Raheem Sterling | Arsenal Player (on loan)

[Silva 83]

I think it was Sterling's awkward style of play which always made his misses look worse.

At the end of the day he was the best goal scoring wide player we've ever had and levels above anyone we have right now with only Foden starting to show he can get to that level. Even Foden isn't yet at the 31 goal season peak that Sterling had.

I look at someone like Grealish and he fluffs just as many chances and also doesn't get into anywhere near the amount of goal scoring positions either but no one talks about him not being about to finish because it's not a 'thing'.

Sometimes you have to look at what else they bring to the table and that can be more than enough to outweigh the weaknesses and Sterling's goal contribution for City far outweighed the fact he wasn't finishing all his chances like a seasoned center forward.

Yeah I never doubted his stats. Or his contribution

But Grealish and Foden are much more talented than him. I bet most footballers (pro and grassroots) would tell you the same thing. You allude to the same with his 'awkward style of play' i.e. not a natural footballer who has an affinity with a ball.

Grealish actually gets slagged off a lot on here because of his goal and assist contribution, or lack thereof. But based on the 'eye test' ie watching him - he's a better footballer than Sterling no doubt. Vastly superior first touch, far more comfortable on the ball, better passer. When Grealish is on it, he facilitates other players and makes them look better in a way Sterling never could or did. But he's not a stats fiend so he doesn't appeal to those types.

Ultimately Sterling was finished before he was age 28. Pep made him look a better player than he was in my opinion. Now Pep does that with plenty of players but it was really pronounced with Sterling for me.

And I would suggest how poor he's been at Chelsea (with the caveat that they're a disgrace of a club) would back me up. He won't EVER be back competing for top honours.

 

[kaz7]

Exactly my point.

I haven't called anyone an ad hom. The original thing that annoyed me a bit was kaz implying I am a kid who should be at school because I don't think Sterling is or was a great player. What sort of weak comment is that? But expected from her to be honest.

Ironic as I have probably watched and played significantly more football than her in the last 35 years. Which is a bit of a dickhead thing to say, but what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

There were a few other comments too but they were just snarky ones and those posters are hypocrites as they don't follow their own advice generally.

Am i rent free in your head , you have slagged me off a few times now , stop it and lighten up ffs , dont be surprised city players get supported on a CITY forum , you seem to be enjoying slagging him off

This thread has been toxic for years with many reasons to hate the kid , without him we wouldnt have got 100 points , he scored 131 goals and god know how many assists , he has dropped off a cliff now but that doesnt take away his contribution to our success

 

[HelloCity]

Yeah I never doubted his stats. Or his contribution

But Grealish and Foden are much more talented than him. I bet most footballers (pro and grassroots) would tell you the same thing. You allude to the same with his 'awkward style of play' i.e. not a natural footballer who has an affinity with a ball.

Grealish actually gets slagged off a lot on here because of his goal and assist contribution, or lack thereof. But based on the 'eye test' ie watching him - he's a better footballer than Sterling no doubt. Vastly superior first touch, far more comfortable on the ball, better passer. When Grealish is on it, he facilitates other players and makes them look better in a way Sterling never could or did. But he's not a stats fiend so he doesn't appeal to those types.

Ultimately Sterling was finished before he was age 28. Pep made him look a better player than he was in my opinion. Now Pep does that with plenty of players but it was really pronounced with Sterling for me.

And I would suggest how poor he's been at Chelsea (with the caveat that they're a disgrace of a club) would back me up.

Yeah the same way Grealish weakness is not scoring a lot of goals but then his overall style of play adds a lot to the way the team functions especially in big games with how good he is on the ball.

 

[Silva 83]

Yeah the same way Grealish weakness is not scoring a lot of goals but then his overall style of play adds a lot to the way the team functions especially in big games with how good he is on the ball.

Yeah

The same people whose main defence of Sterling is his goal record won't be fans of Grealish for the same reason. It's like a venn diagram.

It isn't even about the players - it's about your football philosophy. I don't like poor/average footballers who are brilliant on the stats sheet.

It's like how Ronaldo keeps up with Messi as a goalscorer, but Messi is in a different stratosphere in terms of natural talent, technique, passing, dribbling, free-kicks, football IQ, vision etc. But if you ask someone who doesn't watch football to look at their stats on wiki, you could forgive them for thinking Ronaldo is better than Messi. Football is qualitative as much as it is quantitative, maybe more so.

Same on a lower level with Grealish and Sterling.

If people like Sterling because he scored a lot of goals, fair enough. If that is your football philosophy fair enough. That's not why I watch football, to count up goal stats for individual players. And even if you do that, he should have scored so many more based on how many chances he wasted.

