Football’s Injury Dilemma: Why Short-Term Cover Rarely Makes Sense
Short-term absences don’t justify long-term contracts - but the media still wants to sell it to you
On Wednesday news broke that Arsenal forward Kai Havertz is set for an extended spell on the sidelines with a knee injury. Since it’s August 20th and there’s just over 10 days before the transfer window shut, Arsenal were immediately linked to scouring the market looking to sign someone to cover for Havertz’s injury.
Arsenal are probably not going to sign anyone. They are decently stocked in the forward positions and on Tuesday announced a new deal for Leandro Troussard. That deal was pretty confusing for Arsenal fans when it was first announced, but in hindsight it seems obvious what was going on.
Nevertheless is one of my least favorite quirks of the transfer market. When a player gets sidelined with an eight to 12 week injury in October the reaction is, oh that’s bad. How is his team going to cope with the injury? Someone is going to have to step up, maybe some players have to shift around, maybe someone from the academy comes in? It’ll be tough but the club will figure it out over the next two to three months.
However when the same injury occurs in late August (or late January) the reaction changes to "surely the club will look to sign someone to replace the injured player! They have to!’”
I cannot emphasize enough how dumb this line of thinking is.
Two to three months on the sidelines is a long time - but how long it is depends on what part of the season you’re in. At this stage of the season where there’s only one game a week, early group stage matches in the Champions League, and lot of international breaks, you’re not actually missing too many games. Missing a month in December is a different story.
Even if all things were equal. Missing two to three months of the 10 month Premier League campaign is between a fifth and a third of the season. So why in the world would you spend money to sign a new player and give him a four or five year contract when you only need him for a third of the season?
At this time, the severity of Havertz’s injury is still unknown. IF we’re talking something severe like an ACL injury that would see Havertz miss the entire season along with Arsenal not being sure how good he’ll be when he returns that is a scenario where perhaps there is value in seeking a long term replacement for Havertz before word gets out. That’s just one scenario though and in most other scenarios Arsenal shouldn’t be doing anything.
Most transfers fail. And most transfers fail because clubs get desperate to make a signing and therefore sign a player who’s available rather than someone who really fits their team. If a club have mapped out what their summer plans are and then late in the market decide to change their plans as a reaction to an injury, they’re far more likely to be signing someone that doesn’t necessarily fit what they’re doing.
Arsenal had a plan to bolster their attack this summer. They splashed roughly £60m on Viktor Gyokeres from Sporting and another £50m on Noni Madueke. Gyokeres has gone straight into the starting XI while it’s still unclear how Madueke will primarily be used, but we know he’s going to be used.
These moves have already relegated Havertz to being a rotational piece. If Arsenal are looking to sign someone to cover Havertz injury it would have to be a player they feel could help them right now - otherwise they’d be fine giving his minutes to Ethan Nwaneri or another academy player. What player that can help them now is signing for Arsenal when you’d be behind Gyokeres and Madueke in the pecking order, and possibly behind Havertz himself in a few months! From the club’s perspective, why in the world would they invest significant money for a player that far down the depth chart?
If Havertz is going to miss most of this season this is a big loss for Arsenal. There are still doubts whether Viktor Gyokeres is going to take to the Premier League and if he doesn’t get off to a good start having a player like Havertz who has familiarity with the rest of the players would be a nice option to have. Take that away and if Gyokeres doesn’t fire this season Arsenal could be in trouble.
The situation speaks to football’s challenge of getting short term injury cover as a whole. In American sport it’s easy. You can trade some draft picks or prospects for a veteran with an expiring contract to give you that cover while also not committing anything long term. The free agent pool is usually deep enough that if you have a major loss there’s someone who you can sign on a one year deal.1
Football is far more complicated. No one is spending £20m to sign a player and give him a one or two year contract. Signing a player who wasn’t in your plans simply to cover for an injury likely means that player will be deadweight on your squad by the end of the year.
In an ideal world you can get a player on loan so at least you’re not on the hook for multiple years, but who exactly are you getting? You’re looking for someone who can help you right now, clubs aren’t going to just loan a player that valuable to you. Sure, maybe you make a cheeky loan offer to, say, Manchester United, for someone with high upside like Rasmus Hojlund but why would United accept that? Why would Hojlund, who is trying to get his career back on track, go to a club where he’s not going to be first choice?
Sometimes the opportunity does come along and there’s an out of favor player you can take a low risk bet on with a loan. Three of Manchester United’s best signings2 over the last five years have been the loan deals for Odion Ighalo, Wout Weghorst, and Marcel Sabitzer.
All three signings came in January and all three were to provide cover for injuries. In each situation the right players who would be worth signing long term weren’t available. So rather than spend money on the wrong players, United went for temporary help.
The players themselves didn’t light the world on fire but they weren’t supposed to. They were supposed to eat minutes. Ighalo was good enough to play the Europa League games to allow Martial to be fresh for the Premier League. Weghorst provided a body in the middle of the pitch to allow Marcus Rashford space to continue to run behind defenses and score goals. Sabitzer did a job in midfield. They each did the jobs that were asked of them and then went back to their original clubs.
Those opportunities though are rare - as is finding a good free agent to give a one year contract too3. If you pick up a major injury you’re much better off trying to find solutions internally rather than externally. That’s just the way the game is set up. The risk of trying to find an external solution is far greater than the reward.
Hey Arsenal, Jamie Vardy is available!
And also their most ridiculed
Jamie Vardy, still there!
New to this stack. Found this piece fascinating.