by Ian Royal »
07 Aug 2010 21:23
Dirk Gently Ian Royal Bertrand thought too highly of himself wanting to break into Chelsea, he had no chance, he simply hasn't showed himself to be good enough for that. So he told us to naff off on coming back. We accept his decision and find someone else.
He then gets told he's got no chance of breaking through at Chelsea this year (something anyone could have told him) and is told he's off on loan again. If we hadn't signed Williams he'd probably have come here and if we'd gone up we'd probably have bought him and given him his premier league chance.
But we filled our gap and I for one am not too interested in going back for a player for one year who's shown himself to be pretty mercenary and a little deluded about his own quality.
We simply can't afford to waste money bringing in a player for a spot where we don't have a hole, no matter how good that player is.
If you don't mind me saying so, what a complete and utter load of bollocks this post is.
Care to explain (using your STAR insider info) Dirk?
Because it seems to me to be based on some fairly clear facts.
1) Bertrand wanting to go back to Chelsea and break through there
2) McDermott saying we wouldn't be able to sign him because of these ambitions - or similar - at the end of last season / beginning of pre-season.
3) Us signing a left back
4) Bertrand then being told he's going on loan by Chelsea.
5) Our frequently mentioned lack of available funds.
Maybe I layered it on rather thick when it came to saying Bertrand had a mercenary nature and overinflated opinion of himself. The first is probably unfair, but I still don't think he's going to be better than mid-table Prem for years at best.
Maybe if Armstrong had retired things might be different with him shifted off the wage bill.