What bollocks

Malky was slated because for two years at least he wasn't very good. But when Worthington took over and gave him a regular spot alongside Fleming he was outstanding. No inconsistency there - just saying it how it is.

So was Worthington right to sell him? Yes, if it meant bringing in a younger, quicker, better centre back for the step in class needed in the Premiership. But he didn't - he bought a defender who was worse, hence the outcry.

Roberts? Even more wrong (if that's possible). He was pretty ropey in his first season. Fitness problems, just didn't bed in and he looked a wrong 'un. But from that point on the goals srtared to fly in and he earned hero status. End of story! and the time was right for him to hang up his boots.

Both players were nowhere near up to the task when they arrived and supporters were right to question them. But they settled, grew in stature and desreved all the plaudits they got. What exactly is your problem with that?

Posted By: The Judge, Oct 3, 21:55:05