I disagree with you however on the point that we’re discussing “quality” here. When looking for a backup, of course the club would prefer to have as good a player as possible, but it’s rare that very good players accept to join a club to not be starters. So when looking for players who are second/third choice in their position, the club should look at players who aren’t on par with their first choice players, but are good enough to fill in when said first choice player is injured/tired/rested/on international duty. When Bocanegra goes off to the US squad, Rennes have to play Echiejile or Aubey. Neither are as good as Bocanegra, but one is an up-and coming youngster, whilst the other was recruited to provide cover for Bocanegra and Mangane/Hansson. Aubey isn’t first-choice, but he’s more than decent, so if Hansson gets injured, our defence won’t crumble.

What I’ve been saying since the beginning is that Lyon’s problems is that since Clerc was injured (11th Aug), on both wing-back positions they have a CL-level player, and behind just a “kid”. I’m not Nostradamus, but I can guess that the chances of the two CL-level players being 100% fit (and not suspended) for the whole six months Clerc was out is relatively small. I can also guess (again, Kolocjiczak and Gassama could have proved me wrong) that the “kids” aren’t up to playing top teams or CL matches, or at least it would make for an awkward start to their career. Lyon didn’t need to bring in Maicon and Evra, but just look through lesser Ligue 1 sides for defenders who were good enough to fill in (can play both wings, will accept to not be a starter, might only be there for one season)… Varrault, Sauget, Seube, even Jeunechamp would fit the bill. Good Ligue 1 players, not CL-level, but with enough experience to handle games if the “kid” isn’t considered good enough.

Lyon perhaps need more versatile defence back-ups. Reveillere can play on both wings, but he’s the only one (well, Mensah can do OK on either wing, but he’s not comfortable there) who is used to playing in more than one position. You want your defence to be stable, but injuries -will- happen. So why leave yourself with three good center-backs (Cris, Mensah, Boumsong), two good full-backs (Grosso, Reveillere) and then just kids? With Clerc fit it’s 6 for 4 places, I still don’t find that enough to challenge in 4 competitions.

Ursus, perhaps the “image” of Lyon is indeed what keeps players from joining… But I’m still not convinced. After all, of Juninho, Cris and Fred, who knew anything about Lyon when they were growing up? Clerc seems to have been more than happy to join, and again, I don’t remember Lyon being big when he grew up. Madrid, Barca, Manchester, Milan, Juventus and Liverpool (to name the most obvious) will have appeal that means players will do all they can to play for said club, and will more likely be happy on the bench there than anywhere else. As you note, some players are content to be on the bench (Givet at Marseille this season), whilst others would get in a fit if they even miss half a minute (Ben Arfa at Marseille this season). But I consider that’s something that the manager and the scouts must find out before signing the player. If Belhadj was told he’d be the first-choice full-back (remember, Lyon bought him before signing Grosso) and upon arriving at Lyon he’s told he’s second choice, it’s reasonable for him to not be impressed. However, if you approach a player and tell him that he’ll be a backup, the club will have a much better chance of seeing if he will accept it or not. Piquionne might have in that aspect been a good choice, since although he isn’t as good as Fred/Benzema (or even Milito), he’s prepared to sit on the bench and wait for his half-hour of glory every month, whilst Milito, Reyes or Palacio might have been crying to the media every time they didn’t start, or even when they played out of position!

I’m not saying Lyon should have signed another Clerc because Clerc got injured, nor that they should look for a player able to give Grosso a run for his money like Reveillere gives Clerc on the other wing. Just that after Clerc’s injury, it became clear that Lyon were understaffed in both wing-back positions (they already were at left-back, but without Clerc the right-back was also lacking), so it would have been understandable for Lyon to look to bring in a cover option (who can preferably play on both wings), on explicit terms that he might not get much playing time (Kolo/Gassama might heve been “good enough” in the end), and that he might be offloaded to another club at the end of the season.

Doesn’t weaken your point one iota.

