Quote Originally Posted by Ericsladkilnhurst View Post
On past & current dealings, transfers, contracts, losing players for pea-nuts or nothing,
giving out long contracts to players past their best.
That doe's not show knowledge or wisdom.
Well reading this board over the years, the position seems to be:

1. If we sign a player who doesn't perform as anticipated then he should have been signed on a short contract (assuming that he would have been willing to accept that).
2. If we sign a player who does well, he should have been signed on a long contract with no automatic release clause and with a huge sell on clause (assuming that he would have been willing to accept that).
3. If we sell a successful player when the time remaining on his contract allows us to secure a fee we lack ambition.
4. If a good player leaves for nothing because his contract expires, we should have sold him when we could have secured a fee.
5. If we sell a player for a sum that the market deems appropriate we should have sold him for the monopoly money figure deemed appropriate on here.

Does that sum it up? So 'football knowledge' is a euphemism for possessing a crystal ball and an ability to meet unrealistic expectations?