Alexis Sanchez

Discussion in 'Transfer forum' started by MegaBlue, 3 May 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Colin Bells Boots

    Colin Bells Boots

    31 May 2016
    That would really upset Wenger - good idea.
  2. Nelinho


    30 Oct 2016
    Add to that a heavy schedule forcing you to field 11 fresh pairs of legs every 3-4 fucking days. Add possible injuries (fingers crossed) and suspensions and stuff impossible to predict (like Raheem missing the Liverpool match due to a 2nd yellow = red for ... celebrating with the fans). Add the fact that you're an ambitious club competing in the toughest league of the world, fighting on 4 fucking fronts. And so on, and so on...

    Following that travesty of transfer strategy last summer, City were forced to compete half a season with 1,5 strikers. That is, Sergio with a serious injury record, and a youngster out of his depth. We all remember how that situation evolved, don't we? Maybe not. And in the process the manager was actually counting the days for the arrival of 19yo GJ. Who adapted quickly, true, but that was not a given. On the contrary, it was the exception of the rule. Newcomers need time, you see...

    I wonder how many City fans feel grateful to Jorge Sampaoli today. I do. Thank God he didn't play Aguero on both matches during the international break. And I wonder how many have noticed that GJ as well as Otamendi as well as Firmino, were all substituted early in the 2nd half on Saturday...

    But you do understand that some people will never get it, don't you? It's incredible. I mean we're talking about simple facts. And they don't learn, do they? The concept of physical fatigue, for example, and how it affects performance. Feel free to try to explain it if you want. But I'm afraid you'll be wasting your time...

    Which means the question here is not whether AS was needed or not. That's not even debatable. Once again, the question is why City did not present a plan B. Because in the end that joke of a club called Arsenal did not proceed with the transfer and City were left with no options. I really really, I mean really hope we will not pay for this. As far as I am concerned, there will be no excuses if we do...
  3. PW


    21 Aug 2017
    Don't get me wrong Sanchez is a fine player and would have been a useful addition, but having seen GJ and LS at weekend I'm not to disappointed that he hasn't joined. I can't help feeling it would have hindered the progress of the younger players had he signed and it may have disheartened them.
  4. avoidconfusion


    22 Sep 2008
  5. St.Pauli support

    St.Pauli support

    17 Feb 2010
    Well I think Pep will also have had a thought about that.

    I think best case is a positive competition within a squad.
    You need to manage that kind of competition very well but in this top level anybody has to be ready to show he is the best. At the same time the team must be key.

    Also, our great kids are young and still quite unexperienced. Surely you need some balance.
    Sanchez can offer a lot for at least 3 good years I believe.
    The young guns could learn a lot in those years and afterwards they would be in the best years.
    Believe it or not, there is a plan over several years in place.

    That's why I think City's stance towards Sanchez hasn't changed.
    Because there is no better alternative, up to now.
    City have been committed and still are. They don't want a plan B for the left wing, they want Sanchez. IMO.

    How Sanchez is performing for Arsenal has to be seen.
  6. nottsco2-0


    21 May 2013
    Don't get it with him, everyone absolutely raves about him and I just see a fairly tidy play with the occasional good game. I couldn't see him getting near our side
  7. Manchester_lalala


    9 Jul 2008
    Weve got better players than lemar so it would be a pointless signing.
  8. Neville Kneville

    Neville Kneville

    26 May 2008
    Perhaps people do actually 'get' all of that & would still rather have Sanchez' 30 odd games shared between Sterling, Sane, Bernardo Silva, Yaya Toure & the kids instead.

    If we have no plan of bringing through Sterling & Sane, to be reliable top performers, then fine, we can't trust them so we 'need' Sanchez but that's the only reason we would ever need him, because we are not willing to put our trust in the younger attackers.

    I recon if we'd had Sanchez on Saturday, we now be without two fantastic goals by Sane, having watched Sanchez twisting round in little circles flicking passes about instead (because he needed the game time & it's 'so' important).

    If Sanchez arrives, he will take games from Sterling & Sane as well as Bernardo Silva & any young players we might think of using.

    Occasionally, we might find the unlikely event that all our attackers are injured or tired, & that indeed, having Sanchez is a godsend. Of course it might be that on those occasions, he doesn't actually score or assist, or play especially well, so it turns out he wasn't. His best games might in fact turn out to be when everyone is fit & he's keeping one of our exciting young forwards on the bench.

    But a lot of the time, we will have Aguero, Jesus, Sterling, Sane, Silva, Silva, & KDB, potentially available for attacking positions along with Foden, Diaz etc with Gundogan, Yaya, Fernandinho, Danilo & Delph available for two positions behind.

    In Saturday's formation, had kompany been fit & Danilo not playing cb that would be Kompany, Otamendi & Stones, plus Mendy & Walker leaving five more places in the team.

    (It's pretty obvious where a couple of injuries would cause most problems & it's not up front)

    For those five remaining places, we would have 12 senior players plus Foden, Diaz etc. Against most teams we will probably need someone like Fernandinho. Let's say we just have him, on his own, in midfield, to keep more attacking places available.

    That would leave 4 attacking positions, for Aguero, Jesus, Sterling, Sane, Silva, Silva, KDB & the kids. KDB will play most important games if fit.

    That leaves 3 more places, for Aguero, Jesus, Sane, Sterling, Silva & Silva (plus the kids).

    So three of them, are sat on the bench, next to Gundogan, Yaya Toure & Danilo, who also have to play, regularly & it's not going to be David Silva sat there so often is it ?

    So already, two of the best young players in world football (who are both scoring goals, right now) are struggling to get on the pitch, without us leaving out a 'nailed on' starter & we have no place for Bernardo Silva.

    Now bring in Sanchez.

    Is he coming to sit on the bench ? Nope. He has to start games (even if not in form, because Pep has promised him he will play plenty of games).

    So basically, we are relying on several players being injured, in order for Sanchez to play regularly, without impeding the careers of Sterling & Sane.

    So yes, if we don't trust those two can make the relevant impression, we might 'need' Sanchez.

    Personally, I'd rather take the chance without him, although ironically, he's a much better deal in Jan than he was in August.

    But whether that's right or wrong, as you can see, it's not because I'm a fucking idiot who hasn't thought it through. It's a choice based on 'thinking it through'.
  9. Burtonblue


    7 Nov 2010
    A lot will depend upon on where we are come January.
    If we are steaming then there will be no need to splash out any cash on Sanchez given that he could be signed on a free in the summer.
    I still think he is one of the very best in the world in that position and would be a brilliant addition.
  10. Shahed_Blue


    5 May 2016
    We need a goal scoring wide forward not Lemar
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page