It sounds pretentious, but I have played football (and told I am good) for years at grassroots level. I have played with talentless idiots who didn't contribute in general play, and just poached the box and expected to be fed. I don't like footballers like that.

 

[Silva 83]

Am i rent free in your head , you have slagged me off a few times now , stop it and lighten up ffs , dont be surprised city players get supported on a CITY forum , you seem to be enjoying slagging him off

This thread has been toxic for years with many reasons to hate the kid , without him we wouldnt have got 100 points , he scored 131 goals and god know how many assists , he has dropped off a cliff now but that doesnt take away his contribution to our success

I don't 'hate the kid'. He seems a really good fella and the racist campaign against him was repulsive.

I just don't rate him as much as you do as a footballer. I also never dismissed his contribution to your success - I am saying you've had loads of more talented players than him and Pep made him look better than he was - as his disaster at Chelsea would also suggest.

I slagged you off because your original comment was annoying. Now leave me alone please.

 

[HelloCity]

Yeah

The same people whose main defence of Sterling is his goal record won't be fans of Grealish for the same reason. It's like a venn diagram.

It isn't even about the players - it's about your football philosophy. I don't like poor/average footballers who are brilliant on the stats sheet.

It's like how Ronaldo keeps up with Messi as a goalscorer, but Messi is in a different stratosphere in terms of natural talent, technique, passing, dribbling, free-kicks, football IQ, vision etc. But if you ask someone who doesn't watch football to look at their stats on wiki, you could forgive them for thinking Ronaldo is better than Messi. Football is qualitative as much as it is quantitative, maybe more so.

Same on a lower level with Grealish and Sterling.

If people like Sterling because he scored a lot of goals, fair enough. If that is your football philosophy fair enough. That's not why I watch football, to count up goal stats for individual players. And even if you do that, he should have scored so many more based on how many chances he wasted.

It sounds pretentious, but I have played football (and told I am good) for years at grassroots level. I have played with talentless idiots who didn't contribute in general play, and just poached the box and expected to be fed. I don't like footballers like that.

I like both and feel their contributions are both super important.

Goals win games at the end of the day so can never write off sterlings incredible contribution to our success.

Haaland isn’t the most technical player out there we shouldn’t forget.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Yeah

The same people whose main defence of Sterling is his goal record won't be fans of Grealish for the same reason. It's like a venn diagram.

It isn't even about the players - it's about your football philosophy. I don't like poor/average footballers who are brilliant on the stats sheet.

It's like how Ronaldo keeps up with Messi as a goalscorer, but Messi is in a different stratosphere in terms of natural talent, technique, passing, dribbling, free-kicks, football IQ, vision etc. But if you ask someone who doesn't watch football to look at their stats on wiki, you could forgive them for thinking Ronaldo is better than Messi. Football is qualitative as much as it is quantitative, maybe more so.

Same on a lower level with Grealish and Sterling.

If people like Sterling because he scored a lot of goals, fair enough. If that is your football philosophy fair enough. That's not why I watch football, to count up goal stats for individual players. And even if you do that, he should have scored so many more based on how many chances he wasted.

It sounds pretentious, but I have played football (and told I am good) for years at grassroots level. I have played with talentless idiots who didn't contribute in general play, and just poached the box and expected to be fed. I don't like footballers like that.

Arteta and Pep got the very best out of Sterling. His stats would have been much worse at pretty much any other club. They perfected the timing of his run to be at the far post for the tap in to an empty net.

He obviously had world class movement and off the ball skills too, but his deficiencies would have been more exposed elsewhere, as Chelsea have found out.

Plus, he never really loves a club, as PB suggested, it’s his job.

Hope he gets a move somewhere, but his wages and need to be the main man will limit the pool of clubs he could go to.

 

[Silva 83]

Arteta and Pep got the very best out of Sterling. His stats would have been much worse at pretty much any other club. They perfected the timing of his run to be at the far post for the tap in to an empty net.

He obviously had world class movement and off the ball skills too, but his deficiencies would have been more exposed elsewhere, as Chelsea have found out.

Plus, he never really loves a club, as PB suggested, it’s his job.

Hope he gets a move somewhere, but his wages and need to be the main man will limit the pool of clubs he could go to.

That's the point I made. It was the perfect storm at City, and Chelsea have found that out. I knew it would be a disaster when they signed him.

Pep is a genius and perfected Sterling's muscle memory and movements, he got him to repetitively do the same things and it got him a lot of goals and success.

But by no means is he a very gifted footballer for me. Nobody can convince me he is. I said the same when he was at Liverpool as well.

Grealish, Foden, Mahrez - those are very gifted wide/attacking midfield players City have had. Not Sterling.

 

[Silva 83]

I like both and feel their contributions are both super important.

