Abraxas
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2021
- Messages
- 6,313
So if incompetence was keeping a young player here and seeing him improve his performances to an acceptable standard (I'm not going to go overboard based on a season) - then what would the competence rating of selling him in his early 20s and seeing him show the same improvement at another club have been? Then having a sell on clause for whatever exorbitant figure as compensation for our bad decision which would then require a substantial fee to obtain the services of a fella we sold when his value was low?He played over 30 games for the first team despite being injured the first 3 months of the season he signed. But sure, he wasnt signed for the first team.
Stop rewriting history just because it doesn’t suit your narrative.
Other clubs would have slapped a sell on clause fee and moved him on after 3 years. We got lucky our incompetence finally paid off on him.
You've found a very weird way to spin things - there isn't a way to win through the lens in which you are viewing it.
The fact is...yes the club has been generally incompetent, but it doesn't mean every single decision or event features incompetence. That's now how things work - we get more wrong than we get right, or at least the biggest things we get wrong which overshadows everything else, we don't have to micromanage every event and see incompetence in it all.