FanchesterCity
Well-Known Member
You know what this arguing is like? it's like Ramsey's kitchen nightmares where Ramsey is brought in to improve a restaurant.
He comes in and identifies problem areas, and all of a sudden, the owner keeps arguing that nothing is wrong - in which case, nothing can be improved.
The moment he says the menus isn't right, or the soup tastes crap, the owner gets upset.
It's not moaning to say Fernando might be a weakness and could KdB or Delph give us something he can't. The positive is suggesting ways KdB or Delph might change things, but if you only want to see the negative, you'll focus on the Fernando criticism.
If we bring in KdB - someone else in the team will be moved out. There's no two ways about it. It's two sides of the same coin. KdB is the improvement, so who is the weakness we're fixing?
It really isn't all negative.
He comes in and identifies problem areas, and all of a sudden, the owner keeps arguing that nothing is wrong - in which case, nothing can be improved.
The moment he says the menus isn't right, or the soup tastes crap, the owner gets upset.
It's not moaning to say Fernando might be a weakness and could KdB or Delph give us something he can't. The positive is suggesting ways KdB or Delph might change things, but if you only want to see the negative, you'll focus on the Fernando criticism.
If we bring in KdB - someone else in the team will be moved out. There's no two ways about it. It's two sides of the same coin. KdB is the improvement, so who is the weakness we're fixing?
It really isn't all negative.