Do you change the point of your argument to suit your argument when someone points out flaws in your current point?. You want a proven goal scorer, argue that there is no proof the Stewart is a proven goal scorer. When we state that Charlie Wyke wasn’t, your argument changes to be about promotion?Aye that promotion season shows we got it right -![]()
Make your mind up which point you want to make. Despite having a 31 goal striker, we didn’t get promoted. You said we needed to sign a proven striker to get promoted. Obviously this can’t be the case