Garrido or Kolarov?

[bluemoondays]

Garrido would have been a decent backup to Clichy, low transfer fee, low wages, good pro, would never have whinged about being on the bench and certainly good enough to play against bottom 6-8 teams.

Kolarov fits a few of the above but for his transfer fee and wages he should be a first choice and he is never going to be 1st choice over Clichy.

 

[Blue Hefner]

If Kolarov cost 1.5mil then I'd say him. But he isn't 15mil better than Garrido

They are both pretty shit, however Garrido cost 1.5mil and plays for Norwich which is about his level whereas Kolarov cost 16mil and plays for one of the best teams in England and is well out of his dept

 

[xenon_]

I'll go with Kolarov.

 

[ell]

Can I have the option of Michael Ball instead of these two?

 

[baildon blue]

Kolarov was a shocking signing,a complete waste of time.

Bridge was/is better than both.

Bridge was better than Kolarov and Garrido.Get a grip.

 

[Carl_Man_City]

Kolarov by a mile, anyone who says otherwise needs to give their head a wobble

 

[DannyBoy2890]

Laurent charvet

 

[sergiokun]

Garrido all day

 

[The Pink Panther]

Kolorov > Garrido, but not by £14.5M
In comparison to Kolorov's £16M fee, Clichy was an absolute steal @£7M

 

[humantrain]

Kolarov great in attack. Average defending. Have you all forgotten his performance vs Real Madrid ? Or vs Chelsea in the Community Shield where he assisted in the winning Goal ? I don't understand why City players get so much abuse on this forum. Sometimes I'm ashamed to be a City fan.

-- Tue May 21, 2013 10:32 am --

Bit harsh on Korolov. I know hes had a bad season n'all .

I think Kolorov (and the coaches) should realize that he is LM not LB.

yup. he's more of an LM.