Offsider
Well-Known Member
There are 2 sides to an argument here - do you spend more on NPL/youth to improve young local players OR bring in Bolt to ramp up attention and sponsorship for the Australian league?
Like all things one extreme or the other is rarely the right balance point. Somewhere in between lies the answer.
In this case - for myself - Bolt makes sense.
He brings exposure to the club and the A-league - which feasibly should also bring in more money and, ideally, attract higher caliber VISA players who will better recognise and consider the A-League.
Further, this is one of those rare people that might actually be able to switch code and make it to a certain professional level. The A-League may be his cap, or he needs a lower league, or maybe he could even excel (no-one really believes he'll be too good for the A-League obviously).
The belief that at 32 a world class athlete can't learn to play another sport at a competitive level - whilst on balance is probably true for most - is not a locked down fact. Hence the indefinite trial. It is possible if improbable.
The point is - we just don't need more inexperienced youth or NPL players in the current 2018/19 CCM first team. If the choice is that or giving Bolt a go with all of the myriad and unique other benefits...why even consider the former?
Actually ............ what do the pollies say ??? .......... I’ll take your questions under advisement.
Finding it hard to argue with your points ............ but don’t want to agree either .......... I agree with there are two sides to an ?? the arguments here. Both have their good points. It the npl players step up or bolt does, it’ll be an improvement on last season.
Watching the clips of bolt training is a worry. He doesn’t seem to use his perypheral vision ......... very narrow sighted it seems ????