Lyon failed to convince Jose Antonio Reyes to join them, who instead joined Atletico to sit on the bench. We couldn’t sign Diego Milito who chose to go to Napoli. Ribery went to Bayern. They failed to lure Palacio from Boca Juniors because he doesn’t play to come to France. Giovanni dos Santos went to Tottenham, etc. None of those were Champions League teams at the times of the transfers either. So league does play a role.

Also, you can’t compare midfielders and defenders. Defenders on average experience little turnover (which makes sense because you want a stable backline), and only in cup games or injuries do we see rotation. But in midfield, even bench players see significant game time. So a player like Ederson could accept being on the bench for a year (though I don’t think he’d accept it for another), but Mensah (assuming he becomes healthy) won’t be so thrilled to be relegated to the bench behind Cris and Boumsong.

I think that it is extremely difficult to “explain” why some individuals are content to be “squad players” and others are not. There are simply too many highly personalised factors that can influence a player’s decision, even if one puts all economic arguments aside. A non-exclusive list off the top of my head would include comfort with the role; relationships with coaches and teammates; attitude towards the city/region/league; family pressure pro or con; advice of agents/advisors; media exposure/pressure; concern over international place/prospects, etc.

Even one of your obvious mathematical aptitude would be very hard pressed to quantify it.

I also think that OL has a particular issue that many/all of the other Top 20 teams don’t share, which is that they weren’t a “big” club when the current crop of players came of age in footballing terms. It is almost completely irrational, but it can be an important factor in shaping a player’s idea of where he “belongs”. Ben Arfa’s repeated assertions that OM are “bigger” than OL is just one very obvious example of a mentalite that I think is reasonably widespread among footballers of his generation.

Budgets are a large part of the problem for Lyon when competing in the Champions’ League, but on the point of backups their large financial power compared to other Ligue 1 sides should make it easy for them to bring in players from Le Mans, Rennes, Nancy or Toulouse that are substitutes/fringe players. Ederson, Pjanic, Delgado in midfield aren’t first choice, and probably won’t be for two-three seasons (unless many players are sold/retire). If they’re happy to stay, why isn’t Belhadj? He’s not better than those three, and he’s got far less competition in that position…

What it illustrates is that the much-discussed “tax disadvantage” of French clubs is not as significant as is widely believed (including by me before reading the data). I would argue that its continued prevalence in debates on the subject can be ascribed to a combination of factors including the fact that it used to be significantly worse before the reforms of the mid-2000s, the fact that AS Monaco’s anomalous tax position has been a source of rancor in French football since the end of WWII and the fact that it always serves those who pay taxes to make it appear that they are more burdensome than they are in fact.

Though, as the poster repeats multiple times, it all does come back to budgets, as I noted in my last post. And now that I have my copy of the Deloitte report to hand, I can note that Bayern’s revenue for 2006/07 was 223.3 million euro, compared to OL’s 140.6 million.

One point on the Bayern comparison, though. Bayern’s revenues are around 50% more than OL’s. In particular, their television, sponsorship/merchandising and ticket revenues are significantly higher.

For a 100,000 euro salary (monthly) pre-tax, in France the player recieves 55,700 euros and the club has to pay 121,600 euros. In England, the player would recieve 59,650 euros and the club would pay 112,700 euros. Yes, it is less, but the difference isn’t massive. And in Italy the figures speak for themselves : 48,800 for the player when the club coughs up 128,900 euros. Yet they still manage to have a few decent teams with good squads.

Also, something that has been introduced since is that sports clubs can pay their players 30% without tax as “image” fees. Yes, 30% off-tax. So instead of paying 100,000 euros, the club is better off paying only 70,000 euros with tax and giving the player 30,000 in “image” fees… With the obvious advantage that it’s less expensive for the club and the player recieves a -lot- more money. Recently, there has been discussion of a 50% fiscal tax “shield” that would also greatly help people who recieve large salaries (footballers being one of such categories).

