I fully understand why the club took a risk with Niculae. A club of our size seldom gets an opportunity to sign a player with so many international caps and indeed goals for a Country of reasonble standing in European football when he's at an age when most players haven't yet entered their prime.
There was an obvious thought that although he hadn't done much, if anything, during the two years or so immediately before we signed him he must once have been an outstanding talent who had had no career threatening injury and who was still relatively young even for a forward. What potential if it could only be recaptured !
There was always a risk that his salary, relative to others, would have a negative impact on team spirit and a knock on effect when others came to discuss renewing their contracts but if he recaptured his old form then all would benifit from more regular win bonuses and a share of end of season prize money. In any event the financial element of the risk was being partly underwritten by the chaiman.
The sad fact,however, is that it's becoming increasingly obvious that the risk hasn't paid off. While he's shown the occasional glimpse of outstanding talent he is not consistantly good far less consistantly brilliant. From a personal viewpoint I can hardly believe that a player who achieved so much on the international ane European stage not so long ago is so lacking in pace.
There may at the outset have been problems with lack of match fitness and unfamiliarity with team-mates but that should have ceased to be an issue months ago.
All in all it seems to me the the Niculae experiment has been a failure which has had much more of a negative impact on the club than a positive one.
That doesn't mean that I think the club were wrong to take the bold step of signing him at the time it's just a shame that that bold strategy hasn't paid off.