- Thread starter
- #1,001
Country: England
Well it was £50m on a player who had flattered to deceive in his career. Would’ve been the same sentiment at any other club.A Saka backup was much needed and was consistently stated as a requirement for years . Just because there were competing priorities, doesn't mean there wasn't a need to protect the team against our biggest key man risk.
Let's be real - the backlash wasn't because we spent money on a backup RW. If we had bought Akliouche - no one would have said ****. It's because he was a Chelsea player. Short of signing Palmer, the reaction would have been the same had we bought any player from there regardless of position.
