Raheem Sterling...

A master at diving and trimming beards.

If he was bad
how about sturridge?
goddamn every time that boy touched the ball he might as well have been wearing a light blue jersey

Sturridge is a typical modern day footballer.Seems to be on a permanent sulky mood. Can't see him being there after the summer which will suit all parties imo.

Remove L. Suarez and see what happens.

21 yrs old, 157 Premier League and Cup appearances, 20 appearances for England, 1st winners medal today...I'd say he's not doing too bad.

Total muggery slating Sterling. You can't have watched City in Kiev - the boy is a class act. He is a boy - he is not the player or even one of the players letting that team down.

Feb 29, 2016 -- 12:40AM, themover wrote:

21 yrs old, 157 Premier League and Cup appearances, 20 appearances for England, 1st winners medal today...I'd say he's not doing too bad.

20 appearances for England, and they are sh^te

They have been shyte - FACTS

We will go there with several of the best young footballers in Europe. Kane, Tom Carroll, Delle Alli, Eric Dier, Walker, Rose. Some people rate Barkley he should go - he doesn't start though, he's not really fit to lace Tom Carroll's boots, and that John Stones, but let's be honest Eric Dier plays in midfield and he'd make Stones look like George Berry if he had to fill in one week at centre-back.

I don't think Hodgson will be bold enough to pick Cameron Carter-Vickers, not as first choice anyway. That will be just another footnote in history's indictment of him.

Obviously the key to it is the best young central midfielder in England, if not the world: Ryan Mason. I expect him to own that armband, like Gerrard. And Charlton.

Sterling pace is best suited to counter attacking but his finishing is gash at best.

Even in these days of silly money £49m for someone who can run fast but can't hit a barn door from 6 yards is laughable. Steeling a living, City's Theo Walcott.

seems finaly the likes of wright ,shearer,journo,s have cottoned on to what people such as myself have been saying day in day out for 5 yrs that wallycott has never been and will never be a decent elp player,i,m only amazed they thought he was playing down the middle yesterday,certainly in the 1st half he was stood out on the right wing for the whole 45 mins doing his finger nails,they,ll be along in 18 months time telling us the same about oxo ,all thought we,ve been saying it for 3 years now

All the pundits follow the same line on every subject - virtually, there must be 98% consensus on everything said. None of them can think for themselves, or dares to. Which is why the fans are 5 years ahead on Walcott. The pundits and all those within the game are in a cosy little club where they all make a fortune out of the general public.

We should not be surprised, it is a business and an industry after all.

Keep spouting the same things over and over again, keep your nose clean, laugh all the way to the bank.

The Walcott thing is typical, the line taken on him within the game is that he's good player yet to blossom or who just lacks consistency has palpably been nonsense for years. He's no good, he never has been, a few flashes early on doth not make a career.

You can predict everything said before the broadcast starts.

Walcott was promising as a 16 / 17 year old because he had a lot of pace which at that age can give an advantage, however, he has not mentally been able to progress and as such has been unable to evolve and develop as a footballer - sadly his best years have probably gone & he is yet another footballer who has taken advantage of all the money awash in the game currently - his good fortune that he came into the game with Sky around but probably another example where you don't have to work hard enough to achieve something more for yourself and your team

He's good for an English player. English footballers are on the whole a complete bunch of losers who bottle penalty shoot outs time and time again.

Walcott is one of these players who has had everything on a silver plate since he was mid teans. Where is the hunger to do better? Where is that extra few % effort needed to stick the ball in the back of the net?

Walcott has been dogged by injuries.

Just over 200 appearances in 9 years I wonder how many times he's been subbed?? Seems to happen even when he plays well.

