Home » Devil’s Advocate: Vilified for diligence – why Milan’s medical approach should provoke pride
Jean-Philippe Mateta of Crystal Palace antonee robinson fulham

Devil’s Advocate: Vilified for diligence – why Milan’s medical approach should provoke pride

Photos: Justin Setterfield + Julian Finney/Getty Images

The winter transfer window closed on Monday evening, and yet the storm surrounding AC Milan has continued to rage on.

As we headed into the final day of the mercato, the now infamous ‘Deadline Day™’, it seemed that Milan would be surprise protagonists, at least relative to the amount of activity in the days prior to the window’s conclusion.

Multiple reliable sources from David Ornstein to Matteo Moretto reported that a deal had been agreed between Milan and Crystal Palace for Jean-Philippe Mateta, the 28-year-old French striker who had been extensively linked in months prior.

That came out on Sunday afternoon. Then, as we headed into the evening, it was expected that the striker would pass a medical and sign in an operation worth over €30m. By Sunday night, it had already emerged that doubts had started to emerge. These would never be overcome.

How the story went

So, what exactly led up to the announcement on Monday afternoon from the previously aforementioned sources that Mateta’s move to Milan had collapsed? Well, we can begin to piece together the sequence of events.

The Rossoneri, as we know by now, are thorough in their medicals (more on that to come). When a fee was agreed between the two sides, the testing process began. In the early checks, club doctors found something that they thought needed further investigation.

Now, many fans and journalists pointed to the fact that Mateta has played in all 23 league games of the season, missing only the 24th game against Nottingham Forest two days ago due to transfer reasons. However, stories of his physical issue had already surfaced in December, in English papers.

Jean-Philippe Mateta of Crystal Palace
Photo by Alex Pantling/Getty Images

The Rossoneri staff wanted a further look at Mateta’s knees, in particular his right knee which has had issues before. In fact, the centre-forward ruptured his meniscus in 2019 while playing for Mainz and underwent surgery that year, keeping him sidelined for six months.

Their tests clearly revealed a cartilage problem, with two options: immediate surgery (and three to four months out), or keep playing on injections with the risk of compromising the joint’s stability. This would only delay the surgery, with the possibility of missing the World Cup or a part of 2026-27 season.

On Monday morning, a second round of in-depth medical tests took place, with the club’s chief doctor – Dr. Mazzoni – present to give his assessments. He deduced that Mateta could keep playing through pain and on injections, but with the possibility of worsening the situation.

Otherwise he needed an operation. In fact, it was also deduced that if the knee surgery were postponed until the summer, it would be even more invasive and require a much longer recovery time. That was his final verdict, relayed to Milan.

‘Just buy someone else’

The directors had been following the Châteauroux academy graduate for for some time and had identified him as the right player to strengthen their attack for next season. Massimiliano Allegri agreed too, and the planned summer swoop was brought forward because doors opened.

This is where the first point of contention with the narrative emerges, the idea that Milan acted incompetently in some way by only going for a striker towards the final couple of days of the winter window.

Each transfer – especially one of this magnitude – is effectively a sequence of dominoes that must fall. In this case, Milan needed to strike a deal with Palace for Mateta, which they did. Then, the London club needed to find a replacement, which they did in Jorgen Strand Larsen (a former Primavera player, ironically).

It didn’t end there though: Wolves agreed to the sale of Larsen given their almost certain relegation presented the need to cash in, but they then had to source someone to replace the Norwegian, who ended up being Adam Armstrong from Southampton. The Saints had to give their green light etc., and you see where this is going.

All of those conditions to make the Mateta operation go through did not exist two weeks or even a few days prior to the closing of the mercato. Once the pieces started to align, Milan pushed on the accelerator and were a dodgy knee away from pulling off a €35m coup.

Jean-Philippe Mateta of Crystal Palace jorgen strand larsen
Photos: Matt McNulty + Julian Finney/Getty Images

Then came the argument ‘why didn’t they use that money on another striker’. At most clubs, funds made available by the ownership to the management for a signing are ring-fenced. In essence, RedBird Capital will have given their approval to spend a substantial sum, but only on Mateta.

