Oh I got you point alright Diego...
I'm just not as sure, as you are, that everyone, who posted their 'disappointment' at missing out [after the Stoke 'news' and before your post] are actually...
"those who keep saying we should only go for proven players and use the "would City want that player?" stick to beat every rumour to death and cry of our "lack of ambition" was if every rumour as true..."
I assume you did check before your post and had someone, specifically, in mind. In which case - you (maybe) should have named "those".
If not - then your generalised swipe is more of a literary sneer rather than an actual point.
The point of my original post? To prove the committee, (as some are inferring) are indeed "stupid fuckers".
I offer you an example.
About the Stoke-bound (if rumours are to be believed) Konoplyanka:
If we let this guy go to Stoke on a free and sign the winger from Real Madrids B team instead it will further prove this clubs transfer policy is broken.
Do we have a Manc in the committee or something?
About the Russian winger Cherishev from Real Madrid (on loan at Villarreal):
Any more than £10 million for this guy is an absolute joke.
Who the f**k is he like?
See? On the one hand, we should be signing proven players because if I don't know a player, he's necessarily rubbish; on the other, if we let a player apparently no one wants go to Stoke, then we must have a manc at the committee or something.
That's only one example but again that's beyond the point. It wasn't my idea to name anyone.
My point is that people sometimes try to find a "golden rule" for what we were supposed to be doing in the transfer market when reality is a different matter. People say: only sign proven players. But even them are capable of seeing that sometimes unproven players can actually add a lot to our team. Others say: we should not sign players from mid-table clubs (we're aiming at mediocrity blablabla), but again, even those people once in a while will realize that mid-table clubs also have talented players that are capable of making the step up to a bigger club.
So as usual I judge each transfer on its merits, and if I know little about the player, as is the case here, I just admit it is so instead of just looking for stuff to complain about with no consistency whatsoever.
Anyway, I think you totally get my point. And I understand yours as well. I'm not happy with the results of the transfer committee either - I'm just not a big fan of the naming and shaming that has occurred in a different thread (and I said so in there) as we don't know the details of how it works. But one thing is clear: it is definitely not delivering what it was supposed to so far.
Logged
