Left Liverpool to win some trophies, can't hold that against him.

yeah don't think he can be called greedy, unless you mean greedy for trophies, left Liverpool for the same reason Suarez and Coutinho went to Barcelona, Torres went to Chelsea and Gerrard was on the verge of going to Chelsea before he was given a lot of threats by Liverpool fans, though that was probably part of the reason.

Those 4 players can hardly say they've regretted it, they've all won leagues and/or Champions League titles since, and with a bigger move it generally comes hand in hand with more money.

It's not like Sterling was a Liverpool boy and abandoned his roots for an Oligarch's plaything, he's from Wembley and was a QPR kid, like a lot of players - if they really left clubs like Liverpool, at those times rather than now, purely for the money, they would not have gone to City, China or the middle East would have snapped them up for more. But of course winning trophies there is practically meaningless and carries no presitige like it does in England or Spain.

Sterling was happy to stay at Anfield but demanded ludicrous cash. Wasn't about trophies at all. Then the crooked Middle Eastern club came in with oodles of cash and he helped himself quicker than a fat man at a buffet. Of course now he wants parity on the pay scale with the clubs leading earners........

Also, when Sterling left LFC were in a very strong position on the playing field and City hadn't yet recruited half the side they have now. LFC came within a whisker of winning a 6th European Cup since. City haven't even won the games biggest prize once. Suarez & Couts is no surprise as Barca the biggest team in the world and a magnet especially for South Americans. Torres left as Chelsea had a better side than LFC at the time; so you are comparing apples with oranges because Sterling simply left for the money.

When Sterling joined Man City in 2015/2016, Man City had won 2 of the previous 4 League titles, and in the other 2 season they finished runners up. 1/2/1/2nd, Liverpool were 8/7/2/6th during that period and in the 3 seasons since he's been gone, Liverpool have finsished 8/4/4th and City 4/3/1st with a title and league cup.

These were the first teams of both Liverpool and City the season before in 2014/2015

Liverpool: Mignolet - Johnson - Lovren - Skrtle - Moreno - Coutinho - Henderson - Gerrard (34) - Sterling - Lallana -  Sturridge -

Man City: Hart - Kompany - Demechellis - Zabaleta - Kolorov - Silva - Toure - Fernandinho - Milner - Aguero - Dzeko

City's team at the times as reflected in the league finishing postions were better as were their prospects given the money that City had at their disposal on new players. They also signed De Bruyne in the same summer.

If Sterling was in the Liverpool team now, I don't actually think he would leave, because Liverpool are genuine title contenders.

There was also the manager issue with Rogers, don't think they ever had a great relationship after that documentary when he spoke to him like a child and called him Sterling rather than Raheem.

We probably will be, given your bitterness at the boy leaving Liverpool will always overshadow in your mind anything he achieves on the pitch.

LOL you paid £75m for a centre-back and you're moaning about how much money City have got.

Liverpool don't need to worry about letting Sterling go 3 years ago anyway, this is their best ever Premier League team and imo, the only genuine rivals to City for the league, think those two will soon cut the rest adrift, when I watch Liverpool they never look like conceding these days, Man City whilst a similar record in the goals against column, always look more vulnerable, but get away with it due to having so much of the ball.

certainly should be in a comfortable top 4 position after those games. still be might be double figures behind city by then. seems to have passed people by spurs have played 8 away games already and the top 2 at home. 27 points is well above par from those fixtures

christian eriksen who is seen as spurs most important player and we are nothing like the same side without him has played a grand total of 41 minutes in the last 7 league games 6 of which have been won

sh, no one else will go to brighton, west ham, wolves and crystal palace and get maximum points. none of those are easy teams to beat on their own patch

city will win it by 10 points at least

It's not really impressive to beat teams who's squad worth is far inferior, it's what top teams can do against other top teams minus a key player, if they can still win like City have been doing without De Bruyne is impressive.

Don't think City will run away with it this season, neck and neck with Liverpool surely.

LOL you paid £75m for a centre-back and you're moaning about how much money City have got.


The difference being we saved up our pocket money specifically for VVD so we had the money. No cooking the books to snare our main target was needed. People seem to forget LFC had a net transfer surplus for the past 4 years prior to this window. Klopp has been extremely patient in waiting for the players he specifically wants and has not been panicked into rash signings:

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/679465/Premier-League-Liverpool-Chelsea-Man-Utd-City-Arsenal-Tottenham-net-spend-sportgalleries

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/11449358/jurgen-klopp-v-jose-mourinho-transfer-spending-compared

You can argue whatever you like, but as I said before, with ten games to go Spurs will not be far away. Then who knows?

It's a myth that to win the league you have to win the games v rivals and the others don't matter much, or that you just to have to win all the games v the lesser teams.

In the last 10 years of Wenger there were a couple of seasons they won the 'Big 4' mini league. And a couple where they had the best record v the bottom half teams. They didn't get involved in the title race in any of them.

With 10 games to go last season Tottenham were 20 points behind City, City have since brought in Mahrez for 60mil and Tottenham didn't sign anyone.

And this proves what?

Your logic is flawed - would you not expect a team that has played together for a few years and is still young to be improving?

And to play Mahrez, they must inevitably leave a £50m+ footballer out of the team.

Chelsea impoded under Mourinho and Conte came into clean up the mess, then Chelsea had the benefit of not playing extra mid week European football when Conte won the league in his first season - and the difference between Mourinho/Conte and Pochettino is that Mourinho/Conte are proven winners and are ruthless, Pochettinho is just not in that mould, think Tottenham should have gone at got Conte this season.

I just look at the top teams, and really only Liverpool and City look good enough to win the league based on what I've seen this season, Chelsea I think will finishe 3rd, Tottenham, Arsenal and United fighting it out for 4th. You say that Tottenham can't win the league at Wembley but last season you won 13 from 19 home games only losing 2, a pitch is a pitch and vast majority of the fans there are still yours so I can't buy that it just seems like an excuse.

Tbh, City are lightyears ahead in every positon, I think only Kane could get into City's team, but then they'd have to play with 2 strikers.

I agree spurs will finish at least 10 clear of chelsea

player for player city are not a better team than Liverpool , Spurs , Chelsea, Man Utd , Arsenal