Daley Blind...

Originally Posted by believe

If he was a success surely he’d still be here?

So Stam was a failure as well?

Originally Posted by Gypsum Fantastic

So Stam was a failure as well?

Not sure what the comparison is. Ferguson had reasons (which he since said he regretted) so it’s a completely a anomaly.

Originally Posted by the heathen

Neither of those options seem to cover it.

There should be an option for 'wasn't a complete failure but was slow and therefore relatively shit'.

there's no need for a 3rd option. Lok said he, like Donny, was a failure at United. He wasn't though.

He came, settled quickly, played decent without being anything special (who was expecting amazing for 13m?, but he had mostly better games than bad ones, way more), covered a few positions, was sold after 2 seasons for more (or at least the same) as we paid for him.

Not sure how that translates as a failure because he was slow, or because he was eventually sold* or because Lok found some vids of him making a bad pass.**

* didn't mourinho come in. loads of players are sold when new managers come in, doesn't mean they were failures.
**spoiler, even the best players in the world have made bad passes.

Seems like a return to Ajax was perfect for him. From his wiki:

On 16 December 2018, Blind scored his first senior hat-trick, in an 8–0 league win over De Graafschap at home, whilst playing as a centre-back

Let's hope that Lok is in a timezone where it's reasonable to be incoherently drunk at this hour

Originally Posted by believe

Not sure what the comparison is. Ferguson had reasons (which he since said he regretted) so it’s a completely a anomaly.

your point was he'd been sold, ergo he must, by definition have been a failure. my example was of someone that was sold and wasn't a failure. the fact there were 'reasons' only illustrates the point.

Originally Posted by Medlock

Let's hope that Lok is in a timezone where it's reasonable to be incoherently drunk at this hour

He was decent.

I’m not sure you can consider many players a success post Ferguson considering we haven’t had much success.

Originally Posted by Gypsum Fantastic

your point was he'd been sold, ergo he must, by definition have been a failure. my example was of someone that was sold and wasn't a failure. the fact there were 'reasons' only illustrates the point.

Bit we know the reasons Stan was sold just like we know the reasons Blind was sold. He was sold because he was a bit shit and the manager didn’t want him. If he’d have been a success he’d have been an integral part of the team and would be kept.

Originally Posted by Lok

Classic Buunks, could write all of his football opinions across the great wall of China and still they'd all be wrong.

Good lad apparently though....

Very few things as aesthetically pleasing in the modern game as a defender who is great on the ball, pinging accurate, long-range passes and piercing through balls forward with his left peg, and Blind was great at it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuO4p01KUrw

Originally Posted by ryanMUFC

He was decent.

I’m not sure you can consider many players a success post Ferguson considering we haven’t had much success.

The team as a whole being unsuccessful doesn’t mean players cannot be seen as successful signings. He was also a key part of Mourinho’s treble winning team - which is one of our more successful seasons since Sir Alex left.

Our best left back since Evra imo.

This is how good he was (also from wiki)

He began the 2016–17 Premier League season as first choice center-back alongside Chris Smalling, however, lost his place in the team following a return to form of Phil Jones and Marcos Rojo.

Originally Posted by NedKelly

The team as a whole being unsuccessful doesn’t mean players cannot be seen as successful signings. He was also a key part of Mourinho’s treble winning team - which is one of our more successful seasons since Sir Alex left.

He’s probably not one of the names people would mention as a successful signing on that basis.

Originally Posted by believe

this is how good he was (also from wiki)

23 - 0

Originally Posted by ryanMUFC

He’s probably not one of the names people would mention as a successful signing on that basis.

24 people have already said he was a successful signing

Originally Posted by NedKelly

24 people have already said he was a successful signing

Must be true then

Originally Posted by NedKelly

24 people have already said he was a successful signing

I mean, I voted to say he wasn't a failure, not that he was a success. There is a difference...

Originally Posted by ryanMUFC

Must be true then

I’m not saying it’s true - you’re the one that said people wouldn’t call him a success. I’m pointing out that people already have.

Originally Posted by Whip Hubley

I mean, I voted to say he wasn't a failure, not that he was a success. There is a difference...

Yeah that’s fair. I think speaking relatively, and taking into consideration the amount of dross we’ve signed over the past decade, he’s certainly one of our more successful signings.

Originally Posted by NedKelly

I’m not saying it’s true - you’re the one that said people wouldn’t call him a success. I’m pointing out that people already have.

Oh. Sounds like you’re being pedantic. Enjoy your day.