2025/26 Merlin Röhl

The worst thing that we can do with Rohl is just chuck him in if he isn't 100% fit. We need to be patient. I have a feeling that he can be very important for us going forward. Rushing him could eventually make it worse. Id ve surprised if we see him before the middle of January, and I wouldn't be too dissapointed if that was the case, so long as it led to an extended run for him. From the little I have seen he looks positive and a willing runner, I trust that Moyes knows what he is doing.

Moyes has a history of dealing with youngsters in the right way, so I reckon he will do the same with Rohl.
 

Dymak said:
I get the impression that the exact same discussions will continue into next season and beyond.
Click to expand...

It's possible, it's also very likely that he's available for 30+ games like he has been for every other season bar last year.

Reece James had similar issues to Rohl and particularly Branthwaite. Chelsea nursed him through it and now he's looking a top player again. Hopefully we can do the same and get similar results
 

heatmeiser said:
But he was available for over 20 and 30 in the last two seasons respectively - that's the point.

Whether he played the full 90 in all those games isn't really relevant, as he clearly wasn't injured.

(And he played in over 20 games in 22/23 and played over 1000 minutes, so I'm not sure where your 0.5 games comes from)
Click to expand...

I'm not following your final paragraph here at all?

Rohl has never played more than half a seasons worth of minutes in a top league. Why do you think that may be?

Could it be that hes been injured and come off the bench in games or taken off early because he's coming back from injury and not fully fit?

Either that or do you believe he wasnt good enough for their midfield but was good enough for Germany u21s and to be signed by a premier league side?

Why would they sell him by using a loan with a £17.5mil obligation - its surely because theyre concerned about his injuries.

Others have stated the exact same thing.

Looking at his injury history and his game time its quite a logical conclusion.

This was all known before he was signed. If it was an option, fine but an obligation?

Everyone wants him to be injury free. Everyone wants him to be world class.

The issue is that hes been injured so often and £17.5mil isnt peanuts for someone who cant last half a season.

heatmeiser said:
It's possible, it's also very likely that he's available for 30+ games like he has been for every other season bar last year.

Reece James had similar issues to Rohl and particularly Branthwaite. Chelsea nursed him through it and now he's looking a top player again. Hopefully we can do the same and get similar results
Click to expand...

Reece james at 21 was a starter for Chelsea and playing over 1/2 a seasons worth of mins, unlike Rohl.

When Reece James suffered injuries hed already shown he could play a season in the premier league.

Our boy hasnt shown he can handle the pace in Germany without his body breaking down and hes now in a faster league.

carolinablue232 said:
He’s 23 this season. Even if he’d been healthy his whole career do you expect 20 year olds to all be starting every game in top leagues?
Click to expand...

Looking at the Freiburg midfield, at least half a season starting games for one of three seasons shouldnt be a shock.
 
Zatara said:
I'm not following your final paragraph here at all?

Rohl has never played more than half a seasons worth of minutes in a top league. Why do you think that may be?

Could it be that hes been injured and come off the bench in games or taken off early because he's coming back from injury and not fully fit?

Either that or do you believe he wasnt good enough for their midfield but was good enough for Germany u21s and to be signed by a premier league side?

Why would they sell him by using a loan with a £17.5mil obligation - its surely because theyre concerned about his injuries.

Others have stated the exact same thing.

Looking at his injury history and his game time its quite a logical conclusion.

This was all known before he was signed. If it was an option, fine but an obligation?

Everyone wants him to be injury free. Everyone wants him to be world class.

The issue is that hes been injured so often and £17.5mil isnt peanuts for someone who cant last half a season.



Reece james at 21 was a starter for Chelsea and playing over 1/2 a seasons worth of mins, unlike Rohl.

When Reece James suffered injuries hed already shown he could play a season in the premier league.

Our boy hasnt shown he can handle the pace in Germany without his body breaking down and hes now in a faster league.



Looking at the Freiburg midfield, at least half a season starting games for one of three seasons shouldnt be a shock.
Click to expand...

Because you're going off minutes rather than actual games he's available for.

If he's appeared in 20 or 30 games in a season - which he has in all but one since he's broken into the senior team - then he's been available and not injured.

Taking his minutes and dividing it by 90 to show he's never available is misleading and rather disingenuous.

Whether he's good enough or not is yet to be seen.

And yeah I agree with you on James, that comparison I made works best with Branthwaite. I was just showing that clubs don't necessarily write players off after a season or two of injuries.
 

heatmeiser said:
Because you're going off minutes rather than actual games he's available for.

If he's appeared in 20 or 30 games in a season - which he has in all but one since he's broken into the senior team - then he's been available and not injured.

Taking his minutes and dividing it by 90 to show he's never available is misleading and rather disingenuous.

Whether he's good enough or not is yet to be seen.

And yeah I agree with you on James, that comparison I made works best with Branthwaite. I was just showing that clubs don't necessarily write players off after a season or two of injuries.
Click to expand...

If you take minutes it shows how long hes on the pitch for which does 2 things in this case:

1: It can show that hes unable to play half a season of mins in the bundesliga.

2: It can show his manager didnt deem him good enough to play half a season worth of minutes in the bundesliga.

Or a mix of both.

What other reason do you think he wasnt able to cement a spot in Freiburgs midfield?

Also why do you think they were happy to let him go on loan with an obligation?
 
heatmeiser said:
He had his hernia op on the 10th November, so almost 5 yeah. I'd say it would on the rushed side of he was brought back in now
Click to expand...


Rule of thumb: about a month for a hernia op/recovery/training. He should be good to go over the Christmas period with 20 minutes or half an hour here and there.

Some players recover a lot quicker. Depends on the individual, I suppose.
 
Zatara said:
If you take minutes it shows how long hes on the pitch for which does 2 things in this case:

1: It can show that hes unable to play half a season of mins in the bundesliga.

2: It can show his manager didnt deem him good enough to play half a season worth of minutes in the bundesliga.

Or a mix of both.

What other reason do you think he wasnt able to cement a spot in Freiburgs midfield?

Also why do you think they were happy to let him go on loan with an obligation?
Click to expand...
The lad clearly has injury problems but on what little I've seen of him he looks talented.
I'm sure you're right that we wouldn't have got him for the reported obligation fee if he hadn't had those problems.
However whilst the signing is risky there are a number of young players ( James and Gerard are 2 that spring to mind ) who overcame persistent injuries early in their career.

If he can stay fit then , like Branthwaite he potentially adds a lot to this team
 

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top