Must you take every opportunity possible to have a dig at "player A" ?!?! It's becoming tedious and predictable.
There was no one player who took us into the play offs, just as there was no one player who cost us our championship status. Out of interest, it's been well documented about how much Clarke cost us over three years, but it was his goal at Chelsea that earned a lucrative reply on TV and in front of a full house!! Just how much did that header make the club?
The reason for Bailey getting dog's abuse was because of the way he left the club - as I'm sure you well know. Clarke may have let his contract run out and then line his pockets with a move to Huddersfield, but he continued to give 100% effort right up until the final game of the season.
Bailey deserved a move to a bigger club in a higher division because of performances alone and if he had kept his mouth shut until he left us before saying "sorry to be leaving...great times at Southend, etc" then he would have been treated with the respect that Clarke received. Bailey didn't, acted terribly and got a lot of stick...thats football!
EH? Player A was Bailey.
Personally I find the digs at Bailey for his PR far more tedious and predictable than discussing the merits of what players did on the field.
I don't understand why someone who made the club lots of money gets vilified, whilst someone who cost the club lots gets deified.