It's not. Your response to the article was:
1. "I knew we wouldn't spend 50m on Lamptey"
2. "I knew Conte would get fobbed off with a cheapo"
(See my previous response to both.)
I know you do, I never indicated that you wanted him, I'm just saying Conte's interest was years ago doesn't mean he's still interested.
.....But the article you put stock in says he still is (and all the while doesn't explicitly mention Lamptey being a "must have" for Conte).
Yet despite this you use it to vindicate points #1 & #2 above.
"Cake and eat it" would be an understatement.
If his injuries are a concern at 50 million, why aren't they at 20 million?
They would be.... The risk would just be MUCH less that's all. A more viable gamble.
VDV for 8m was a worthwhile gamble.... VDV for 30m (in old money) would have been crazy for us.
Come on mate, this isn't complicated.
They still should be shouldn't they if it stops him from developing and playing games? A crocked player is a crocked player, He's a player that we'd be looking to, to improve the first team not just a squad player.
So you don't want Lamptey at all then?
Bit pointless going down this path at all then wasn't it.