Thus, the expectation that Igli Tare and co. were expected to come up with just as good a name for the same price and get all of the processes done (negotiations, documentation and another medical) within just a few hours is unrealistic and shows a lack of understanding for how transfers work.

One example of when the Rossoneri did pivot late in the window can be found just a few months ago. After pursuing a more typical centre-forward for the entire summer, Milan completed the signing of Christopher Nkunku from Chelsea at the 11th hour, for €38m plus bonuses too.

Not only is Nkunku a winger/second striker/attacking midfielder/anything but a natural number nine, but the fee suggested a bit of desperation, and until his recent run of goals he looked like being one of the biggest flops in years. Even with the Frenchman’s resurgence, it is still a questionable operation, to the extent there were rumours of a January exit.

Vilified, for what?

In the ensuing mass of misguided opinions and false versions of events, one tweet in particular caught the eye, from an account called The Touchline on X.

It read: “There’s ongoing discussion among some agents about AC Milan as a potential destination, largely because its medical tests are considered among the most complicated and demanding in world football.

“Several agents admit they prefer to avoid AC Milan as an option for their players, especially after multiple transfers were suspended or collapsed when players failed to pass the club’s medical examinations. They secretly admit AC Milan’s medical tests are known for detecting issues other clubs might overlook.”

It must be noted that The Touchline are not renowned for the accuracy nor profile of their exclusives, but let’s take some of the words at face value and evaluate the notion that there might now be some warning lights attached to Milan.

The notion that the Rossoneri are ‘detecting issues other clubs might overlook’ should be a badge of pride. It means that the club are being thorough with every medical test that they do, and that they are setting a higher standard than others.

Rewinding just a few months, the Victor Boniface saga sticks out in recent memory. Milan agreed a loan with option to buy for the Nigerian with Bayer Leverkusen, and it became clear why the German club were willing to sanction such a formula for a prolific striker.

Ultimately, Boniface failed his medical in August having even landed in Italy to do it, primarily due to chronic abnormalities found in his right knee. He would end up joining Werder Bremen, suffering a serious knee issue that has him out for the season at least, but he is apparently considering retiring such is his ordeal.

In the same window, Milan also sent club doctors to do tests on the then-Almeria defender Marc Pubill. The Spaniard had failed a medical with Atalanta in August 2024 due to knee concerns after surgery on it in 2023.

So, medical staff went to Barcelona in July to perform preliminary checks before a formal bid was made. This was quite an unusual process, because normally in-depth medical checks can only be done once a deal has been fully agreed, which is what happened with Mateta.

Moving back the clock to January 2020, Milan were getting ready to welcome Antonee Robinson. The left-back arrived in the city, but his sporting fitness test revealed a heart rhythm irregularity that caused a lot of concern. The doctors warned that if untreated, it could lead to something as serious as heart failure.

Specifically, doctors detected an abnormally high frequency of ectopic heartbeats (inefficient beats that occurred at a rate of roughly 15%, well above the 3-5% considered normal for elite athletes).

Robinson was initially scheduled for a cardiac ablation procedure, but was able to manage the issue by cutting out caffeine. Since then, the USA international has expressed appreciation that the problem was found, given the potentially life-changing consequences had it not been.

That wasn’t the first time that a heart issue was detected, either. In August 2018, shortly before arriving on a free transfer, Ivan Strinić was diagnosed with initial hypertrophy of the cardiac muscle (a thickening of the heart muscle).

It was so serious that doctors told him to stop all competitive sporting activity for several months. He did return to training in late 2018 but didn’t play, and his contract was terminated by mutual consent in August 2019. He never took to the field in a competitive game again.

There are other examples of Milan’s medicals detecting previously known issues, and rather than being some kind of inconvenience, this should be treated as a mark of quality. Any party – club, player or agent – upset that a player did not pass the tests clearly doesn’t have the player’s health at heart.

Of course transfers are primarily a business transaction, where lots of money changes hands, and strict legal frameworks are deployed. It is also an emotional transaction, because clubs and fans look forward to welcoming new signings which will transform their sporting fortunes.