Gassama traveled to Fiorentina (http://www.football365.fr/la-une/article_278207_Lyon-Le-groupe-face-a-la-Fiorentina.shtml), so I don’t think you can count him as “injured”.

Givet and/or Muller would be backups. If Givet joined Lyon, I wouldn’t expect him to play much. Maybe 5-6 league games and a few cup games, but not a central part of the campaign. He’s already doing that at Marseille, so where would he be “downgrading” if he joined Lyon? (Muller would even have been better, since he would have been a more experienced back-up whilst Gassama and Kolocejiak are still young, and he was already at the club)…

Lyon don’t need to buy brilliant backups from the EPL/Serie A/Liga, but just have more than three wing-backs (both sides). Belhadj would have been one, and I don’t see any reason why he was almost never played when he joined Lyon (Grosso is the #1 choice, but against sides from the bottom half of the table and before CL games, he might be in for a rest now and then, yet Belhadj only played 582 minutes, most of which he was not left back and/or came on as a substitute). Perrin’s choices are what pushed him out. And when he went on loan to Lens, he didn’t do too badly. So why doesn’t he want to stay? If it’s playing time, then Lyon need to choose : rotate with Grosso (before CL games, bottom-half teams, cup games), or sell him and bring in someone who -is- ready to wait on the sidelines for his time to come (just like Givet is ready to wait for Marseille to have seven injuries in central defence before he’ll get a game). Lyon’s choice to loan Belhadj left them with Grosso and Kolocejiak in that position… a very light amount of cover for a team that’s expected to challenge for 4 trophies this season.

It would be nice for Lyon to have CL-level backups (like Chelsea, who seemingly have a second XI good enough to play in the Champions’ League), but that’s a dream for most clubs. So you have your CL-level players, and behind them a League-level player (just like O’Shea, Fletcher and Park, or Bodmer, Kallstrom or Piquionne), and then young hopes or old players on the out (Pjanic, Tafer or Gassama). The League-level players will want more playing time, the CL-level players will want to be sure they are first choice, and the young players will want to prove themselves. But making the club tick (and choosing who plays when and how much) is the job of the club’s staff (mainly the manager). Some managers (i.e. obvious suspects, Mourinho, Capello et al.) are very good at creating an atmosphere within the club that makes the players feel valued, even when they play only a few minutes every year. Lyon might not have enough “appeal” to bring Mourinho or one of the well-known managers that are good at this to their side, but there are lots of less well known managers that are also good at this, even if they aren’t as good as Mourinho. If you’re making a CL-level player sit on the bench, something’s wrong. But when you’ve got nobody between your CL-level and your upcoming youngster, it’s equally problematic. Reveillere and Clerc’s injuries lead to a simple question : the youngster or an out-of-position league/CL-level player. The answer was that the out of position Mensah was better than Gassama. And it’ll likely stay that way.

If Lyon can’t be compared to any club in the Serie A/Liga/EPL because of the “attraction” of said league, who can Lyon be compared to? Bayern Munich? I believe Sagnol, Oddo, Lahm and Lell are there to deputise the flanks, with a few youngsters from Munich II or the youth team to fill in if there’s an injury.

Lyon is having bad luck and injuries in understaffed positions, but I wouldn’t call it an injury crisis, and certainly not the “worst ever seen”, as ghislain claimed. Lyon are doing well and showing why most people believe they’ll retain their title, by winning despite injuries to key players (proof that they don’t rely too much on their starting 11 to win each game, but that they have a few other decent players too).

And sorry Shazback, you are mistaken about our last game. Gassama WAS injured, that’s why Mensah played instead of him. So we actually had our 3 RB injured.
And on the left, Grosso has been injured, that’s why we had to play Kolo, which is just 17 yo, and never played before with th professionnals.
So (to me) that really sounds like an injury crisis.

We cannot just say that 2 or 3 other teams in the world have at least similar injuries to explain it’s not a crisis. In my mind, that’s too easy.