Fabio Aurelio

[Exiled_red]

Not sure about all this 'starting' and 'finishing' lark, but his appearance stats at LFC are:

2006-07: 24
2007-08: 29
2008-09: 33
2009-10: 23
2010-11: 14

That's about right but that's including sub appearences

I got the stats about start/finishes from: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/player/...urelio?cc=5739

[CJ]

on a pay as you play i would keep but anything else no way.

the other thing is do you have a first choice lb then play fab if he is fit? does that piss the other lb off?

if you want him as back up how do you make sure fab is available when the usual one is out?

[Craig_H]

Lark? It's pretty important not constantly going off injured.

I'd love it for him to play 10 games in a row. Just isn't going to happen though.

Does it really matter if they are 'in a row' though?

If he plays 20 or more games a season, and he generally does, i think he's worth keeping.

[CJ]

would he be a good coach?

[Vermilion]

Does it really matter if they are 'in a row' though?

If he plays 20 or more games a season, and he generally does, i think he's worth keeping.

He slots straight back in every time, not needing games to regain form or touch too.

[Reece]

would he be a good coach?

No, he'd keep breaking down.

Ha.

[Rich]

Agree to disagree then

He's available less than 50% of the time. So for that reason and that alone he's a liability.

Night all

[Kenneth]

That's probably true, but the fact that he's basically always touch and go in terms of availability must be a real hindrance to training and team preparation.

[Exiled_red]

Does it really matter if they are 'in a row' though?

If he plays 20 or more games a season, and he generally does, i think he's worth keeping.

It depends if your first choice is dependable, 20 games spread around is ok to give the first choice player a break every now and then. But if they are out and he is the only back up we're in trouble because it's unlikely that he'll be fit when we need him.

My point with the start/finish thing is that in so many games we need 2 left backs in the game because it's so rare that he plays 90mins.

[CJ]

No, he'd keep breaking down.

Ha.

boom tish

[Tee]

Absolutely gutted for him, it is just not his fault he is so fragile. YNWA

[Shanks]

Does it really matter if they are 'in a row' though?

If he plays 20 or more games a season, and he generally does, i think he's worth keeping.

At the moment, he's our first choice....

If we want to be were we need to be, then let's be looking at these type of players... Evra, Cole, Chiellini, Lahm.. etc..
Not saying we have to sign them but we need some reliabilty..

[Mostar]

Personally I'd say good bye to him but I'm not sure if there is a club out there what would sign him and on that basis I'd be surprised if he is not around next year.

Great player when available but he is rarely fit and that is especially problematic in the context of our team if you already have 3,4 in our squad that are injury prone.

Even though his wages may not be high and his experience may be important to younger players, he still takes a spot on our squad and we need players that we can depend and rely all season long and he clearly is not one of those players.

[Gibbo]

I'd be happy to keep him if we offered him a pay as you play contract.

[Mostar]

I'd be happy to keep him if we offered him a pay as you play contract.

Same here but he's still has a year left on his regular contract. There is no reason for him to make any changes to it.