But those aren't answers to my questions, are they? And, by your logic, we should go for players and, if we can't get them, go for other players who, by definition, must be second choice and therefore inferior. How is that decisive? Your proposal simply advocates the Lowe approach you roundly criticised in one of your earlier posts on this thread: lots of substandard players rather than a few quality players.
Pipe on standby; will await proper answers to my original questions.