Above all, though, they concern human beings. If Milan are the industry leaders in anything, medical evaluations that could change (and even save) lives isn’t something to be ashamed about. If other clubs ‘might overlook’ that on the other hand, then the Rossoneri are on the right side.

Tags AC Milan Jean-Philippe Mateta

38 Comments

  1. Great article.
    A lot of idiotic comments under that Touchline tweet and other accounts over the last week trying to push a nasty narrative against Milan by bunch of half-wits, some Milan fans too.

  2. This is absolutely correct. If a club is willing to pay 30–40 million or more, it has the full right to conduct an exhaustive medical and performance evaluation of the player, down to the smallest detail. When you are paying several million in salary, the expectation is clear: full health and zero systemic risks.

  3. I’m fine with thorough medicals.

    I just wish we had a Plan B and attempted this signing earlier on. If this happened a couple of days before the end, maybe we could have realistically found someone else.

    Nonetheless, I think it’s both appropriate and professional to require a player actually passes a medical. Imagine if he came here for 30 million and immediately needed a surgery and was out 3-4 months.

    The diligent and prudent approach makes sense, especially when considering the sums spent.

    1. Plan B for what?
      Milan already signed a striker this window.
      They actually wanted Mateta for the summer, but Mateta pushing to leave immediately and Crystal Palace securing his replacement, moved the operation 6 months early.
      Milan didn’t need to sign another striker after Fulkrug. Where would that plan B striker play when Leao and Pulisic are healthy? Milan has 15 games left in only serie A.

        1. I think they should just have closed the Kostic deal instead and then allowed him to stay with the first team and maybe play a few matches here and there with the Futuro. Maybe next season then loaned him out to either a Serie A or B team and allow him to further develop. I would have welcomed Mateta but he was not really the player I wanted us to acquire as I’ve set my eyes firmly on Vlahovic or maybe Lewandowski if he could be interested.

      1. Fulkrug so far is clearly a temporary solution. Mateta was supposed to be a long term solution based on the contract offered. Guess plan B was gonna be a striker in summer despite what Allegri had been asking for since no other striker was lined up.

        1. A 29 year old who has had 2 good seasons in his career was supposed to be the long term solution?
          In January Milan needed a temporary solution. Rarely you sign a permanent solution in a winter mercato. Milan tried to do that last January. How is that working out so far?
          Allegri was asking for a defender after Fulkrug, not another striker.
          Milan got 5 forwards for only 2 spots and only 15 games left. Again, im asking, where and when would that plan B striker would have had the time and space to play with Pulisic, Leao and Gimenez coming back in the next days/weeks?
          The strikers that Allegri supposedly wants were not available in January.
          BTW, it was reported that Allegri wanted a defender in the last days of the mercato, not another striker.

          1. People are just completely ignoring the fact that Fullkrug IS the January no. 9 signing, as if he doesn’t exist. As you said, the plan was always Fullkrug on a loan with no obligation until June and then they’d sort out a more long term no. 9. Mateta now was simply an opportunity pickup.

          2. Oh I completely agree with you. Priorities were off. But when you’re offering someone a 3+ year deal it’s not a temporary solution – you’re trying to keep the player long term. And even at that you effectively things up and don’t have an alternative plan …

        2. Allegri was not entirely convinced about signing Mateta as he did not consider him the right striker for the team, though Milan decided to consider him as a market opportunity and with Mateta pushing to join Milan the club tried to accelerate his arrival, then his physical conditions issue rose. However Mateta was not among the primary targets for Allegri
          [@MatteMoretto]

          One of Allegri’s desires in the January was to sign a central defender. After some internal evaluations at Milan they realized that Disasi was the only plausible name.
          Tare negotiated with Chelsea and Disasi’s entourage, Allegri was also on terms with the deal. Then the Milan management opted to interrupt talks as they decided to give confidence to De Winter
          [@MatteMoretto]

      2. Yep, it was a total “opportunity” signing. Fullkrug is the January striker signing to get us to the summer.

  4. Good call. We made a mistake some 20 years ago with Fernando Redondo, never again. They improved Milanello medical facilities after that mistake. Older fans will remember i am sure

    1. They also brought in injury prone Ancelotti to Milan and won the Scudetto if you remember THAT far back… You never know.

