thenabster said:Woo people are ripping Mertens here. He's good. Has great stats, kind of like a Valbuena who can score 3 times more. He is definitely good enough for City but maybe not for a starting spot. It would be a good buy but maybe not the buy we should do, plus he would be a bit expensive too.
Tron Coltrane said:thenabster said:Woo people are ripping Mertens here. He's good. Has great stats, kind of like a Valbuena who can score 3 times more. He is definitely good enough for City but maybe not for a starting spot. It would be a good buy but maybe not the buy we should do, plus he would be a bit expensive too.
In their defense (and at the risk of up-ending my own interest) I think it might have something to do with him recently knocking Cahill's tooth out with a cheap shove then rolling around like he'd been shot after a nothing tackle.
That said, I'm surprised nobody else noticed the positive side to his game in the friendly. I thought Hazard was a non-event, but everything creative went through Mertens. A pacey winger who played down the width of the pitch on the break, taking defenders on and putting balls into the 18, spreading out the England back line, but at the same time shoring-up the attack in the center when white shirts were behind the ball -- looking for the final pass (like Nasri or Silva) while keeping possession in attack.
He did enough for me to look him up, and what I saw was a hilarious statistical record on club level, a reported interest from Bayern and Inter, and a supposed £10 mil price tag (which even if wrong, couldn't be off by more than double). Thought he was worth talking about anyway, but I guess I could be wrong.
itisrising said:Quick,has a good cross in him and wouldn't cost the earth. Hopefully Vinnie can put in a good word. He might be what we need. The hype surrounding Munian and Lavezzi would mean that they would be unrealistic targets. I really believe he would key when we are on a counter as he is a player with immense pace.
ANY1aBLUE said:itisrising said:Quick,has a good cross in him and wouldn't cost the earth. Hopefully Vinnie can put in a good word. He might be what we need. The hype surrounding Munian and Lavezzi would mean that they would be unrealistic targets. I really believe he would key when we are on a counter as he is a player with immense pace.
He certainly looked better than Hazard - what was all the fuss about him eh?
ANY1aBLUE said:itisrising said:Quick,has a good cross in him and wouldn't cost the earth. Hopefully Vinnie can put in a good word. He might be what we need. The hype surrounding Munian and Lavezzi would mean that they would be unrealistic targets. I really believe he would key when we are on a counter as he is a player with immense pace.
He certainly looked better than Hazard - what was all the fuss about him eh?
Monkfish said:ANY1aBLUE said:itisrising said:Quick,has a good cross in him and wouldn't cost the earth. Hopefully Vinnie can put in a good word. He might be what we need. The hype surrounding Munian and Lavezzi would mean that they would be unrealistic targets. I really believe he would key when we are on a counter as he is a player with immense pace.
He certainly looked better than Hazard - what was all the fuss about him eh?
yeah but Hazard only cost 32m, and as you heard Chelsea earned 650m from their CL win so its nothing to them
Tron Coltrane said:Stuuuuuu said:Please god no. We don't need to be signing diving cheats like this guy. It's just wrong for City.
Again, I'm the first one to admit I don't know enough about the guy, so this is a legitimate question: is this statement based on a reaction to one game (in which case you could pick out similar unfortunate incidents for a third of our team, at some points in their careers, to label them "diving cheats"), or is this an informed accusation based on watching him play throughout the past?
Monkfish said:ANY1aBLUE said:itisrising said:Quick,has a good cross in him and wouldn't cost the earth. Hopefully Vinnie can put in a good word. He might be what we need. The hype surrounding Munian and Lavezzi would mean that they would be unrealistic targets. I really believe he would key when we are on a counter as he is a player with immense pace.
He certainly looked better than Hazard - what was all the fuss about him eh?
yeah but Hazard only cost 32m, and as you heard Chelsea earned 650m from their CL win so its nothing to them