Which could be multi-factorial, in large part due to having our first, second and third-choice centre halves (the third being our first-choice left back) injured, as well as our second-choice and now third-choice left back along with our possible first choice right back.
Are you really suggesting we should've extended de Gea's contract? Over a four-year period, the cost of retaining a 33-year old de Gea (even on half his wages) would've been £40m. Do you think that would've been a sound financial option?