He turned 24 last month and already moving to his 4th permanent club and had four different loan clubs. Last season he played 40 odd games for Donny, they offered him a three year contract and he was linked to Rangers. Yet we still messed about offering him a short term contract when it was pretty obvious he had something to offer us and should have been given a two year contract from the start. He's turning into abit of a journeyman already that doesn't want to put down his roots long term somewhere and become a legend or highly thought of at a club. We saw how he was in the summer with Donny but risked it anyway. Now he's another like Pearson that we've got match sharp for someone else and see nothing from it.
If we'd given a 3 yr deal and he'd turned out $hit, you would have hammered the club for it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I said two years. If it was some unknown then a short term contract like Wabara got would sometimes make sense. But with him being match fit, playing so much last season, being rated enough to be offered a three year contract by Donny and be linked to a side as big (in Scotland) as Rangers he clearly had enough about him to be offered a longer deal by us. We've now lost two of the guys who have played the most for us this season for absolutely nothing because on both deals we messed up.
It isn't that we didn't offer longer. He didn't want to play for us for longer. He used us as a shop window so he can move to a bigger club in a higher league
He only played well in the first couple & last few weeks of his contract with us. No great loss. Hopefully James Bree can stake a claim now.
If he was the best available at the time then it made sense to offer him the six month contract. I guarantee if we'd have brought someone in on a longer contract who wasn't as good as Wabara, we'd now be sat here with the same people saying, "Why didn't we try for Wabara on a short term contract? He was available but we turned him down - this guy is crap!"