Tel was a huge disappointment last year performance wise. We were all buzzing when we signed him and the majority thought he'd compete with solanke as a 9 and would start over Son and Richarlison on the left. He was a complete let down. He didn't even come on in the Europa League final. An injured and half fit Richarlison and Son were both selected ahead of him.The purchase of Tel is a real conundrum and completely ignores the benefits of the 'try before you buy' option which leads me to conclude that despite reports to the contrary his loan deal did indeed contain an obligation to buy.
Nothing else makes sense and without wishing to upset the more qualified scouts within the forum I really cannot see what they are seeing other than a young athlete that runs around a bit.
£40m for a young prospect is in the higher bracket for a punt and it should have manifested into some glimpses of star ability by now and it simpy hasn't.
Which makes you wonder why we were so desperate to make him perm? Ange had gone and we had not even hired Frank at the time. So this was not a managerial decision. This was Lange and Levy going rogue, not doing any due diligence and making another costly mistake. I hope the young lad proves me wrong but I've seen nothing to suggest that he's any better than Odobert or Soloman yet. Nevermind being good enough to start or replace Son.
