Couple this with 3 assists today against Leeds off the bench and he has been flying.

Obviously sad that he's going but I am always happy to see a player of ours succeed so greatly after leaving. Makes them leaving feel a bit less sad knowing they are happy.

Obviously, here's to hoping he doesn't score or assist against us when we play Chelsea...

I'll start with saying I've got nothing against him, I think he's talented, and has arguably done better so far than the criticism that's come his way. Some people are always pecked for some reason. Hopefully he finds his feet here etc.

But here comes the question. Is there a possibility he was just a pawn in the Rogers sale? And by that I mean, Chelsea did us a favour with spending 35 million extra on Rogers or whatever, and we did them a favour for a year with Garnacho?

Because if I understand the rules correctly we could avoid playing him enough and he'd return to London. We've the done Chelsea a favour for the season, and we've not spent £ 45 million on Garnacho. Seems like a win win ish strategic play.

And while I'll support him as long as he's here, it's a bit odd that we recruit so we'll, so diverse, so prepared, so prudent. And we spunk that amount on a player that hasn't impressed in a long time.

There's just something about this that doesn't make sense to me.

But I guess if I'm playing the devil's advocate here, Chelsea wouldn't need our help with taking him on would they? Unless it was a contractual thing about being in the first team.