Sterling Deal Complete: 49 million (44 + 5)
- Thread starter mark1975
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
That's assuming City isn't or hasn't been a party in Ward's (and Sterling's) orchestration of the whole episode.
I think Ward left his agency to go solo. Ox is still at the agency and has't gone with Ward as of yet.
Is Odemwingie still with him? I should hope not. Poor Peter, nearly got arrested for trespassing down at QPR that time.
Aidy Ward right now down to his last client... convincing sterling to stay on as his client..
The man is unbelievable, I'm 100% sure this "break down in trust" has formed from that slippery cunt whispering in Raheems ear.
[article=http://www.football365.com/f365-says/9906970/is-he-also-destroying-his-path-to-City]"Milner has been one of my favourites. I don't want to say players, favourite people that have been part of Manchester City's journey. I want to thank him for his service to the club, he's been a hard worker, he's been a loyal servant to this club. He's given everything to this club and it's been a joy to watch him win every single domestic trophy."
Those are the words of City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak, tellingly picking Milner - possibly the most unassuming, least egotistical footballer to have won a Premier League title - as one of his own favourites. Khaldoon is a man who speaks often of respect, responsibility and principles; Milner is a man who embodies all those words. The Englishman played fewer games than Fernando last season but you suspect that Khaldoon would never personally plead with the Brazilian to stay. He intervened with Milner and intervened with Yaya Toure, knowing that his own affection for the pair reflected that of City fans.
So when you re-visit quotes from Khaldoon talking about City's quest to sign "high-quality individuals" this summer, you wonder whether the word 'individuals' is significant. Despite a mass u-turn from Liverpool fans and media who now espouse the inexplicable notion that Sterling is both a) overrated and b) worth £50m, Sterling's potential as a footballer runs parallel to City's as a football club. But as a person, as an 'individual', does he match City's ambitions?
This is a club who have worked tirelessly to be the closest thing possible to a loveable behemoth. They have a squad littered with good eggs - Sergio Aguero, David Silva, Pablo Zabaleta, Vincent Kompany - and their commitment to 'social responsibility' looks like rather more than lip service. It might not be possible to be both community club and fifth-richest club in the world, but City are having a damned good go. Does Sterling - caught up in an unseemly public war in which nobody emerges with any credit - fit in with that ethos?
I have previously written about Sterling's right to seek a move to a club that can offer Champions League football (and not 'rest' him in their most high-profile fixture) and a title challenge, presumably managed by a man who will not play him at wing-back. He may also prefer to join a club where a bevy of former players and a hunting pack of local journalists do not circle to condemn anybody who even vaguely suggests - through twisted words or exaggerated deeds - that they are 'bigger than the club', an unspeakable football crime second only to spitting.
I even said in that piece that, if I were Sterling, I would 'do everything in my power to engineer a move to Manchester City or Arsenal this summer' and defended a TV interview variously described as 'explosive' and 'offensive' that was in truth much closer to 'benign'. But now I fear that Sterling has not only burned his bridges at Liverpool but tossed a hand grenade down his path to Manchester. Will PR-conscious City want a player who asked not to be included in a pre-season tour and then promptly rung in sick? In the made-up game of 'WWMD?', you know that Milner would be incapable of such chicanery.
For as long as somebody at Liverpool is leaking details of Sterling's exploits to the staunchly loyal Merseyside press and his agent Aidy Ward is whispering in the ears of the London media, Sterling will remain on the back pages, coming across as brash, ill-disciplined and ill-advised. It's probably not the best route to a club that talks of "quiet and efficient" transfer business.
Sarah Winterburn[/article]
Those are the words of City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak, tellingly picking Milner - possibly the most unassuming, least egotistical footballer to have won a Premier League title - as one of his own favourites. Khaldoon is a man who speaks often of respect, responsibility and principles; Milner is a man who embodies all those words. The Englishman played fewer games than Fernando last season but you suspect that Khaldoon would never personally plead with the Brazilian to stay. He intervened with Milner and intervened with Yaya Toure, knowing that his own affection for the pair reflected that of City fans.
So when you re-visit quotes from Khaldoon talking about City's quest to sign "high-quality individuals" this summer, you wonder whether the word 'individuals' is significant. Despite a mass u-turn from Liverpool fans and media who now espouse the inexplicable notion that Sterling is both a) overrated and b) worth £50m, Sterling's potential as a footballer runs parallel to City's as a football club. But as a person, as an 'individual', does he match City's ambitions?
This is a club who have worked tirelessly to be the closest thing possible to a loveable behemoth. They have a squad littered with good eggs - Sergio Aguero, David Silva, Pablo Zabaleta, Vincent Kompany - and their commitment to 'social responsibility' looks like rather more than lip service. It might not be possible to be both community club and fifth-richest club in the world, but City are having a damned good go. Does Sterling - caught up in an unseemly public war in which nobody emerges with any credit - fit in with that ethos?
