Scott Sinclair (continued)

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Fat el Hombre said:
Pigeonho said:
The Fat el Hombre said:
Might as well drive our title to trafford now
You've proper lost it now haven't you?!
Sinclair will obviously lose us the title.

He won't win it that's for sure
We cant have 25 £20M + players. Hes a good player who will provide the width and pace we need.
 
Pigeonho said:
The Fat el Hombre said:
Pigeonho said:
You've proper lost it now haven't you?!
Sinclair will obviously lose us the title.

He won't win it that's for sure
Neither will Silva or Aguero. Combined though they will assist in winning it. Players who cost £6m or £660m don't win the title on their own. Christ, this is embarrassing!

You're wasting your time Pige.
 
The Fat el Hombre said:
Pigeonho said:
The Fat el Hombre said:
Might as well drive our title to trafford now
You've proper lost it now haven't you?!
Sinclair will obviously lose us the title.

He won't win it that's for sure


You're going to look silly if he scores or makes an assist on Saturday. Give the lad a break, he might grow on you. Certainly he isn't as bad as you are making out.
 
Benarbia said:
Maicon & Sinclair, does that mean we've moved backwards

in terms of signing big names yes, but if they are an improvement on savic and johnson respectively, then no
 
waspish said:
The Fat el Hombre said:
waspish said:
Why don't fans judge payers after they'd played for us?

Because I've seen him play

It's funny that I've watched every city game last 20 years and I haven't seen Scott Sinclair play for city

Ok. From now on no one in the transfer forum is allowed to comment on potential signings because we've never seen them play for City. Luke chadwick? Might be good cos no one's ever seen him play for city. Danny shittu? Might be good cos no one's ever seen him play for city etc
 
I got used to the idea of us playing hardball, then coming back in January to get him. Show clubs we won't get messed around or held to ransom.

Disappointed that he's signing for this reason, but this minor annoyance aside, footballing wise this is a decent signing
 
mansour's tow ropes said:
Benarbia said:
Maicon & Sinclair, does that mean we've moved backwards

in terms of signing big names yes, but if they are an improvement on savic and johnson respectively, then no

Is sinclair better than Johnno though? I don't think he is. Johnno was a **** I suppose but that's about it

Looks like we're stagnating whilst others have strengthened, or at least not moving forward enough
 
The Fat el Hombre said:
Might as well drive our title to trafford now

when-someone-wont-stop-talking-about-their-problems.gif
 
Sweet addition to the squad. Dzeko will be thinking..............

Crosses from the bye line sir?

the-fast-show_001745_1_MainPicture.jpg
<br /><br />-- Thu Aug 30, 2012 11:03 am --<br /><br />
mcfc2607 said:
Колобок said:
mansour's tow ropes said:
in terms of signing big names yes, but if they are an improvement on savic and johnson respectively, then no
since when is Maicon not a big name in football?!!
Since when has maicon signed

Maicon hasn't signed, but to say he's not a 'name' is ridiculous even for this forum.
 
The Fat el Hombre said:
waspish said:
The Fat el Hombre said:
Because I've seen him play

It's funny that I've watched every city game last 20 years and I haven't seen Scott Sinclair play for city

Ok. From now on no one in the transfer forum is allowed to comment on potential signings because we've never seen them play for City. Luke chadwick? Might be good cos no one's ever seen him play for city. Danny shittu? Might be good cos no one's ever seen him play for city etc

I see your point, just annoys me fans saying a player is rubbish or not good enough. If city thought that he wasn't good enough why are they buying him?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top