club and above all against Inzaghi. Guilty, in his opinion, of having made him play little considering his alleged value. He made accusations that he publicly repeated a few months ago, when he started scoring again with the Marseille shirt. That farewell cost Zhang quite a few million, four and a half, handed over to the Chilean as long as he went elsewhere. The moment he emptied the Pinetina locker, taking away a golden severance pay, they breathed a sigh of relief at the headquarters, and the coach did the same.
event
—
Twelve months have gone by, not twelve years, and we are witnessing an event that we never thought we would see: he, Alexis Sanchez, returns to Inter and is welcomed with all due honours. Yet the president is the same and the managers are the same, as is the coach. Is it possible that the man almost forced to the door, certainly with a lot of money, immediately comes back through the window? Is it profitable for an opponent of Inzaghi to be reintroduced into the locker room? And, even putting aside these economic and personal events, what is the point of going to get a striker who is about to turn thirty-five?
strategy
—
The signing of the free agent Sanchez is the latest episode in a market – that of Inter – difficult to understand, at least in its final part. The first moves certainly had a logic, it is no coincidence that we applauded them: Dzeko out and Thuram in, Brozovic out and Frattesi in, a beautiful and positive rejuvenation, with limited technical risks. Even the sale of Onana is understandable, because in line with the difficult economic conditions of our clubs: faced with proposals like that of United, it is practically impossible to say no. Inter’s market strategy, at that point, was traced: the money collected from the sale of Onana would have been committed to Lukaku, and the new goalkeeper (Sommer or whoever) would have cost a handful of millions. It was the Belgian’s betrayal, his sensational about-face, that called everything into question, and perhaps caused Inter to lose some serenity. Who has made choices that are difficult to understand since then.
middle age
—
In attack today Inter have two thirty-four-year-old boys played: Arnautovic (another return) and Sanchez. The refurbishment work stopped early. Very soon. In addition to them, in the offensive department there are Thuram and – luckily – the untouchable Lautaro. Can anyone argue that the Nerazzurri are stronger up front than last season when Lukaku, Dzeko and Correa were alongside Toro? The average age has not decreased, although the Bosnian is not a boy; on the other hand, the strength, the quality and the ability to create have decreased significantly. But how did we get to this point?
treasure
—
Inter could have invested the 35-40 million intended for Lukaku on another striker. They wouldn’t have been enough to buy a champion, but you could try to take an important element, maybe a perspective. The managers, for example, really liked Balogun, 22 years old, twenty-one goals in Ligue 1 with Reims, now disputed between Monaco and Chelsea. Instead the internal debate (Marotta and Ausilio wanted the little American from Arsenal, Inzaghi was pressing for a pure centre-forward) led the Nerazzurri to spend around ten million for Arnautovic instead of betting everything on Balogun. Consequently it was decided to allocate the remaining part of the treasury to a defender: Pavard. There are those who argue that the amount paid by Inter – 35 million – is excessive. This is probably not the case, even if his contract with Bayern would have expired in 2024: he is a highly experienced footballer, world champion in 2018, and in any case when you deal with rich clubs like the Bavarian one, the ratings cannot be low.
surprise
—
We are especially surprised by the philosophy: being able to invest in a single player, having the opportunity to hit just one shot, why focus on the defender rather than the centre-forward? Who weighs more in the economy of a team? What was Inter’s main shortcoming, the rearguard (which last season, already without Skriniar, accompanied the Nerazzurri to the Champions League final) or the attack, orphaned by Lukaku and Dzeko?
© REPRODUCTION RESERVED