I have previously written about Sterling's right to seek a move to a club that can offer Champions League football (and not 'rest' him in their most high-profile fixture) and a title challenge, presumably managed by a man who will not play him at wing-back. He may also prefer to join a club where a bevy of former players and a hunting pack of local journalists do not circle to condemn anybody who even vaguely suggests - through twisted words or exaggerated deeds - that they are 'bigger than the club', an unspeakable football crime second only to spitting.
I even said in that piece that, if I were Sterling, I would 'do everything in my power to engineer a move to Manchester City or Arsenal this summer' and defended a TV interview variously described as 'explosive' and 'offensive' that was in truth much closer to 'benign'. But now I fear that Sterling has not only burned his bridges at Liverpool but tossed a hand grenade down his path to Manchester. Will PR-conscious City want a player who asked not to be included in a pre-season tour and then promptly rung in sick? In the made-up game of 'WWMD?', you know that Milner would be incapable of such chicanery.
For as long as somebody at Liverpool is leaking details of Sterling's exploits to the staunchly loyal Merseyside press and his agent Aidy Ward is whispering in the ears of the London media, Sterling will remain on the back pages, coming across as brash, ill-disciplined and ill-advised. It's probably not the best route to a club that talks of "quiet and efficient" transfer business.
Sarah Winterburn[/article]
Seriously?
City can fuck right off. If they can pay 42 million for mangala then they can pay 50 million for this little shit.
It's easy to be quiet and efficient in the transfer market when money is no object. Sarah Winterburn talking about City like they shit Dignity.
It's easy to be quiet and efficient in the transfer market when money is no object. Sarah Winterburn talking about City like they shit Dignity.
Can someone clear up the Sterling at wing back debate please. How many game did he actually play there? I've heard it being used as one of the reasons why he wants to leave.
I don't think any fan ever wanted to see Sterling occupy that position. Nor did anyone see it as a long term solution. I can only recall him playing there 2 or 3 times max. One was an in game tactical switch knowing he had the mobility and intelligence to play there. It allowed us bring on another attacker without disrupting our central midfield players while also keeping Sterling on the pitch. He did however start a game against United in the wing back position. Rodgers got it wrong that day. He wanted to play as many attacking midfielders as he could fit which meant Sterling was asked to play in the wing back position. Perhaps another reason for selecting him at RWB against united was due to our previous game against them. A game where Sterling missed a few good chances playing up front. Perhaps Rodgers wanted to remove some of the responsibility from Sterling and share it evenly around the pitch. I dunno, either way, Sterling operated from wing back a few times but I can't remember it being more than a few times.
Can someone clear this up?
I don't think any fan ever wanted to see Sterling occupy that position. Nor did anyone see it as a long term solution. I can only recall him playing there 2 or 3 times max. One was an in game tactical switch knowing he had the mobility and intelligence to play there. It allowed us bring on another attacker without disrupting our central midfield players while also keeping Sterling on the pitch. He did however start a game against United in the wing back position. Rodgers got it wrong that day. He wanted to play as many attacking midfielders as he could fit which meant Sterling was asked to play in the wing back position. Perhaps another reason for selecting him at RWB against united was due to our previous game against them. A game where Sterling missed a few good chances playing up front. Perhaps Rodgers wanted to remove some of the responsibility from Sterling and share it evenly around the pitch. I dunno, either way, Sterling operated from wing back a few times but I can't remember it being more than a few times.
Can someone clear this up?
Not at all. I reckon he's doing it because he can see what a self-promoting, incompetent cockend Ward is, and has enough about him to realise that such a clueless agent won't do his career any good at all. Unfortunately I'm afraid Sterling may be both too stupid and too greedy to follow suit.
There's a difference between a proper reason and a flimsy excuse, and this - like most of the "reasons" put forward for Sterling's campaign to leave - is an excuse, an artificial attempt by the player and that headwand Ward to defend the indefensible. What Sterling really wants are (a) more money and (b) instant glory, and that's the top and bottom of it. This, like the rest of what the pair of them have said all the way along, is no more than window-dressing.
He's all about the money, money, money.
Without it he gets a little funny, funny, funny.
He's doesn't care what the world says,
Sterling wants his paycheck.
Oh I agree, it's flimsy. Sterling playing RWB is not why he wants to leave but did he play RWB much for us? I'm trying to recall whether it was 2 or 3 times or for a sustained period.
It certainly wasn't for a sustained period but I reckon it probably amounted to more than 2 or 3 times in all.
Binny?
Binny?
What has a player being instructed to carry out a role in a particular match got to do with anything?
Don't get pulled in to a daft debate like this, it's just mud slinging.
Don't get pulled in to a daft debate like this, it's just mud slinging.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
