Indeed..... However; the difference between two players(*) only serves to re-enforce why it wasn't some big over-stepping of boundaries for Fab to have asked Conte to trust him and try to develop Spence.
(*Salah was nearly triple the price and bought for a senior role; both factors would engender way more expectation to hit the ground running.)
The sentiment here may be true IF Spence was bought INSTEAD of some uber-target that Conte wanted.... If you have evidence of this then by all means share; other-wise issues are just being conflated here to the convenience of furthering a chosen narrative.
(......For example, as far as I'm aware there was nothing of any weight floating round in the summer to suggest that Conte had a boner for Porro at that point.)
"Sure"?
It's not their first time working with each other.... I suspect they both know their respective boundary's with each other better than your assumptions may otherwise bring you to contradict.
Meh..... Not got time for the "X or Y didn't want X or Y player" suppositions game.... Especially when most importantly we're talking about the working relationship between 2 completely different individuals to those that came before them.
As per the start of my last post:
"DOF is above the manager in the recruitment pecking order... So long as the working relationship is harmonious, there will be a degree of give and take."
I get why this may un-nerve some people, but it's the nature of the role. You want a cohesive vision which transcends any individual manager, then that's the path you go down.
IMO if we'd had one (a good one at that!) over the last 5/6 years we wouldn't have so much damn dead (yet expensive and hard to shift) wood on our hands.
If you wanna go down the path of complaining that we should have bought a ready-to-go RB in the summer, then fine..... But that's it's own separate matter from the "Conte didn't want him" stuff and the "Levy was meddling again" nonsense.
Last edited:
