It's not. 4 is the minimum.
We always had at least 4 attackers, dunno why is it such a problem now.
Milan have Inzaghi, Gilardino, Pato, Ronaldo + Paloschi
Inter have Suazo, Crespo, Zlatan, Cruz, Ballotelli.
The ONLY bad thing about Amauri is that he'll take one big part of our transfer money. Or that's only smthg that we assume ?
None of us has an idea how much money we have and that's why we don't really have arguments to be for or against this transfer.
We'll see after the transfer window ends.
But if we do have enough money to cover all the needed areas, then it's really hard to understand not to like Amauri in Juve.
Yeah I know that 4 is the minimum but all this are top strikers who will want to play regularly.... Not a single player can maintain a good form without playing regularly..
Instead of getting Amauri we should go for another striker, younger and more perespective.... maybe we should get back Paolucci. He is having a future. Milan have Inzaghi (old), Gilardino ( inconsistent ), Pato (young), Ronaldo ( all the time injured ), Paloschi (young)
The situation in Inter is different. Chrespo and Cruz (old), Zlatan (bitch but fairly a good player), Ballotelli ( young starlet) , Suazo (road runner and a good player)
the thing is that Milan and Inter are having different variants in attack. Some of their players are having aerial abilities, the others are having very good speed and dribbling. This is giving them a lot of options to choose from.
If we have those 4 strikers - Trezequet, Iaquinta, Amauri and Del Piero we will have to play aerial football all the time. We all know that the different teams are having different players and weaknesses. We will strugle also if we play in Europe. Amauri is a good player but we must look for other players that will fill the empty places.
All I am saying is that one fast player with good dribble and precise shoot can change more things than the signing of Amauri