You are correct. There is no viable back up striker obtainable that can fit in with our side and coincide with our needs on the planet...
BEHAVE...
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Alvarez replacement thread
- Thread starter It'sBlue93:20
- Start date
BEHAVE...
Maybe, or maybe 20 mil was too good to refuse relative to what we thought he would contribute. Nowhere near good enough for what exactly? To start in the Prem on a regular basis? To serve as a squad player used in some cup matches? To gain a spot start against a weak opponent on a squad filled with A listers? To break glass in case of emergency?Nowhere near good enough, thats why he was sold. Pretty simple.
decmancity
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 12,706
If there was, then the club clearly don't feel the need to go and get them.You are correct. There is no viable back up striker obtainable that can fit in with our side and coincide with our needs on the planet...
BEHAVE...
Time will tell if that is right or not.
Of course 20m was good, hes scored 11 goals in his senior career.Maybe, or maybe 20 mil was too good to refuse relative to what we thought he would contribute. Nowhere near good enough for what exactly? To start in the Prem on a regular basis? To serve as a squad player used in some cup matches? To gain a spot start against a weak opponent on a squad filled with A listers? To break glass in case of emergency?
Nowhere near good enough to take up a squad spot for City.
Gabriel
Well-Known Member
Wonder why Santiago Jimenez (Feyenoord) suddenly rejected Nottingham Forest?
Personally, I don't think Delap is the answer. My whole point is we need someone to serve as a second #9. Your point is having no one is a better option than having Delap. Maybe so, but how does a squad as carefully crafted as ours, built to succeed at the highest levels, proceed without a second option in the 9 role? IMO it makes ZERO sense. We have the money and the squad space. What is the point of not filling the role of a back up 9? Why? That the club know what they are doing is not the same thing as a reason. What reason does the club have for not wanting a back up to Haaland, if that's even the case. I've yet to hear a logical explanation except this notion of playing one of our wingers or midfielders there.If there was, then the club clearly don't feel the need to go and get them.
Time will tell if that is right or not.
Of course 20m was good, hes scored 11 goals in his senior career.
Nowhere near good enough to take up a squad spot for City.
As far as anyone knows the club may be working feverishly to address this issue as we speak...
blueparrot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 29,431
If there is we'll get one if there isn't we won't. If we don't it will be because we think it's the better option to whats available..You are correct. There is no viable back up striker obtainable that can fit in with our side and coincide with our needs on the planet...
BEHAVE...
Personally, I don't think Delap is the answer. My whole point is we need someone to serve as a second #9. Your point is having no one is a better option than having Delap. Maybe so, but how does a squad as carefully crafted as ours, built to succeed at the highest levels, proceed without a second option in the 9 role? IMO it makes ZERO sense. We have the money and the squad space. What is the point of not filling the role of a back up 9? Why? That the club know what they are doing is not the same thing as a reason. What reason does the club have for not wanting a back up to Haaland, if that's even the case. I've yet to hear a logical explanation except this notion of playing one of our wingers or midfielders there.
As far as anyone knows the club may be working feverishly to address this issue as we speak...
Why isn't playing a false 9 a logical explanation?
In the three seasons before Haaland arrived, our top scorers were Sterling, Gundogan and Mahrez. In two of those seasons we scored more league goals than we have when Haaland has been here.
The club may decide to bring in a backup 9, but the attackers in this team are well capable of stepping up if we put them in the main goalscoring position. Putting in a 9 that is well below Haaland's level in terms of goalscoring, but isn't at the same level of overall team play that we get with our other attackers, doesn't seem logical to me.
And his performance and attitude on Saturday was so unlike any City player I have seen for a long time, a big , daft, dirty lump.Nowhere near good enough, thats why he was sold. Pretty simple.
1) Who said anything about bringing in someone well below Haaland's level? 2) When we won with the false 9 system it's what we played. Not a back up plan to a traditional 9.Why isn't playing a false 9 a logical explanation?
In the three seasons before Haaland arrived, our top scorers were Sterling, Gundogan and Mahrez. In two of those seasons we scored more league goals than we have when Haaland has been here.
The club may decide to bring in a backup 9, but the attackers in this team are well capable of stepping up if we put them in the main goalscoring position. Putting in a 9 that is well below Haaland's level in terms of goalscoring, but isn't at the same level of overall team play that we get with our other attackers, doesn't seem logical to me.
I'm not going to debate this 'til the end of time. I respect your opinion but I disagree that we are better off without a true second 9 on the squad...
Txiki Txiki Bang Bang
Well-Known Member
Rory passed some of that Stoke DNA to himAnd his performance and attitude on Saturday was so unlike any City player I have seen for a long time, a big , daft, dirty lump.