Goals win games at the end of the day so can never write off sterlings incredible contribution to our success.

Haaland isn’t the most technical player out there we shouldn’t forget.

'Goals win games' is true at the base level - but it overlooks that a lot of goals are moves and very intricate. Often the last contact before it goes in the net (or second-last for assist) isn't the hardest part of the goal. Messi perfected the pre-assist, for example.

Admitting this on here will probably get me banned, but I am not a fan of Haaland as a player either, far from it. That's down to his all-round game. And me thinking that dates s to long before Roy Keane said anything.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

That's the point I made. It was the perfect storm at City, and Chelsea have found that out. I knew it would be a disaster when they signed him.

Pep is a genius and perfected Sterling's muscle memory and movements, he got him to repetitively do the same things and it got him a lot of goals and success.

But by no means is he a very gifted footballer for me. Nobody can convince me he is. I said the same when he was at Liverpool as well.

Grealish, Foden, Mahrez - those are very gifted wide/attacking midfield players City have had. Not Sterling.

I think you’re probably underselling Sterling a bit. He doesn’t flow like the others you name, but proved to be more effective than some on the list.

All players have their faults and it’s up to clubs to minimise and mask those, whilst maximising their star qualities.

When we moved away from the fast winger style, Raz became less important to us and didn’t like it and moved on.

He’d have done pretty well for Klopp too though.

 

[Kippaxpete]

It's easy.

I formed a bond with the club as a boy, before I became politically and morally conscious. Then (even though it took a while) I broke that connection as an adult because I didn't wanna engage in cognitive dissonance i.e. supporting and wanting the best for a club where I hated the political views.

Basically, I lean left of centre, and this club is as right-wing and racist as it gets. Many horrible thuggish fans. I am pretty sure people can put 2 and 2 together based on my posting history. I am not gonna associate myself as a person with that.

And I wasn't gonna just start 'supporting' Pep's Barca or Pep's City, with zero connection to Barcelona or Manchester, no family history of supporting those clubs, even though for me they've been the two best teams to watch (club wise) of the last 15 years.

While I respect your stance, if it's integrity and intelligent debate you're after, I'm not sure this is the right forum for you. Football fandom is, by its very nature, tribal and, as such, it often leads ordinarily reasonable people into a form of mental gymnastics whereby some see every player through sky blue tinted spectacles and occasionally become apologists for owners with links to dubious political regimes (and, by that, I do mean us and, yes, I've been equally guilty at times).
Regardless, for the sake of your mental health, I'd avoid getting into spats with those who are clearly some way short of your intellect. Where's the fun in shooting metaphorical rats in a barrel?
Otherwise, keep posting mate. I might not agree with every opinion but I respect your right to express it.

 

[HelloCity]

While I respect your stance, if it's integrity and intelligent debate you're after, I'm not sure this is the right forum for you. Football fandom is, by its very nature, tribal and, as such, it often leads ordinarily reasonable people into a form of mental gymnastics whereby some see every player through sky blue tinted spectacles and occasionally become apologists for owners with links to dubious political regimes (and, by that, I do mean us and, yes, I've been equally guilty at times).
Regardless, for the sake of your mental health, I'd avoid getting into spats with those who are clearly some way short of your intellect. Where's the fun in shooting metaphorical rats in a barrel?
Otherwise, keep posting mate. I might not agree with every opinion but I respect your right to express it.

Sincerely hope you’re not referring to my posts with that.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Yeah

The same people whose main defence of Sterling is his goal record won't be fans of Grealish for the same reason. It's like a venn diagram.

It isn't even about the players - it's about your football philosophy. I don't like poor/average footballers who are brilliant on the stats sheet.

It's like how Ronaldo keeps up with Messi as a goalscorer, but Messi is in a different stratosphere in terms of natural talent, technique, passing, dribbling, free-kicks, football IQ, vision etc. But if you ask someone who doesn't watch football to look at their stats on wiki, you could forgive them for thinking Ronaldo is better than Messi. Football is qualitative as much as it is quantitative, maybe more so.

Same on a lower level with Grealish and Sterling.

If people like Sterling because he scored a lot of goals, fair enough. If that is your football philosophy fair enough. That's not why I watch football, to count up goal stats for individual players. And even if you do that, he should have scored so many more based on how many chances he wasted.

It sounds pretentious, but I have played football (and told I am good) for years at grassroots level. I have played with talentless idiots who didn't contribute in general play, and just poached the box and expected to be fed. I don't like footballers like that.

I love Grealish and I loved Sterling. Different players and I had no problem with Sterling leaving. But I don't get people acting like he wasn't a brilliant player for us over a number of years or that he was 'made to look better than he was.'

 

[Vienna_70]

Also, does this extend to opposition players?

