Capello Kalulu

Capello suggests why Kalulu left Milan: “They don’t need a defender like that”

AC Milan parted ways with Pierre Kalulu in the summer, and whilst it is a loan deal, there is a buy-clause within it, and Juventus are expected to activate it. However, Fabio Capello has suggested this might not be a terrible thing. 

There were several hypotheses tested with Kalulu in the summer when Paulo Fonesca arrived. Kalulu spent time training as a right-back, and his performances halted the club’s pursuit of Emerson Royal – a decision which has been referred to since.

When Strahinja Pavlovic joined, the defence became bloated, and with Zlatan Ibrahimovic preferring to take a risk on the new signing, it made sense to part ways with the Frenchman. However, this decision has been questioned.

Today, Capello spoke of Kalulu’s performance against RB Leipzig in the Champions League and brought forward a new perspective on the move, and his words have been relayed by Milan News.

“Two words to close, however, Kalulu deserves them: is it possible Milan didn’t need a defender like that? Sometimes the market has logic that I don’t understand. And so I rely on the field, where the Frenchman is showing he is one for Juve.”

At the time, the Diavolo may not have needed Kalulu, but the Frenchman is now shining in Turin, and a €14 million buy clause seems a steal.

Tags AC Milan Pierre Kalulu

26 Comments

  1. Frenchie has been injured off and on for two seasons at Milan. It isn’t improbable to think management had little faith in his being bale to stay fit.

    Of course everyone knows best in retrospect. As long as he stays fit this will have been a bad move. But Kalulu is one injury away from this being a good piece of business.

    1. This is exactly right. If he got injured the 2nd match in, everyone would say how brilliant the move was.

      If he gets injured next match, they’ll say the same thing.

      You make decisions at a moment in time based on the information you have. They did gamble a bit that he might not be able to stay fit. So far, it looks like he is, but that could change quickly.

      Most people can’t understand this, and judge decisions based on immediate outcomes, not the long term implication / risk. Sort of like the pandemic / vaccine fiasco.

      1. That logic makes little to no sense. Then they should sell each and every player since injury doesn’t discriminate. By using that same logic the club should have never gone in for Pulisic since he is prone to picking up injuries

      2. You don’t loan for cheap (then small option fee to buy) to a direct rival in a area of need when you don’t have an adequate replacement and don’t sell a player that can play multiple positions in the back line and over[ay for his replacement for a player of lesser quality.

        Also based on your logic we should not have signed Abraham, RLC or Pulisc who all had a long injury history

    2. Exactly this.
      Bennacer is a perfect example for being injury prone and unreliable.
      People were losing their mind when there were reports that Bennacer is going to be sold, they rejoiced because he stayed and 2 weeks later Bennacer got injured as he usually does.

    3. I’m sorry but I have had to refute these lies over and

      over through the summer.
      Kalulu is NOT injury prone

      Serie A 23/24 – Injured and reinjured after being rushed back because of an injury crisis played 9 league matches

      22/23 played 34 league matches

      21/22 played 28 league matches – vital part of league winning team

      20/21 played 13 league matches – he was a young guy breaking into the team

      Stop defending these goons with lies.
      He is a class player
      Sadly he was probably Moncadas greatest pick ever!

      1. Don’t borher mate with those 3 nicknames,acm1899,milan 905 and z are actually one and the same clueless gringo clown paid to lick jerry’s balls…that’s all

    1. Emerson is definitely not what we need and I understand your sarcasm but Kalulu wasn’t the answer either. If that was the case he would’ve been the starter ahead of Calabria and that wasn’t the case even when he was fit.

      Therefore he couldn’t displace Calabria and Florenzi for the Right Back position and we even had Sergio Dest at RB and he was horrible but he started ahead of Kalulu.

      I don’t regret losing Kalulu. I regret that we didn’t keep Kessie and Tonali together and sell Krunic and Bennacer instead.

  2. We got him out, he is now a juve player, why dwell on that, if he was that good, or more so if he was that good for US we would have kept him, his time was up and we moved on byeeee

    1. Wise milan management believe kalulu is injured prone. If kalulu is injured prone why didn’t they make the deal loan with obligation to buy. That will protect milan.

