Media persecution of Raheem Sterling

[Rolee]

The media killed him pre-tournament, but I think a few City fans are just putting a tick where media reports stick a cross

There are two separate issues.

1. The criticism and what underlies it - now and in the past.
   
   
2. His form for England which has been poor at the World Cup.

If was an England fan, I'd probably want Vardy starting or Rashford. England have a fantastic set-piece routine going on. That doesn't suit Sterling. They also lack midfielders who can play the little one-twos around the box that Sterling thrives on.

Nothing gave me greater pleasure last season than to see Sterling score goals for City, but I think some of the disappointment from England fans at Sterling's performance is genuine and without any angle or side to it. If I were Southgate I'd be torn about whether to carry on playing Sterling hoping that a goal would kick start him and lift him, or play someone like Vardy or Rashford. Rashford's finishing is also poor, but he is fearless and reasonable in the air. Let's face it 75% of the balls going into the England forwards are high crosses or free-kicks and corners. This does not suit Sterling.

Sterling had a mixed game against Sweden. it was possibly his best game of the tournament, but in no game did he come close to the level he reached at times for City.

1. Apart from a half hour in the opening game his form has been fine.

2. Why change a winning team?

 

[2sheikhs]

we don't have the players to see and deliver to sterling's movement ,our goals except a couple have come from set pieces ,southgate wants to play the possession way but doesn't have the players , put modric/silva into the midfield then sterlings umpteen runs would of been picked out , it isn't a sterling problem it is a lack of quality behind where the problem lies,how any fucker says put vardy or rashford instead of sterling I don't know ,yes put them on with a few minutes to go because sterling has run the oppo ragged

As I said before, we could still win games with Vardy and Kane up front. If allardyce was in charge, that’s the route we’d adopt. Playing the percentages and hoping for defensive mistakes from the opposition.
I still think Sterling is not being utilised in his best position though. I’d play him on the right of a front 3 with walker as wingback, stones, cahill and mcguire at the back.

 

[93.01]

Anything but goals, and that is a problem for a forward.

All I am saying is that he is not playing as well for England as he does for City. You should try reading what I say before responding like that.

He's half right. Goal contribution is important. But it is not the priority facet that city look for in their forwards. As I've previously said Aguero could not get into the team some time ago because of peps concern that if he wasnt scoring, he was offering the team precious little else. That had changed with aguero. You only have to look at the forwards we have been linked with in hazard to know it's a lot more than goals city are after. Hazard and Jesus are not 30 goals a season players but there movement/ essentially f the false 9 position s they take up, dragging defences out of shape, feeding in other players provides their respective teams with the platform to help themselves to a shitload of goals. Pep had been clear. It's all about the team.

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

Sir Geoff Hurst knows the score: "Raheem Sterling was terrific. He had a little bit of criticism but he performed well. He did more than the other games, he was key in turning the defence, looked enormously fit right throughout the game."

 

[Sir peace frog]

Which is 50% of what I said. City don't play like England. England are playing set-pieces and most of the deliveries into the box are high balls. That's not Sterling's game and he's also clearly lost confidence. I can't take anyone seriously who is not prepared to accept that Sterling is playing under par for England, and struggling to score goals.

hes playing under par because a hell of a lot of his runs aren't being seen , hes not able to do what he does for city, hes running teams ragged getting those freekicks or pulling people all over the place,as for being taken seriously by you marvin I couldnt give a fuck ,you think rashford should play instead

 

[Marvin]

He's half right. Goal contribution is important. But it is not the priority facet that city look for in their forwards. As I've previously said Aguero could not get into the team some time ago because of peps concern that if he wasnt scoring, he was offering the team precious little else. That had changed with aguero. You only have to look at the forwards we have been linked with in hazard to know it's a lot more than goals city are after. Hazard and Jesus are not 30 goals a season players but there movement/ essentially f the false 9 position s they take up, dragging defences out of shape, feeding in other players provides their respective teams with the platform to help themselves to a shitload of goals. Pep had been clear. It's all about the team.

he last scored for England in 2015 almost 3 years ago.

I do not appreciate other contributors trying to make out I am anti-Sterling. Unfortunately some people are not as reasonable as you are. I am not starting another running argument on Bluemoon about this topic of any other. Frankly other people are not up to it

 

[babyape]

Sir Geoff Hurst knows the score: "Raheem Sterling was terrific. He had a little bit of criticism but he performed well. He did more than the other games, he was key in turning the defence, looked enormously fit right throughout the game."

B*llocks. What does a World Cup Winner know about winning World Cups. Steve down the boozer who once had a trial for Oldham Town in 1992 and watches Match of the Day sometimes knows what everyone knows. Sterling is rubbish and needs to be replaced by the Wythenshawe Pele immediately.

 

[inchy14]

Anything but goals, and that is a problem for a forward.

All I am saying is that he is not playing as well for England as he does for City. You should try reading what I say before responding like that.

I unfortunately did read what you'd posted, you want Rashford or Vardy to start instead of Sterling because he hasn't scored yet countless others and i have pointed out that even though we'd also like him to have scored his contribution to the team is vital. Not one person has intimated that he's playing as well for England as he does for City, but then again no one is saying Kane or Alli are playing as well as they do for Spurs.

he last scored for England in 2015 almost 3 years ago.

I do not appreciate other contributors trying to make out I am anti-Sterling. Unfortunately some people are not as reasonable as you are. I am not starting another running argument on Bluemoon about this topic of any other. Frankly other people are not up to it

Who's said you're anti-Sterling? I'm saying you can't / don't see the bigger picture, it's not all about individual players scoring, some players sacrifice themselves for the team by making intelligent runs, something i also think Lingard happens to do to great effect.

Rashford and Vardy have both come on or played part in games and have done absolutely fuck all to justify replacing Sterling.

 

[SilverFox2]

Is the point that the chances that he missed would simply not have been there to anyone else if he had not been playing ?
In other words his presence generates chances.

 

[inchy14]

Is the point that the chances that he missed would simply not have been there to anyone else if he had not been playing ?
In other words his presence generates chances.

Another good point. Rashford or Vardy may not have even been in those positions in the first place, something i said after he missed chance after chance in the derby, he's got different movement to other players and creates is own chances.