Cole Palmer

Because the club were counting on him to be a first team squad member that would certainly be expected to get plenty of minutes. We would have needed to replace him in the squad if he had gone out on loan. Therefore we wanted to keep him but if not, sell him so we had the money to replace him. I don't think the club were counting on McAtee for the seasons he was out on loan.

It's worked out well for him at Chelsea but I very much doubt he'd be putting those numbers up for us if he had stayed (I doubt he'd have been taking the penalties for a start!). The role he has at Chelsea suits him and not having to play against packed defences every game certainly helps.

He was needed as a squad player so much there was no possibility of him going on loan and coming back a year later more experienced and more valuable? Doesn't sound like good economics to me.

More likely imho Guardiola was being stubborn (his way or the highway) and the management didn't see enough long-term value potential in Palmer. But that's all OK. Guardiola has proved himself often enough and so have the rest of management. They aren't immune to making the odd mistake, though, and we shouldn't be afraid to recognise them when they happen.

And as I said, he is a good player, good luck to him. I like him.
 
Last edited:
FFS how many more times must people like you need telling ?? City didn`t make any mistake in selling him. He wanted to fuck off.The only thing City didn`t guarantee was playing time. End of debate.
It was a mistake. Like buying Phillips was a mistake. But booting Cancelo out and buying Haaland weren’t mistakes.

We make mistakes, we make a lot, we make far fewer than many other clubs and we get more things right than wrong but they still happen.

Selling Palmer was a mistake, that’s okay, we’re allowed to make them.
 
Player wants a loan. We say no. Player asks to leave.

If this guy had gone on and failed elsewhere, every single person here would have said it was the correct decision to let him go. They would have said that a player who doesn't want to stay and compete should be sold.

The ONLY reason that people are saying different is because he is performing well.

Cole Palmer is a talented player. I was disappointed when he left, but we move on. HE IS NOT A CITY PLAYER, so he doesn't need discussing every, single time we don't win, or Chelsea do.
 
Last edited:
He came on as a sub in a European game, which we were already winning, scored from outside the box. First time I saw him. It was obvious to me he had something special. More than his technique it was a belief in himself that all the great players have.

We cocked up here but as many have said we get more right than wrong or at least we used to!
 
So you think the club should guarantee young players game time? That's just setting a precedent that's not gonna turn out well a lot of the time.
No. And I doubt any player expects that, including Palmer.

We should give them reasonable playing time or lose them.

In this case we were happier to lose him than make any compromise. Nobody realised his true potential or they might have shown more flexibility.

We are rich enough to farm out risk to other clubs and buy in oven ready. By and large that works. In a few cases it will come back to bite us in the arse.

As it has here, despite any revisionism. Another club has given him his rein and he has blossomed big time.
 
Last edited:
Whatever we think of him, he's a media star now and is getting the royal (blue) treatment from all and sundry. The working class lad who's made it in the big city just by being who he is - takes everything in his stride, doesn't change, lovable for it. I watched the game yesterday and he scored 2 penalties (the second a cheeky panenka) but I was surprised at all the praise being heaped upon him. Not that scoring penalties isn't a skill in itself. Apparently, he doesn't practice them. He's at the right club (blank canvas situation when he went there - a free hit) and the right manager.
I did wonder if he was doing this for us whether he'd be getting the same amount love ?
Anyway, good luck to him - infinitely preferable to the ego Bellingham. Just hope Palmer stays level-headed. He is good to watch and backs himself every time.
 
Because too many people like you don`t fully understand the real reason why he wanted to fuck off.People like you find it hard to understand that City were NOT to blame for this reason, something which you and others (only a few) have real problems in understanding.
As for the buy back clause he may not have wanted to come back to City, being a dyed in the wool Rag, and hoped that his beloved Rags would come knocking at some time in the near future.
Think about it ... £40M+ for someone who had hardly featured for the Blues. Chelsea may have come in with a lower offer and we said we wanted a buyback clause. The lad my have said to City there would be no way of coming back, so City insisted in a higher fee without the buy back fee being included.
Ok pal this forum is about opinions and I do feel like the majority of the fault falls on City. Plus who gives a toss who he supports as long as he plays well, look at Rico Lewis he is a blue but he’s not at the level. Palmer scored a screamer v Arsenal and then scored V Sevilla to be put back on the bench, no wonder he got pissed.
 
Exactly

NO player should be guaranteed game time at City. You earn your spot like the rest.

Palmer chose not to stay and force his way into the team and that's fine. It's his choice.

We lost a very good player and it's a move that's working out great for him. We probably got the shitty end of the stick here but that's life. At the time, it wasn't the wrong decision. He wanted to move because we dont guarantee people playing time.
Yet Foden was afforded more game time even whilst not playing well at times. Yet has regressed
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.