Centre back options

[FantasyIreland]

Why does it have to be either or? Centre back's crucial IMO, cos the whole shooting match depends on Kompany's fitness. Not only does he dominate the opposition, but he elevates the performance levels of those around him. Take him out of the equation and we instantly lack power, pace and height. A question then of whether we think a man who's only managed only 25 league appearances in the last 2 years, is worth gambling on. Personally I think it's a stupid risk and I'd be looking hard at Bonnucci or VVD, and offloading Kolarov

The bump was aimed at those who are determined to take the Sanchez thread off topic by arguing we shouldnt be signing him,but instead signing a centre half with the money.

I'm all for getting rid of Kolarov and signing another centre back as well as Sanchez,both are essential IMO.

 

[2001bluesky]

Possibly but I think the idea is to go balls deep this season and win silverware.

Yes i understand that, but i don't there is quality CB out there this season. VVD maybe, but 70M price tag is too much. Maybe Pep will surprise us with something we didn't expect.

 

[Neville Kneville]

Why does it have to be either or? Centre back's crucial IMO, cos the whole shooting match depends on Kompany's fitness. Not only does he dominate the opposition, but he elevates the performance levels of those around him. Take him out of the equation and we instantly lack power, pace and height. A question then of whether we think a man who's only managed only 25 league appearances in the last 2 years, is worth gambling on. Personally I think it's a stupid risk and I'd be looking hard at Bonnucci or VVD, and offloading Kolarov

The 'either/or' only comes in, if either we can't fit the player in the squad due to the No of non homegrown players, or if we can't afford the money due to our other signings.

If that was the case, I would sign a cb as the priority & then try to fit in the extra attacker with wheeling & dealing afterwards.

But of course, the right player has to be available & within budget.

 

[Marvin]

Allegri has reportedly said that Allegri Bonucci's, "an important player, an extraordinary player and above all he has to understand that he’ll be the future leader of the Juventus dressing room" so London Evening Standard are reporting that Chelsea are switching targets to Van Dijk.

Struggling to see an obvious target for City so I think whoever City buy in this position is going to be a surprise, or could Guardiola go for Tosin as the 4th option?

 

[cadds92]

I actually think the CB we end up getting - that is if we go for one - will be somebody unexpected. Maybe even someone from South America.

 

[Dax777]

We don't need a CH. Sure we MAY be better with a very good one like Varane VVD or Chiellini. But there is no guarantee an injury to Komps still won't affect us.

Contrary to popular opinion, CH is not a problem. Frankly its a strength. In Komps, Ota, Stones and Kola we have 4 very good ones.

If we had Thibaut Courtios save ratio all season we'd have conceded 29 to 31 goals. Better than Chelsea's 33.

If we had De Gea's save ratio, we'd have conceded 26 to 28 goals... Sure still worse than the 25 the Rags conceded. But they were a particularly defensive team. While we always played.

The only team who would have been significantly better had we had their goalie was Tottenham. If we had their goalie, we'd d have still conceded 29 to 30 goals. 6 more than they did.

It is no surprise that we got a keeper out of the blocks. If we up our save ratio to around Mignolet's, the worst of the other 5 and we'd have conceded the same # as Chelsea.

Where else we failed on the other hand is in scoring. Both Chelsea and Spurs scored more goals than we did off of fewer chances.

Chelsea created 57 fewer clear chances than we did. And scored more. Yet folks are somehow convinced its our CBs that's the problem.
Bernado, Sanchez, Mbappe are all links and acquisitions that speak what are problems were. The focus on fullbacks, the choice to use Dihno and Navas even when the regular fullbacks were healthy, also speaks to our true weakness.

CB frankly isn't one of the

 

[Marvin]

We don't need a CH. Sure we MAY be better with a very good one like Varane VVD or Chiellini. But there is no guarantee an injury to Komps still won't affect us.

Contrary to popular opinion, CH is not a problem. Frankly its a strength. In Komps, Ota, Stones and Kola we have 4 very good ones.

If we had Thibaut Courtios save ratio all season we'd have conceded 29 to 31 goals. Better than Chelsea's 33.

If we had De Gea's save ratio, we'd have conceded 26 to 28 goals... Sure still worse than the 25 the Rags conceded. But they were a particularly defensive team. While we always played.

The only team who would have been significantly better had we had their goalie was Tottenham. If we had their goalie, we'd d have still conceded 29 to 30 goals. 6 more than they did.

It is no surprise that we got a keeper out of the blocks. If we up our save ratio to around Mignolet's, the worst of the other 5 and we'd have conceded the same # as Chelsea.

Where else we failed on the other hand is in scoring. Both Chelsea and Spurs scored more goals than we did off of fewer chances.