          1. Yes but my point is more like that nobody would have been without those years as he became one of the biggest legends ever of the sport. In modern day game he might never have gotten the same chance.
            I don’t especially care that we didn’t buy Mateta but you win some and lose some regardless and Ancelotti might never have arrived either as already mentioned by ACM1899.

    2. Redondo got injured after the transfer.
      What does that have to do with the medical facilities?
      Jashari got injured after the transfer in training
      Conti got injured after the transfer in training
      Caldara got injured after the transfer in training

  5. No one is criticizing Milan for pulling out of deals based on the results of medicals. If true, I’m glad Milan’s medicals are more in-depth. 35mil for a player with a knee problem is madness, no matter what your budget is.

    What Milan is guilty of, however, is waiting until the end of the window to make a move for a position in need without having a plan B if that move failed.

    THAT is dense.

    1. It’s not a position in need. We have 5 attackers for 2 spots, that should be enough. Add RLC who can play up top as well. Keeping our players healthy seems to be the bigger problem here.

    2. Knee problem… More like knee surgery. He would have been out 3-4 months. And signing anyone during the winter is a very difficult prospect.

  6. Hopefully I don’t get the BS message that I “posted too quickly” this time (WTF?). I’m all for strict medicals, too. Given how some players don’t want to leave… if there is no injury buyout clause (like in the NFL), Milan could be stuck with these big-money contracts on chronically injured players for years (similar to MLB).

    1. It was a good reason not to get him at the time. He was out around six months for surgery that was suppose to have him ready for the start of the season. I’m not sure he is back to 100% yet. Man City also wanted him but wisely held off due to the surgery. Surgery is always a bit of a risk.

  7. I think there were also another transfer deadline day when we tried to bought Bibiany was it? From Parma but he’s detected to have a heart conditions, then we bought Bonaventura as replacement which is a good deal

  8. Why do we always go after players with deep-lying injuries and health issues? Like why do we even start the negotiations in the first place? If the player had a major surgery in the past then do not even mention his name. It’s like we do the negotiations and the medical tests just so other clubs can benefit from the information.

  9. 30 M should be a very healthy and 100 % fit for the first team.
    Fulkrug were good enough to complete half of season

  10. Excellent article; 100% agreed.

    Some posters here even subscribed to the conspiracy theory that Milan used a medical excuse for pulling out of the deal for some unclear conspiracy reason, when Occam’s Razor dictates that the much simpler explanation, that Mateta’s knee was INDEED a huge problem as diagnosed by two separate medical teams, is much more likely to be true.

    Besides, that wouldn’t be necessary; Milan could just just have said “sorry, after further thoughts, we’re no longer interested in this player; we just signed a striker and we have another one close to recovering (a bit faster than initially thought) so at this point we’ll stay put.” Clubs walk away from deals all the time; no need to find a medical excuse.

    Palace were already talking knee surgery; then they stopped talking about it, likely because they wanted to get rid of the hot potato and didn’t want to scare away potential buyers. Glad that Milan didn’t fall for it, ultimately.

    Sure, Mateta had been playing, but out of damaging injections like the article details. Fine for a loan with no obligation to buy as a short term solution, but not fine for a 30+ million permanent deal. Even for a loan (which was suspiciously not what Palace wanted) if there’s a need for immediate surgery to avoid aggravation, what’s the point?

    Also the other part of why this possible deal was only approved by RedBird late in the window, has to do with the refinancing of the vendor loan. Suddenly there is no more high interest to pay (actually the loan with Comvest is structured as able to pay interest only at maturity and with stock options) so more funds were freed. As the article indicates, too late to get a plan B if the Mateta deal didn’t go through. These conditions that allowed RedBird to breathe more easily were only done very late in January; initially it seemed like only in late March it would maybe happen; Comvest moved faster.

    Yes, the club tried, but ultimately the plan was defeated not by Milan’s incompetence, but actually because of the player’s knee, and because of the timeline. It happened like that, and there is more reason to be relieved that it didn’t go through, than regretful. We actually dodged a bullet.

Comments are closed

Sign up for our newsletter
Follow us