Scott Sinclair (continued)

[sboroMCFC]

Why didn't we go for Hoillet instead?

 

[Ducado]

Why didn't we go for Hoillet instead?

Because we did not want him?

 

[argyle]

We could be buying Samaras again and the happy clappers would spin it into a great signing.

Sinclair is a squad signing, nothing more. Someone to bring on when our plan A isn't going well. He isn't going to be storming the Champions league.

Do people really believe Sinclair was Mancini's second choice after Hazard? The real question is who else did we lose out on/turned down on after Hazard.<br /><br />-- Thu Aug 30, 2012 12:09 pm --<br /><br />

8m for Scott Sinclair. L O fucking L.

Considering Sunderland have just spunked upto £14m on Fletcher and how Liverpoo spunked £32m on Carroll and £20m on Henderson, I would say you can only be laughing at the bargain we have, surely?

So pointing out Liverpool's shit signings is now our default position when our signings are a little disappointing?

 

[Neville Kneville]

We could be buying Samaras again and the happy clappers would spin it into a great signing.

Sinclair is a squad signing, nothing more. Someone to bring on when our plan A isn't going well. He isn't going to be storming the Champions league.

Do people really believe Sinclair was Mancini's second choice after Hazard? The real question is who else did we lose out on/turned down on after Hazard.

Sinclair is the replacement for Johnson, not for Hazard.

Whoever we have in mind for that, will either sign tomorrow or we'll have to wait til Jan or next season. Hazard was the target & there are few players available anywhere who can replace him.

 

[hgblue]

He's got strength, skill, intelligence & experience. And he was cheap & Mancini wanted him.

Why are people moaning ?

Some people are like that, they get fixated on an idea and won't let it go, they will now be looking for evidence that they were right all along, in their eyes the player has not got a chance, I happen to think that most City fans will welcome the player, even though he is not some mega signing, he has something we are missing and that is pace

If you don't rate a player you don't rate him. Simple as that. I'm not going to change my mind because he's signing for City. If he signs, I'll wish the lad well and hope he proves me wrong.

 

[Ducado]

We could be buying Samaras again and the happy clappers would spin it into a great signing.

Sinclair is a squad signing, nothing more. Someone to bring on when our plan A isn't going well. He isn't going to be storming the Champions league.

Do people really believe Sinclair was Mancini's second choice after Hazard? The real question is who else did we lose out on/turned down on after Hazard.

For happy clappers read realists, those who don't play silly computer games and watch the odd foreign game and think some player with an exotic sounding name would be great, also read those that know we can't keep spending at the rate we have been spending and also know you can't get every player you go for, also some of us know that no team is made up world class players, it's a mixture.

It's a good signing and I happen to trust the club on this, I don't think I am alone, lets see how he performs first

 

[Danielmanc]

We could be buying Samaras again and the happy clappers would spin it into a great signing.

Sinclair is a squad signing, nothing more. Someone to bring on when our plan A isn't going well. He isn't going to be storming the Champions league.

Do people really believe Sinclair was Mancini's second choice after Hazard? The real question is who else did we lose out on/turned down on after Hazard.

For happy clappers read realists, those who don't play silly computer games and watch the odd foreign game and think some player with an exotic sounding name would be great, also read those that know we can't keep spending at the rate we have been spending and also know you can't get every player you go for, also some of us know that no team is made up world class players, it's a mixture.

It's a good signing and I happen to trust the club on this, I don't think I am alone, lets see how he performs first

This is so right.

Maybe some of out "supporters" should give the player a chance with our team rather than write him off before he has kicked a ball for us.

 

[argyle]

We could be buying Samaras again and the happy clappers would spin it into a great signing.

Sinclair is a squad signing, nothing more. Someone to bring on when our plan A isn't going well. He isn't going to be storming the Champions league.

Do people really believe Sinclair was Mancini's second choice after Hazard? The real question is who else did we lose out on/turned down on after Hazard.

Sinclair is the replacement for Johnson, not for Hazard.

Whoever we have in mind for that, will either sign tomorrow or we'll have to wait til Jan or next season. Hazard was the target & there are few players available anywhere who can replace him.

Hazard would have been the replacement for Johnson. Fair enough, his agent got greedy and we walked, no problem with that.

However who else were we knocked back on before Sinclair?

I wish the lad well, but he's not a player champions should be after, imo.

 

[The Fat el Hombre]

Cracks me up when people say stuff like this, as though the average man is supposed to have a knowledge of players up there with what City pay millions every year and employ full time scouts to do

Yet you don't trust these same scouts if we buy a player you don't like - laughable really. Or are you not the average man?

Has nothing to do with trust. They have a far greater knowledge of players than me. You ask me who I think we should sign and my knowledge is fairly limited to the prem, theirs is worldwide.