Chelsea created 57 fewer clear chances than we did. And scored more. Yet folks are somehow convinced its our CBs that's the problem.
Bernado, Sanchez, Mbappe are all links and acquisitions that speak what are problems were. The focus on fullbacks, the choice to use Dihno and Navas even when the regular fullbacks were healthy, also speaks to our true weakness.

CB frankly isn't one of the

I agree we struggled for goals for a large part of last season. I thought that largely fell at the feet of Agiero. Sane and Jesus were big pluses in the 2nd half of the season and with Bernardo Silva signing and possibly two attacking full backs arriving, I think the attacking potential of the team has gone up significantly

I am glad that you think we are strong in central defence. It's not an issue if Kompany is fit, but for the past two seasons he has not been and without him I don't trust any of the other central defenders. They seem to go to pieces without him. We had 70% possession on average last season, and yet a recurrent theme last season was City's inability to defend against occasional break aways. That wasn't entirely down to the two central defenders. Toure was terrible off the ball, the keeper was new and both full backs were poor so we should be better defensively this season. I think we'll strengthen the full backs and we've signed a keeper, but looks like we are going to play without a defensive midfielder so it's the central defence that to me is the weak area of our squad

It's possible to be successful with weak points. Chelsea I thought were extremely lucky with injuries last season eg if Costa had got injured they'd have struggled. But knowing our luck, Kompany will get injured once again. perhaps it is not luck. We should really expect it, or at the least plan for it. I suggest that if Kompany does get injured again, and City have not strengthened that area then Guardiola will get hammered but as I've been told already today it's June and not August and I should wait and see what happens!

 

[Lancet Fluke]

We don't need a CH. Sure we MAY be better with a very good one like Varane VVD or Chiellini. But there is no guarantee an injury to Komps still won't affect us.

Contrary to popular opinion, CH is not a problem. Frankly its a strength. In Komps, Ota, Stones and Kola we have 4 very good ones.

If we had Thibaut Courtios save ratio all season we'd have conceded 29 to 31 goals. Better than Chelsea's 33.

If we had De Gea's save ratio, we'd have conceded 26 to 28 goals... Sure still worse than the 25 the Rags conceded. But they were a particularly defensive team. While we always played.

The only team who would have been significantly better had we had their goalie was Tottenham. If we had their goalie, we'd d have still conceded 29 to 30 goals. 6 more than they did.

It is no surprise that we got a keeper out of the blocks. If we up our save ratio to around Mignolet's, the worst of the other 5 and we'd have conceded the same # as Chelsea.

Where else we failed on the other hand is in scoring. Both Chelsea and Spurs scored more goals than we did off of fewer chances.

Chelsea created 57 fewer clear chances than we did. And scored more. Yet folks are somehow convinced its our CBs that's the problem.
Bernado, Sanchez, Mbappe are all links and acquisitions that speak what are problems were. The focus on fullbacks, the choice to use Dihno and Navas even when the regular fullbacks were healthy, also speaks to our true weakness.

CB frankly isn't one of the

I never knew that was how it worked and that you could work out how many goals you would have conceded with different goal keepers, amazing.
We all know bravo was/is shit but no amount of save ratio stats are going to convince me that our defending was good enough last season before Kompany came in. Admittedly I came to that conclusion by looking at the pitch not at a spreadsheet so it probably counts for little.

 

[Tevez City]

We don't need a CH. Sure we MAY be better with a very good one like Varane VVD or Chiellini. But there is no guarantee an injury to Komps still won't affect us.

Contrary to popular opinion, CH is not a problem. Frankly its a strength. In Komps, Ota, Stones and Kola we have 4 very good ones.

If we had Thibaut Courtios save ratio all season we'd have conceded 29 to 31 goals. Better than Chelsea's 33.

If we had De Gea's save ratio, we'd have conceded 26 to 28 goals... Sure still worse than the 25 the Rags conceded. But they were a particularly defensive team. While we always played.

The only team who would have been significantly better had we had their goalie was Tottenham. If we had their goalie, we'd d have still conceded 29 to 30 goals. 6 more than they did.

It is no surprise that we got a keeper out of the blocks. If we up our save ratio to around Mignolet's, the worst of the other 5 and we'd have conceded the same # as Chelsea.

Where else we failed on the other hand is in scoring. Both Chelsea and Spurs scored more goals than we did off of fewer chances.

Chelsea created 57 fewer clear chances than we did. And scored more. Yet folks are somehow convinced its our CBs that's the problem.
Bernado, Sanchez, Mbappe are all links and acquisitions that speak what are problems were. The focus on fullbacks, the choice to use Dihno and Navas even when the regular fullbacks were healthy, also speaks to our true weakness.

CB frankly isn't one of the

Well said.

 

[RayCTID]

Mascherano is probably a one off but there is always a possibility that one of our midfielders or either of our new full backs could fill in. Adarabioyo should be given more of a chance but will be loaned out.