Fair enough, I cannot fault you with your analysis, he does lose posession quite a lot.
The only problem I would have with what you're saying is that risk taking is a huge part of Bruno's game. In your scenario, that final ball he's being told not to play could be the defence splitting pass.
I don't think it's as cut and dry as you're making it out, as in Ole can just pull Bruno to one side and say, 'listen, you need to cool down on your risk taking' or something along those lines. That's his game, who he is as a player.
He looks to hurt the opposition at every opportunity. He's a gambler, and why would he change? He's the talisman of one of the biggest clubs in the world, and arguably the best player in the PL. He might be the character that can take criticism from the manager, but it's a fine line because you're trying to change what's a fundamental part of his game, and something that's transformed us from woeful to title challengers.
No player is perfect, even KDB gives the ball away all the time. City average 70% posession or something though, so maybe it's not as noticable. The question is, does the pros of having Bruno in the team outweigh the cons of his play style? The answer is absolutely yes.
So true. It’s like it’s a negative.