In that time he's scored 54 goals, mainly from a wide position. That's very impressive, especially when you consider Arsenal dominate position anfd therefore teams drop deeper, negating his pace.

some serious trolling from jed here 

*dominate possession

To summarise: he can't dribble (just loses control of the ball when he moves and trips over it); he can't pass (other than arguably a bobbling 2-yarder); he is weak on the ball (despite super-scouser Stevie G claiming otherwise) and his finishing is undoubtedly the worst from any player in the EPL. Can you remember Raheem scoring a good goal or doing something special or even half-decent? NO! That's because he's not capable... put him in a League One side and see how he does. Absolute and utter fraud. If you tend to disagree strongly then OK that's your prerogative and everyone is entitled to their own opinion but I shall tell you this for free... you're a huge mug!

sunday league beckons when he looses a yard of pace, absolute garbage.

remember in his very early days at Anfield chance to win game vs Everton and his shot hit the corner flag. Spurs were sniffing around and I thought might be good time to sell before he gets found out then Suarez makes him look much much better than he is - the sale was very good business - i don't expect him to get any better but if anyone can get him to improve it'll be Pep

as much as i dont rate stirling as a top epl player the one thing i would give him over wally and oxo, is that he at least looks as though he wants to play and gives it a go,just hasnt got the tools needed in the box i,m afraid

I said Liverpool should take the money and run away laughing, I stand by that, and it's been borne out so far. Pep might sort him out though.

How has it been borne out? Sterling has a winners medal and Liverpool are further away from a league title than they were when he played for them City are better with Sterling and Liverpool aren't imho

not saying your right or wrong but if arsenal fall over the line in epl does that mean we are all wrong about wally and oxo,reminds me of when le boueff was playing shoite week in,week out and his only response was i,m a world cup winner,dealp at boro lec full back has enough games in to be an epl medal winner if lec win the lg,doesnt make him a top epl player,currently playing in the championship,you,d be a brave man to say stirling has improved city as a side which you,d expect after spending 50 million

Well we used to have Milner on the left hand-side, so basically a swop of Milner for Sterling with Liverpool. Which do you think is better? Not knocking Milner because he always puts in a shift but Sterling provides pace on the left which we didn't have before.

How has it been borne out? Sterling has a winners medal and Liverpool are further away from a league title than they were when he played for them Confused City are better with Sterling and Liverpool aren't imho


He's done nothing. What do Liverpool have to do with it?

A swap for Milner? lol I think you're forgetting something.

that pace on the left currently has you 9 pts behind barca,i mean leciester

I assume you are referring to the £50 million Dirk I doubt Milner will last 10 years so £5m a year for Sterling is reasonable

The season isn't over yet, and I wouldn't write City off for the league just yet. They are also about to go into the quarter-final of the Champions League for the first time ever (barring a disaster) and that's with Sterling in the team.

themover, please don't jonj in with this "puts in a shift" cliche thats becoming  almost as daft as (he gave him the eyes" and other football bsah7t talk.a shift? a fun  hour and a hour running about on a football pitch  pleeeeeeeeeeweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease, i ask you

fair enough...Milner did a lot of running every match. Will that do?

yes perfectly acceptable

Sterling is useless

useless?of course not, he's an england international so he must have some kind of ability, overrated probably, has he progressed at city/almost undoubtedly not, has he's regressed at city/ almost undoubtedly yes.

sterling is useless and has a rubbish haircut and beard but english teams have to have a quota of english players. so if milner is worth £8m, sterling is well worth the £49m paid.

delph not milner. milner is rubbish as well.

Never in a month of Sunday's is he worth 50 mil, not even in today's inflated market. I would be surprised if Guardiola doesn't replace him fairly quickly.

coming from someone who describes Jack Wilshere as world class

I assume you are referring to the £50 million Dirk Tongue Out I doubt Milner will last 10 years so £5m a year for Sterling is reasonable

The season isn't over yet, and I wouldn't write City off for the league just yet. They are also about to go into the quarter-final of the Champions League for the first time ever (barring a disaster) and that's with Sterling in the team.


For 10 years? how do you work that out?

I haven't written City off for anything...

