comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 8 seconds ago
From that bale money we atleast got 2 decent squad players in chadli and lamela and then got somebody who would end up being the most important player in the best spurs team for 30 years in eriksen
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I know you are having a laugh
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well at least we got eriksen who was fantastic for us. And if we played things right we would have sold him for more than we sold bale for

comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 3 minutes ago
From that bale money we atleast got 2 decent squad players in chadli and lamela and then got somebody who would end up being the most important player in the best spurs team for 30 years in eriksen
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I know you are having a laugh
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which part do you disagree with?

Well at least we got eriksen who was fantastic for us.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Yep I always wanted a player who bottled challenges, played when he wnated to and hid when we played a big team.

Thats without effectively going on strike for a year until we got rid of him of course.

If thats the type of player who you think is fantastic then thats your choice but it would not be mine for sure I actually want a player who is interested in the team not himself.

Ah I see that eriksen's last season with us is already clouding people's judgement

Which part do you disagree with
------------------------------------------------------------------

Most of it to be honest, in fact everything but them being the best for 30 years.

The most important part of the team was Harry's goals beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Chadli was an in and out squad player for a couple of years and Lamela has spent more time injured than he has been available.

If thats your idea of good investments I will make sure I never invest any of my money in the same places you do

Let me see Erik Lamala

Cost 25 mill

Approx wages for the past 7 years 20 mill

Appearances about 155 goals about 20

Games not available for approximately 200

Wow fantastic investment

Eriksen was the most important player in our team. We were a completely different side without him, couldn't create a thing. Kane wouldn't have gotten so many goals without him. Brilliant player.

Chadli had a double digit goal season for us and we ended up selling him for almost double what we paid.

Lamela injuries are obviously frustrating but that doesnt take away from what an important squad player he has been. Obviously overpaid but that does not mean it was a complete waste of money.

We're getting lost in the weeds here though, regardless of the quality of the players they atleast had some level of positive contribution. Signing nobody had an undeniable negative contribution

Wow fantastic investment
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who claimed this was the case?

Ah I see that eriksen's last season with us is already clouding people's judgement
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Not at all he was bottling challenges and hiding in big games in his first season for us

Signing nobody had an undeniable negative contribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Saving the money when we had a monumental stadium bill undoubtedly had a very positive effect on the club as a whole rather than on a few results here and there

No one has said lamela was a fantastic investment...could had not been for his injuries which we couldn't have known before signing him.

Ok let's ignore all the goals, all the assists, all the chances he created, the vital role he played.

Eriksen wasn't good at tackling so he can't have been that good

comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 1 minute ago
Signing nobody had an undeniable negative contribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Saving the money when we had a monumental stadium bill undoubtedly had a very positive effect on the club as a whole rather than on a few results here and there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A few results here and there? It cost us the chance to continue being a top side and potentially win something ffs

Must resist joining eriksen debate

All the bale money could have been flushed down the big and it still would have been better than not signing anyone in the respective situations

Ok let's ignore all the goals, all the assists, all the chances he created, the vital role he played
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

But lets also not forget what we won with that incredible player Eriksen, oh that would be nothing of course.

Lets not forget he was part of the team that got slammed by every big side we played for 4 years.

Not being good at tackling is not an offence Paul Scholes could not tackle but he was a great player the difference was that Paul Scholes was not a bottler Eriksen was.

comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 1 minute ago
Ok let's ignore all the goals, all the assists, all the chances he created, the vital role he played
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

But lets also not forget what we won with that incredible player Eriksen, oh that would be nothing of course.

Lets not forget he was part of the team that got slammed by every big side we played for 4 years.

Not being good at tackling is not an offence Paul Scholes could not tackle but he was a great player the difference was that Paul Scholes was not a bottler Eriksen was.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're expecting that to change my opinion, as if I'm unaware of the fact that we didn't win anything whilst he was here?

Trophies or no trophies Eriksen was class and to act like it wasn't a "fantastic investment" is baffling

Eriksen on song was a glorious player, always 3 steps ahead of anyone else on the pitch.

Eriksen on song was a glorious player, always 3 steps ahead of anyone else on the pitch
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Unless it came to making a tackle of course or taking a whack

comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 34 seconds ago
Eriksen on song was a glorious player, always 3 steps ahead of anyone else on the pitch
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Unless it came to making a tackle of course or taking a whack
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure either is really the key attribute for a #10 tbh

Thats a key attribute for anybody who plays in a contact sport ffs

You just said Scholes was a bad tackler and was a great player

You just said Scholes was a bad tackler and was a great player
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yep I said he COULD not tackle but I also said that he did not bottle a tackle try to keep up there is a massive difference between the two things

Why is not being able to tackle better than not tackling