Bacuna

[2b2bdoo]

Damour hardly played for us in the first part of that season, so we needed another central midfielder.

If Demour wasn't needed the first half of the season why replace him?

[LeningradCowboy]

If Demour wasn't needed the first half of the season why replace him?

Because we only had three other players in that position (Arter, Gunnarsson, and Ralls).

[2b2bdoo]

Because we only had three other players in that position (Arter, Gunnarsson, and Ralls).

Yeah but the point was why not just keep Demour if he's hardly being used then clearly he wasn't needed much. Just seemed an expensive transfer for the sake of it.

[Gnojek]

Yeah but the point was why not just keep Demour if he's hardly being used then clearly he wasn't needed much. Just seemed an expensive transfer for the sake of it.

The signings of Damour and Warnock paint an accurate picture of Warnock's transfer dealings.

I really liked Damour and thought he was an excellent addition to the squad. Neat and tidy with a good pass, who also racked up a lot of yards. The fact he was unknown, came from an unheralded second-tier French team and arrived on a free transfer made it all the better. I remember Warnock saying the recommendation came from the same source that had suggested he sign Drogba in his younger years. Warnock was (and no doubt still is) great at things like this.

However, Bacuna is the polar opposite. In horse-racing terms, he's "exposed". You know what you're going to get and he's unlikely to make a real splash. Add in the fee and the contract length and it's not good business. Fair enough, he's still in-and-around the first XI every week and I don't dislike him, just that he's a bit too much "6/10" for me.