I can see the logic behind it. We still need a bit of cover if Martina is destined to fill in at centre back. Could have worked out for both clubs. Bit of a shame for the player if he doesn’t play this season, but that’s the risk you take when you leave the Saints.
I see the logic, papster, it’s just that bringing a Berty big bollocks back into the camp, who turned his back on us first chance he had, would surely impact the feeling in the squad.
This story appeared a week or so ago. A cheap cover option but he seems to have gone backwards at Arsenal and would rather stay and win his place than go and get more experience, so more fool him because he is falling back in the pecking order there and will probably end up at WBA next year.
This series of articles suggest that it’s Wenger that refused the move and not Chambers, sadoldgit.
I feel that he’s in danger of falling between two stools - not big/assured/experienced enough for a CB and not quick enough for a right back. He should go somewhere on loan where he can perfect one of those positions.
Chambers coming back makes sense for us but not for Chambers or Arsenal. He would not be guaranteed playing time here since we would clearly still want to sign a first team CB and he would be second or third in line for RB. Loaning him might make sense for Arsenal, but only to a club that would start him.
Beyond the fact he plays for Arsenal, is there any evidence he has been Berty big bollocks, or that he instigated the move? I get the impression all the young guns are still mates…
“ Calum made it clear to us that he did not see his future at Southampton. As such, it was crucial that we were able to negotiate a substantial fee that also reflects the work our staff have put into Calum’s development since he joined the club at the age of eight."