Not rocket science son

 

[Ducado]

We could be buying Samaras again and the happy clappers would spin it into a great signing.

Sinclair is a squad signing, nothing more. Someone to bring on when our plan A isn't going well. He isn't going to be storming the Champions league.

Do people really believe Sinclair was Mancini's second choice after Hazard? The real question is who else did we lose out on/turned down on after Hazard.

Sinclair is the replacement for Johnson, not for Hazard.

Whoever we have in mind for that, will either sign tomorrow or we'll have to wait til Jan or next season. Hazard was the target & there are few players available anywhere who can replace him.

Hazard would have been the replacement for Johnson. Fair enough, his agent got greedy and we walked, no problem with that.

However who else were we knocked back on before Sinclair?

I wish the lad well, but he's not a player champions should be after, imo.

It's a pity your not running a top football club really

 

[Bluesiam]

Can I ask who you would sign - bare in mind he has to be English and a winger. Also, he has to fit in with Mancini work ethic hence the selling of AJ, oh and also he has to be prepared to be a squad player as really he is looking at 10/15 starts and 10/15 sub appearances, and he has to have pace as thats what we lack.

So go on - who should we have bought?

This.

But if I was going to be pedantic, Aaron Lennon ;)

Not a bad shout but how much would he cost then? Doesnt score as much as Sinclair either. And a bit more injury prone.

Anybody consider the fact that Spurs might not sell him? I also suspect he wouldn't be prepared to sit on the bench as much as Sinclair would.

 

[Cheadle Blue]

Why didn't we go for Hoillet instead?

come on mate, Sinclair is better than hoilett. i think a few on here will be in for a bit of a shock

 

[argyle]

We could be buying Samaras again and the happy clappers would spin it into a great signing.

Sinclair is a squad signing, nothing more. Someone to bring on when our plan A isn't going well. He isn't going to be storming the Champions league.

Do people really believe Sinclair was Mancini's second choice after Hazard? The real question is who else did we lose out on/turned down on after Hazard.

For happy clappers read realists, those who don't play silly computer games and watch the odd foreign game and think some player with an exotic sounding name would be great, also read those that know we can't keep spending at the rate we have been spending and also know you can't get every player you go for, also some of us know that no team is made up world class players, it's a mixture.

It's a good signing and I happen to trust the club on this, I don't think I am alone, lets see how he performs first

If any of these realists were to have read an ITK post on here a week after we won the league stating that we would be signing the likes of Sinclair they would have ripped that post to shreds.

For what ever reason the brakes have been put on our transfer dealings.

 

[Dextersmate]

We could be buying Samaras again and the happy clappers would spin it into a great signing.

Sinclair is a squad signing, nothing more. Someone to bring on when our plan A isn't going well. He isn't going to be storming the Champions league.

Do people really believe Sinclair was Mancini's second choice after Hazard? The real question is who else did we lose out on/turned down on after Hazard.

For happy clappers read realists, those who don't play silly computer games and watch the odd foreign game and think some player with an exotic sounding name would be great, also read those that know we can't keep spending at the rate we have been spending and also know you can't get every player you go for, also some of us know that no team is made up world class players, it's a mixture.

It's a good signing and I happen to trust the club on this, I don't think I am alone, lets see how he performs first

Spot on, 99% of City fans would agree.

 

[argyle]

Sinclair is the replacement for Johnson, not for Hazard.

Whoever we have in mind for that, will either sign tomorrow or we'll have to wait til Jan or next season. Hazard was the target & there are few players available anywhere who can replace him.

Hazard would have been the replacement for Johnson. Fair enough, his agent got greedy and we walked, no problem with that.

However who else were we knocked back on before Sinclair?

I wish the lad well, but he's not a player champions should be after, imo.

It's a pity your not running a top football club really

Do all mods on here resort to shitty little personal digs when someone disagrees with them?

 

[blutomato42]

Sinclair fee

Has a fee actually been agreed, and he'll have a medical later or tomorrow, or is it just more crap paper talk?

 

[Shauntheprofitmachine]

This.

But if I was going to be pedantic, Aaron Lennon ;)

Not a bad shout but how much would he cost then? Doesnt score as much as Sinclair either. And a bit more injury prone.

Anybody consider the fact that Spurs might not sell him? I also suspect he wouldn't be prepared to sit on the bench as much as Sinclair would.

Although he does have pace in abundance which is something we were crying out for last year

 

[iamdamienl]

Re: Sinclair fee

I'm pretty sure its been agreed

 

[Danielmanc]

Re: Sinclair fee

Has a fee actually been agreed, and he'll have a medical later or tomorrow, or is it just more crap paper talk?

6.2 mil according to SSN

 

[Patientman63]

Re: Sinclair fee

Has a fee actually been agreed, and he'll have a medical later or tomorrow, or is it just more crap paper talk?

If its in the paper, its probably crap.