Why did we let Zinchenko go?

[stonerblue]

It's not a fuck up.

Zincheko is a gifted footballer - who is playing his best football of his career now. But he wasn't in top choice first 11 and would not be. We have more talented players in our squad. We couldn't retain the entire squad *and* sign Haaland - we had to let some players go. I'm very much OK with having let Zinchenko and Jesus leave - and I'm very glad that their careers at Arsenal are going great.

Who was top choice LB then?

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

Who was top choice LB then?

Does it matter? The point is that we are and continue to be weak at LB. RB could use an upgrade too. Selling a makeshift left back squad player to a side that's not even top 4 for a fair amount in order to raise funds and make squad space especially if the squad player really wants more playing time - is win-win.

 

[stonerblue]

There's a huge amount of divergence from reality evident when discussing Zinchenko and what he actually brought to Manchester City. Undoubtedly a very likeable chap and he had a couple of excellent minutes. Without him we might well have not beaten Villa, which is more than equalled out by without him we might well have not needed to beat Villa.
He was absolutely culpable in the CL final against Chelsea and he was often found wanting when isolated at the back post. Laporte bailed him out often when he was having a ‘normal’ game at left back.
People should stop confusing ‘we need a left back’ with ‘we’ve let a really nice bloke who was a very average left back, leave’.

That's bollox

 

[stonerblue]

Does it matter? The point is that we are and continue to be weak at LB. RB could use an upgrade too. Selling a makeshift left back squad player to a side that's not even top 4 for a fair amount in order to raise funds and make squad space especially if the squad player really wants more playing time - is win-win.

Course it fucking matters. He was our best left back and we sold him with no replacement. Not makeshift and who isn't a squad player.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

That's bollox

And yet Pep and management thought otherwise - and many posters on this thread think that moving Zinchenko was in the best interest of both him and of our club - me included.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

Course it fucking matters. He was our best left back and we sold him with no replacement. Not makeshift and who isn't a squad player.

At LB we gave as fill-ins (and each better than Zinchenko) - Ake (defensively much better), Laporte (better defensively with a bit of passing nous), Cancello (much better offensively, weaker defensively).

 

[stonerblue]

And yet Pep and management thought otherwise - and many posters on this thread think that moving Zinchenko was in the best interest of both him and of our club - me included.

Well in that case....

 

[stonerblue]

Hmm... Ake not a fill-in (and much better defensively). Clearly Cancelo has never played LB either. And damn! - Laporte as a fill-in left-back - no way!

Idiotic that we sold a makeshift left back with zero replacement.

2 centre halfs and a winger

 

[Gabriel]

Getting to the stage where there might need to be a designated sub-forum for all the Zinchenko/left-back threads…

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

2 centre halfs and a winger

You are simply going to keep arguing. Zinchenko's best position is attacking mid. He's a fill-in LB. He'd almost never start in our lineup at attacking mid though in almost any game as we're very strong there - as a squad player he can fill in at LB as needed. But I think we'd mostly prefer Ake or Laporte (other LB fill-ins) at that position due to Zinchenko's defensive lapses.