I assume you refer to 36.Well, there is one better way. By playing.
I'm in favour of this short-term signing as a stop-gap until the arrival of a long-term world-class signing. However, that doesn't stop me regretting that it is necessary to make these signings to cover a problem position.
We let a talented academy product go, and he went on to international honours and currently captains a Premiership rival. Since his departure, we've made a series of short-term signings at 12, such as Bowden (a one-season regular), Bai (a 35-year old definition of short-term) and now de Villiers (signed for less than a season).
I only hope that de Villiers is the last of these short-term stop-gaps and that the (rumoured) incoming marquee player is a genuine long-term option who won't have his head turned by the wages on offer abroad. Tigers really need to start building some consistency because the player turnover for the last few seasons has been excessive and probably a contributing factor to the club's declining performances.
It's possible to simultaneously be optimistic and excited about de Villiers' arrival and a little frustrated that we need to look for a 6-month signing in this situation.
Could you tell me 4071, if Leicester had tried to match the Gloucester offer would you be happy to do so if it meant releasing all the other development players to pay him?
I don't know for sure what he earns, but is 2-300k pa a reasonable amount to pay someone to learn on the job, or should it be more reasonable to accept less as recompense for patience and loyalty, prove yourself and then get the rewards?
In a world gone mad a club could just about manage a 1st team squad of about 20 players learning on the job by your measure.
Yes he has gained international honours, how did that work out? Not worth much in bragging rights presently I'd say.
To be fair I also don't see him as the future defensive lynchpin in a side!
. Given the situation, name me any player that we could have got who would be better? 
