I was looking at it myself, the fullback position is the only place they can make that case but we needed to replace our fullbacks fast, with quality and experience of type that is in short supply.
This will be their sticking point despite all the above positions you mention and there will probably be comparisons to Liverpool because it suits their narrative. Liverpool got lucky though with their fullbacks. Robertson was a hopeful punt that paid off, Arnold is the first academy product they've had make the grade in years unless you count Sterling who only spent 2 years there before going pro. They also were allowed to ease them in from a position of no pressure, we had no such luxury after our first season under Pep, it needed rectifying fast.
City lost all 4 squad full backs that summer and they were all well over 30. We replaced the 4 with 3 signings which isn't that profligate especially as I'm struggling to think of a full back we've actually paid a big fee for since the takeover. Zabaleta cost £6.45m, Clichy £7m, Kolarov £16m and Sagna was a free.
That's true but I was looking at it from the market distortion angle, they went especially overboard with the criticism of our fees on Mendy and Walker.City lost all 4 squad full backs that summer and they were all well over 30. We replaced the 4 with 3 signings which isn't that profligate especially as I'm struggling to think of a full back we've actually paid a big fee for since the takeover. Zabaleta cost £6.45m, Clichy £7m, Kolarov £16m and Sagna was a free.
City lost all 4 squad full backs that summer and they were all well over 30. We replaced the 4 with 3 signings which isn't that profligate especially as I'm struggling to think of a full back we'd actually paid a big fee for since the takeover. Zabaleta cost £6.45m, Clichy £7m, Kolarov £16m and Sagna was a free.
Which paper do you work for?We play in a stadium built and paid for by the state, it's not unreasonable to assume our owners wouldn't be here without that stadium. There are plenty of arguments to fight but this isn't one of them, countries/councils have always "helped" club's that benefit them. West Ham got handed a stadium, Everton sold their training ground to the council, the same council approved compulsory purchase orders to knock down people's houses for Anfield to be redeveloped. It's laughable what he said but people in glass houses and all that.
We play in a stadium built and paid for by the state, it's not unreasonable to assume our owners wouldn't be here without that stadium. There are plenty of arguments to fight but this isn't one of them, countries/councils have always "helped" club's that benefit them. West Ham got handed a stadium, Everton sold their training ground to the council, the same council approved compulsory purchase orders to knock down people's houses for Anfield to be redeveloped. It's laughable what he said but people in glass houses and all that.
Genocide of indigenous peoples.
Also slavery, yes.
Why do we have a "limit" facility?Having watched both parts I'm struggling to understand the excitement about it to be honest. A shoeing for the mediocrity Tebas, nice words about the season past, lots of stuff about CFG (which doesn't interest me in the slightest), a vague promise to expand the stadium when the time is 'right' and not much else.
I like Khaldoon but his end of season thing is standard City TV.