But that's not true. He HAS been given a chance to prove himself and it took him a long time to do so. He's played 66 games for us despite being underwhelming in most of them. How many players have we signed who are turfed out without even playing 10 games? If he continues this upward trajectory then many of us will have been proved wrong but we can't be expected to give every new signing who doesn't play well this much time.
Good luck Pedro Porro.
Just admit, like many on here, you were too harsh, too quick.
I was critical of his performances, and I think fairly so. If you want to see fast judgements go on the Spence thread after he's played ONE game for Rennes.
What?! Henry scored 17 goals in the prem in his first season and 26 in all competitions.
Alright Statto.
I mean, you completely pulled that Henry was a disappointing signing out of nowhere.
There's a difference between calling out the poor displays, and the dogs abuse he's been getting on here and everywhere else. It is very hypocritical to say "he's the worst full back to ever play for us, can't wait for him to fuck off" and then say a few weeks later they are glad we kept him over Doc for instance. VERY hypocritical.
This is a myth. Clubs with excellent scouting systems can continuously sign good players for under ten million with a decent success rate. Clubs that don't will piss away tens of millions time after time.
That's tickled me big time.
Think thats true. Surely its harder to find a ready starter for a Champions League team but its definitley possible. Surely prices were different a few years back but Dele, Eriksen, Dier or Toby were great business even if they would have cost treble money.
Such as some posters childishly referring to him by his number, instead of his name.
