Re: micha - tevez
From August 2009 to the end of November 2009 - under Mark Hughes - Carlos Tevez scored just 2 premier league goals for City (both at home against West Ham). From December 2009 to his transfer request in December 2010, he was certainly highly prolific. But City's offensive strategy over that period was focused almost entirely on creating opportunities for him (often as lone striker) to score. He incidentally did little to disguise his hostility towards the manager responsible for orchestrating his most productive period ever.
His substitution against Bolton and the ensuing December transfer request saga was, of course, a watershed. Thereafter, even Tevez fanatics were acknowledging at the time that his head was 'somewhere else'. Certainly his goal contribution was nothing remarkable in the second half of the season, though the desire to win the Golden Boot did bring out a special performance in the last match of the season. At the end of the day, Tevez shared the Golden Boot with Berbatov, who did not take penalties and who, even last season, would have been ranked by most observers as United's 3rd best striker.
Since my first post on Bluemoon I have consistently argued that, whilst I will always be grateful for what Tevez has contributed to City notably during his first season, selling him is vital for our development as a team. In particular, I have argued that only when Tevez was gone would David Silva be liberated from the personal pressure to pass (back) to him and only then would Silva realise his true potential. Even though Tevez has not yet gone and has been a brooding presence this season, I believe that there is enough evidence to vindicate my claim.
Skashion said:
From August 2009 to the end of November 2009 - under Mark Hughes - Carlos Tevez scored just 2 premier league goals for City (both at home against West Ham). From December 2009 to his transfer request in December 2010, he was certainly highly prolific. But City's offensive strategy over that period was focused almost entirely on creating opportunities for him (often as lone striker) to score. He incidentally did little to disguise his hostility towards the manager responsible for orchestrating his most productive period ever.
His substitution against Bolton and the ensuing December transfer request saga was, of course, a watershed. Thereafter, even Tevez fanatics were acknowledging at the time that his head was 'somewhere else'. Certainly his goal contribution was nothing remarkable in the second half of the season, though the desire to win the Golden Boot did bring out a special performance in the last match of the season. At the end of the day, Tevez shared the Golden Boot with Berbatov, who did not take penalties and who, even last season, would have been ranked by most observers as United's 3rd best striker.
Since my first post on Bluemoon I have consistently argued that, whilst I will always be grateful for what Tevez has contributed to City notably during his first season, selling him is vital for our development as a team. In particular, I have argued that only when Tevez was gone would David Silva be liberated from the personal pressure to pass (back) to him and only then would Silva realise his true potential. Even though Tevez has not yet gone and has been a brooding presence this season, I believe that there is enough evidence to vindicate my claim.