Correct me if I am wrong but, as things stand, we are already threadbare at the back. There are three players - Faye, Tomkins and Reid - covering two centre back positions and, without Spence, just four players covering the two full back positions, and of those, neither Faubert nor O'Brien are specialists.
Given he can play at centre back or right back, Spence appears to offer the ideal "utility cover" we need and, based on his performances at Bristol City last season and the fact they want him back, is clearly capable of doing a job in the Championship.
Unless we have another couple of players coming in, this is a very odd decision indeed in my book as it leaves us too exposed at the back with a danger that we are going to be left with our arses hanging out.
6 comments:
it would be odd if it was't for a hefty loan fee, too good to turn down i guess, if they can't shift ilunga and faubert it makes sense they get as much money as they can, also he will gain a load of first team experience. seems like a last minute thing that wasnt planned
I agree, this is ridiculous! Defence is where we lack depth as it is.I'd personally would have had him in the starting 11 at right back.And now Barrera may be off on loan too according to sources on KUMB. No depth in this squad at all!!
Even without the shortage of cover at the back this is a totally bizarre decision. This could be Spence's big breakthrough year and He could certainly do a job in the fizzy. If we achieve promotion this season then surely it would be better that Spence had a year to gel with the squad around him first.
Another money decision that doesn't make any sense!
Hard to believe it is money motivated. perhaps there is a 24 hour recall clause and they see this as a way of polishing the lad whilst more experienced players are fit and available?
there is a recall clause that can be activated after the 1st of january
Post a Comment