My positive spin is we got Dike last season because our main target - Obbi Oularé - turned us down. We've now got Oularé so we don't need Dike Also, as my Dad said after watching the Oularé YouTube highlights "he's just like Dike but with a footballing brain" Seriously, let's see what Oularé brings when he plays. The whole Dike thing was great while it lasted but it was badly managed by Murphy and his conflicting communications. It's now in the past, lets focus on the current and future.
Not disrespecting your opinion. Just suggesting you've thrown it out there at a time when you knew the fish were biting, because my opinion is that's it's a really bad take.You do love to throw the odd controversial grenade out there to disturb the hornets nest. This discourse is full of opinions so not sure why you'd say you're not allowed one. It's just you backing yours and me disagreeing with it.
Okay, I'll have to be the Leyla Fernández to your Emma Raducanu then (or vice versa!) I do think there's room for more objective views about the club and it's ambition though. We can sometimes be a critical friend!
Absolutely. I think using NOT signing Dike to kick off that discussion is a wayward way of doing it (in my opinion). Especially when we've not sold a single first team player this Summer and brought in 6+(?) signings ourselves.
Yeah but he was either blind or lying to us as it was obvious from pre covid that Mowatt wouldn't sign a new contract through choice.
Thats the spirit, dike was too inexperienced anyway only 20 when we loaned him and only ever played in a micky mouse league prior to us.
No confusion here. I have referred to one player, on whom we had an option negotiated by our (then) CEO. I have not referred to "spending loads of money". I don't doubt he would have been expensive, but Murphy stated that the price was within our compass. He scored goals. This season we have 5 from 6 games. Businesses don't tend to grow without some degree of investment. In my view we might have been better signing several fewer players and pushing the boat out a little for Dike. But it's only my opinion!
I don't think we'll ever fully know the details of 'the deal' we had in place. For all we know, we were ready to pay what the agreed fee was, and Dike turned us down. We've then gone on to sign 3 strikers. They might not be like for like, but our style of play has changed. Cole is an odd one, but Oulare (who seems more in the mould of Dike) and Iseka have barely kicked a ball yet. They're probably more cost effective options than Dike, as Conway eluded to them taking pay cuts to come here. But I just struggle to fathom how that equals a lack of ambition by the club? If they go on to score 30+ goals between them this season, would you still say it shows a lack of ambition? Its a term that gets thrown around all the time, usually when we haven't spent a vast amount of cash on a player we simply can't afford.