Scott Sinclair

[cheddar404]

I can't possibly say as I've never seen training, so I'll leave it up mancini.
Maybe we bought him because he's English.

I'm English though and I'd do it for a fraction of his wages.

 

[Uncle Wally One Ball]

great post, how anyone can shay hes rubbish when hes barely played is beyond me. He showed at swansea he is good enough

Disagree. If you speak to any Swans fans who watched him all the time they will all tell you, to a man, that he flattered to deceive. He wasnt good enough at Swansea and wasnt starting games there. He ran with the ball nicely but there was never an end product with him. I know Swansea were laughing their heads off when we came in for him.

He started 35 of their 38 PL games last season, why would you lie about something like that?

End product = 8 goals and 5 assists last season.

Brendan Rodgers described him as his "go-to guy"

I believe Mourinho gave him his first start at Chelsea just before he left, he saw something in him and Mancini sees something in him but ignore all that, we the fans obviously know better.

I meant this season before we signed him. He wasnt starting and they didnt miss him. Rodgers likes him but he wouldnt have been in their team this year, they are more direct and Sinclair doesnt produce.

 

[Rolee]

Disagree. If you speak to any Swans fans who watched him all the time they will all tell you, to a man, that he flattered to deceive. He wasnt good enough at Swansea and wasnt starting games there. He ran with the ball nicely but there was never an end product with him. I know Swansea were laughing their heads off when we came in for him.

He started 35 of their 38 PL games last season, why would you lie about something like that?

End product = 8 goals and 5 assists last season.

Brendan Rodgers described him as his "go-to guy"

I believe Mourinho gave him his first start at Chelsea just before he left, he saw something in him and Mancini sees something in him but ignore all that, we the fans obviously know better.

I meant this season before we signed him. He wasnt starting and they didnt miss him. Rodgers likes him but he wouldnt have been in their team this year, they are more direct and Sinclair doesnt produce.

You mean this season when it was known he would be on his way out? Give over.

 

[Wrighty Wrexham]

"Still, the notoriously unsympathetic British public are having none of it. One particular tweet - which earned over 900 re-tweets - read: 'Helen Flanagan has now been picked twice in a row. Which is better than Scott Sinclair has done since joining Man City #PrayForScotty.' Ouch"

Poor Scotty

 

[Cityinmyheart]

would had certainly given more if played ahead of nasri......

 

[RochdaleBlue1990]

We should had brought him on today, he could had changed the game for us.

He is a class player.

 

[Manchester1894]

We should had brought him on today, he could had changed the game for us.

He is a class player.

would had certainly given more if played ahead of nasri......

Two of the worst comment's I've read on here.

Sinclair has limited ability hence he cannot make any impact at a big club. You only have to look at the gormless expression on his face to realise even he knows he's out of his depth BIG TIME.

Inside City show's the inept performances are reflected in the training ground... Misi-hit's/losing possession/lack of intelligent runs/awful pens and free kicks.

Sell in Jan please!

 

[Cellarite]

Would surely have been a better option than putting Lescott upfront.

 

[jaden19]

he isn't too bright is he?

he should never have moved. he is not good enough to start for a top 4 club.

 

[peoffrey]

If Sinclair was doing the business in training and taking his chances when he gets them then he'd be playing. He missed two sitters against Villa and his shot against Reading looked like his boots were manufactured by Toblerone.

Even Adam Johnson was getting more starts than him.