I just don't think Sterling is that good, the rest is in your imagination.

well he's 21 years old so I'm expecting him to play for at least 10 years

well he's 21 years old so I'm expecting him to play for at least 10 years


Highly unlikely he's at City for 10 years, you paid £50M and he wasn't worth that.

City had 3 transfer window targets...Sterling, De Bruyne and Pogba. They got two of them. I don't think they're too concerned about the price tbh.

City had 3 transfer window targets...Sterling, De Bruyne and Pogba. They got two of them. I don't think they're too concerned about the price tbh.


Doesn't make him worth the money though. Pogba is too good for City, or any English club.

they obviously decided he was worth it and it's maybe a bit early to decide it wasn't

Alex Ferguson turned down the opportunity to buy Aguero as he decided at the time he wasn't worth the money, not everyone get's it right all the time

they obviously decided he was worth it and it's maybe a bit early to decide it wasn't


He wasn't worth it based on how good he was at the time, and what his resume was. I could be proved wrong yet, but to me he'll never be worth that, that's my opinion.

Jack Wilshere was MOTM against Brazil and Barcelona as well a couple of England games, also score the goal of the season. If Sterling was still at Liverpool, you'd not give a seconds thought into defending his form since City signed him, he hardly looks a world beater does he. De Bruyne looks more the real deal.

Alex Ferguson turned down the opportunity to buy Aguero as he decided at the time he wasn't worth the money, not everyone get's it right all the time Tongue Out


Yeah, but not relevant.

"He wasn't worth it based on how good he was at the time, and what his resume was."

I don't disagree with that, the price also has the dreaded word "potential" built into it. The same could be said of United's purchase of Martial. In Sterling's case just the fact he's English adds £10m thanks to the FA rulings on home-grown players.

he'll be on the brush at the etihaad in a few months,maybe "keeper of the urn"

I don't disagree with that, the price also has the dreaded word "potential" built into it. The same could be said of United's purchase of Martial. In Sterling's case just the fact he's English adds £10m thanks to the FA rulings on home-grown players.


That's all i'm saying. I don't think he's as good as he looked with Suarez, that's my opinion. When he turns into a top class talent, who turns in consistent performances in the EPL, CL and for England then i'll happily admit i'm wrong. Until then I stand by my opinion.

By the way, I'm not a Liverpool, Manyoo, Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs or even a Leicester City fan either. I honestly couldn't give a monkey's chuff who wins the EPL, the CL, The FA Cup or whatever that was played on Sunday, so I've no axe to grind if that's what you're getting at, and in fact Aguero won me a very nice lump indeed with that famous goal, and I've always been a admirer of him and Silva.

I wondered how much was him and how much was Suarez (same with Sturridge) - and I think a hell of a lot was down to playing with a true World Class talent, and I think so far that's been shown. Liverpool were exceptional that year, and it's easy to get fooled into thinking players are better than they are when the whole team is on fire.

henderson also looked good in that season,they give him the captains job and thought he could do gerrards job,he,s since returned to his previous dire form

The way he handled himself during his transfer was disgraceful in my view. But to be fair to the lad , what has LFC actually done since he left ?

I don't blame him for leaving that club. As long as he plays well for England I'm happy sorry.

henderson also looked good in that season,they give him the captains job and thought he could do gerrards job,he,s since returned to his previous dire form


Yep. It's so easy to look good in a side that's flying, I remember Houllier's Liverpool one year, I think they won 2-3 trophies? - they were never the same again, and they had no chance of being either. They had a special year, I have never seen a team work harder, and they had a class act in Gary Mcallister pulling the strings. A terrific midfielder.

some shrewdies on here

I fondly remember the Utd fans who argued until they were blue in the face that Januzaj was better

In some ways it shows the brilliance of Guardiola. Sterling is a player who could have gone either way imo but he's playing for the best attacking coach in the world and he's now playing superbly. He's still a young player with potential to improve further. Good luck to him. Hopefully a couple of other English attacking players can come through the ranks at City.

He's top of the league