      Send off kalulu to rival with loan and option to buy is stupid. If kalulu perform well, then juve can buy him cheap. If he injured prone, then juve can send kalulu back. It is very great deal for juve, nothing to lose.

  3. if they sell Kalulu cz he’s injury prone then why buy Pulisic?
    statistic Kalulu isn’t injury prone, he play more good game & less fatal blunder than Thiaw, can cover all back pos, even less salary,

    just admit it, it was bad sell, current management isn’t saints

    1. Yes. It is stupid deal.

      Milan management believe kalulu is injured prone. If kalulu is injured prone why didn’t they make the deal loan with obligation to buy. That will protect milan.

      Send off kalulu to rival with loan and option to buy is stupid. If kalulu perform well, then juve can buy him cheap. If he injured prone, then juve can send kalulu back. It is very great deal for juve, nothing to lose.

  4. Flagging that I really liked Kalulu and wish he’d stayed.

    It’s a difficult one to judge though.
    Note that he is shinning at CB for Juve.
    Where he has played some his best football for Milan.

    Had he stayed he’d likely be playing RB at this point. Based on the current needs of the squad.

    Had we loaned Thiaw instead we would be in a better place. With Kalulu providing depth for two positions.
    I suspect the player is having a bigger impact at Juve than would have been possible if he had stayed.

  5. I said it many times BEFORE the terrible loan with option to buy but no buy-back clause (that Is, this is not just in hindsight): it wasn’t even proven that Kalulu was injury-prone (young guy; just got unlucky with two serious injuries back-to-back which happens including because he was unwisely rushed back in the middle of the injury crisis, but he wasn’t injury-prone before that), and when Florenzi got injured during the USA tour, management should not have shipped out Kalulu. It’s called depth. Regardless of the pecking order, for depth we should have kept him.

    Maybe a case could have been made to lose him if Florenzi had remained healthy but as soon as Florenzy’s injury happened, to be on the safe side that possibility of sending out Kalulu should have been immediately cancelled; and then, why on Earth are we sending a player to a big rival, in conditions very favorable to that rival???

    For me, and based on what Tottenham friends of mine were saying and what I’ve seen this season, there is no doubt that Kalulu when healthy is a better RB than Emerson Royal.

    So, we ship him out with an option to buy for 13M and we spend 15M on Emerson Royal, a downgrade? There is no way, shape. or form, in which this can be considered to be a smart move by the managers.

    OK, so there was doubt about Kalulu’s injury status? Then, only accept a loan if there is an obligation to buy WITH a buy-back clause. Not a loan with option to buy with no buy-back clause.

    So, maybe Juve wouldn’t accept the latter? Fine, then, keep Kalulu.

    The way it was done, the risk remains Milan’s, and Juventus got no risk for them whatsoever. If Kalulu had been shipped to, say, Villareal, it wouldn’t be as bad, but to Juve??? Why are we helping them???

    And of course, Thiaw is also not as good as Kalulu. If we had to get rid of one defender, it should have been Thiaw, not Kalulu who is a versatile and very decent player, unlike Thiaw who can only play RB and is not very good at it, being gaffe-prone.

    Again, the argument was, “but Thiaw didn’t find takers; at one point Newcastle wanted him, then didn’t.” Fine. We have kept Origi and Ballo for years as surpluses because there are no takers. We kept Caldara for 6 years!!! Just keep Thiaw as a surplus, but don’t lose Kalulu. Or strongly tell Thiaw’s agent “he isn’t in our plans and won’t be registered for Serie A or Europe; therefore, aggressively offer him around to Serie B, to League 1 bottom feeders, to Saudi Arabia, wherever, if you don’t want to see his career destroyed.” Maybe then, we could have found a taker for Thiaw.

    Kalulu’s loan was clearly done to finance Emerson’s signing but Emerson is worse than Kalulu. Go figure!!!

    This whole situation sounds like amateur hour.

    It is similar to keeping Jovic but shipping out Colombo, who at least could have been used for the Europe lists, unlike Jovic. Similar but worse, because in the case of Colombo at least there is a buy-back clause, if I’m not mistaken.

Comments are closed

Serie A Standings

Live football scores . Current table, fixtures & results.