Let’s be honest: price tags change the narrative. If Moore had arrived for a hefty, club-record fee we'd all be looking for instant returns. Because he’s on loan at Ibrox — and still only 18 — people give him more time. That doesn’t mean the appraisal is lazy. It’s simply how football works. Age and cost shape expectations.


Why fees skew opinion

To be fair, you can see why fans are less forgiving of someone with a big transfer fee. When a player is billed as the answer and the club splashes significant cash, patience wears thin quickly. Skov arrived with a reputation and international experience, so the bar is higher. Moore has arrived on loan, so the immediate pressure is lower. It’s not that one is magically better than the other in principle — perception plays a huge part.


Age, minutes and development

Young players live or die by minutes and context. An 18-year-old coming off the bench is meant to learn, make mistakes and grow. Moore’s minutes have shown progress and promise, which is why he’s been pushed ahead of more established names. That said, a loan is also a statement: it suggests the sending club wants him to develop away from the first-team spotlight. That’s common practice and not an indictment.


Where that leaves Chermiti and the rest

All of which brings up Chermiti. If a player has been bought for a sizeable fee, supporters understandably expect quicker returns. How much leniency do you offer a 21- or 22-year-old who hasn’t had many minutes? It’s a fair question. Comparisons based on age, minutes and fees are inevitable. I’m not slagging anyone off — I’m just saying context matters when we judge progress.

Truth is, form, opportunity and how a player adapts all feed into the verdict. We’ll be harsher on those we’ve invested heavily in. That’s football. And while fans can be impatient, there’s also room for measured judgement: look at minutes, role, and where the player is in their development rather than just the sticker price.

Written by Kaisercaillaud: 25 May 2026