Pretty sure I could find you slagging off loads of oppo players. But when it comes to ex-City players it's all 'you're being too negative'.

Might as well leave due to this sheer tribalism from some. Fucking joke.

I’m not on another team's forum, slagging off their ex-players.

I’ve been a Manchester City supporter since 1970, and I’m posting on a Manchester City forum.

 

[HelloCity]

'Goals win games' is true at the base level - but it overlooks that a lot of goals are moves and very intricate. Often the last contact before it goes in the net (or second-last for assist) isn't the hardest part of the goal. Messi perfected the pre-assist, for example.

Admitting this on here will probably get me banned, but I am not a fan of Haaland as a player either, far from it. That's down to his all-round game. And me thinking that dates s to long before Roy Keane said anything.

I’m probably more in line with Pep Guardiola’s thinking in that there is room for different types of players in the team - each with their own different characteristics.

I don’t think we win the treble or 4 in a row without Haaland and things like the domestic treble don’t come without Sterling’s goals either.

Alongside those players I like to see the likes of Silva, Foden, De Bruyne, Gundogan, Bernardo and Grealish to add the flavour.

 

[Vienna_70]

Yeah I never doubted his stats. Or his contribution

But Grealish and Foden are much more talented than him. I bet most footballers (pro and grassroots) would tell you the same thing. You allude to the same with his 'awkward style of play' i.e. not a natural footballer who has an affinity with a ball.

Grealish actually gets slagged off a lot on here because of his goal and assist contribution, or lack thereof. But based on the 'eye test' ie watching him - he's a better footballer than Sterling no doubt. Vastly superior first touch, far more comfortable on the ball, better passer. When Grealish is on it, he facilitates other players and makes them look better in a way Sterling never could or did. But he's not a stats fiend so he doesn't appeal to those types.

Ultimately Sterling was finished before he was age 28. Pep made him look a better player than he was in my opinion. Now Pep does that with plenty of players but it was really pronounced with Sterling for me.

And I would suggest how poor he's been at Chelsea (with the caveat that they're a disgrace of a club) would back me up. He won't EVER be back competing for top honours.

Just because ha has an awkward style of play, it doesn’t mean he is not a natural footballer..

Michael Johnson (the American athlete) had a very awkward-looking style) but no on can accuse him of not being a natural runner.

 

[Silva 83]

I’m not on another team's forum, slagging off their ex-players.

I’ve been a Manchester City supporter since 1970, and I’m posting on a Manchester City forum.

One ex-player I have criticised. I have hardly slagged him off.

I have been complimentary to your other players.

Do you want me to just tell you every player you have had in the last 15 years is exceptional? Seems insecure asking for that.

 

[Silva 83]

While I respect your stance, if it's integrity and intelligent debate you're after, I'm not sure this is the right forum for you. Football fandom is, by its very nature, tribal and, as such, it often leads ordinarily reasonable people into a form of mental gymnastics whereby some see every player through sky blue tinted spectacles and occasionally become apologists for owners with links to dubious political regimes (and, by that, I do mean us and, yes, I've been equally guilty at times).
Regardless, for the sake of your mental health, I'd avoid getting into spats with those who are clearly some way short of your intellect. Where's the fun in shooting metaphorical rats in a barrel?
Otherwise, keep posting mate. I might not agree with every opinion but I respect your right to express it.

Thanks. I've already said that I have mental health issues. I was just giving an opinion on Sterling, that's all.

I am not saying I am more intelligent than anyone here either, just feel I got jumped on for criticsing Raheem.

 

[Silva 83]

I’m probably more in line with Pep Guardiola’s thinking in that there is room for different types of players in the team - each with their own different characteristics.

I don’t think we win the treble or 4 in a row without Haaland and things like the domestic treble don’t come without Sterling’s goals either.

Alongside those players I like to see the likes of Silva, Foden, De Bruyne, Gundogan, Bernardo and Grealish to add the flavour.

Fair enough. I respect that opinion.

I am willing to admit I am very dogmatic - I prize technique in football above all else, and natural genius.

It's something I could maybe work on. I admit that. So fair enough,

 

[Barcon]

A lot, as I take an interest in high quality football. I have been watching Sterling since his Liverpool days.

By 'neutral' I mean I don't actively support any club (I walked away from the club I did support as a kid because I am repulsed by its political views, and refuse to start supporting someone else like a glory hunter).

He's very much a guy who is technically limited but has great workrate and off the ball movement. He's also constantly defended based on his output, rather than his all-round game. That's not my type of player.

Ultimately, he's gone to Chelsea and proved me right that he's well on the way down. So I would say I am winning with what i think of him.

He was good at City, of course, but cost you in a few big games with his laughably bad finishing.

Liverpool?