City bid £8m for Scott Sinclair

Brophs

The One and Only
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
52,158
Manchester City boss Roberto Mancini is making a shock £8 million swoop for Swansea City's Team GB winger Scott Sinclair.

Mancini agreed to pay the price for the former Chelsea prospect yesterday and the player and his agent ravelled to the Premier League champions to sort out terms and seal the deal.

Sinclair wants to join one of the top clubs after an impressive campaign at Swansea and the Welsh club are being forced to sell as his deal has just over ten months to run.

Mancini has been looking for a speedy wide man and is going for Sinclair after looking at Argentinian Matias Rodriguez and even Caen's young flier M'Baye Niang.

The City chief wants the option of a quick, attacking wide man to give his side a new dimension. He also needs an extra option as he goes for Champions League glory.

Sinclair has also been linked with a reunion with Brendan Rodgers at Liverpool and he may yet try to intercept the deal, but may be wasting his time.

City are confident they can pull off the coup and Swansea want the deal done quickly to let them get on with finding a replacement.

Swans supremo Huw Jenkins has a move teed up for Bristol City wide man Albert Admoah and would throw £2 million - and Scottish attacker Stephen Dobbie - into the deal.

Sinclair knows the north west well from a year on loan at Wigan and he is also dating Coronation Street actress Helen Flanagan.
Click to expand...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/manchester-city-makes-shock-8m-1230472
 
Would be a decent substitute for them, he is a good player.
 
He could be a good bench warming replacement for Johnson (if leaves of course).
 
The 'meh' is strong with this one.
 
This actually looks like a good deal to be honest.

He won't be on astronomical wages, and he won't go for a massive transfer fee.

He'll be a decent substitute to bring on, providing width to a City team that considerably doesn't penetrate enough from the wings, and the most important thing is that he won't complain when he doesn't start games.
 
If we made this bid the mass hysteria would be United are broke. Are city taking FFP seriously or is AD United looking for a return on their investment? Or are they going to use their youth programme to poach the best young talents around?
 
Slevs said:
This actually looks like a good deal to be honest.

He won't be on astronomical wages, and he won't go for a massive transfer fee.

He'll be a decent substitute to bring on, providing width to a City team that considerably doesn't penetrate enough from the wings, and the most important thing is that he won't complain when he doesn't start games.
Click to expand...

He would become another player they would find it difficult to move, once they get better player.
 
Firstly, there are no quotes whatsoever, unless I've missed out on somethnig which happened over the weekend, why do you all believe this one?

Second, it's the mirror, who aren't beyond making up quotes.

Thirdly, there's a typo. Looks like it was written by a four year old. Unless of course they really did mean 'ravelled'.
 
RedLars said:
Career suicide if he goes.
Click to expand...

This.

Seems a bit of a pointless signing really. I cant see Sinclair playing more than a meagre handful of games given the rest of the City squad.
 
He won't start more than 15 league games in a season, probably even less than that so it'd be a pointless move. Everton, Newcastle or Tottenham should be the next step in his career, not City.
 
They don't even play with wingers. They'd need another 2 quality wide players before Mancini would even consider changing his system. Sinclair would be an eternal substitute just like Johnson.
 
I quite like Sinclair and it could be a decent signing. At the end of the day we need home grown players. Is there really that many better home grown players that we could get?

Now if Johnson could be used as part of the Agger deal or we sold Johnsonand used the money to pay a big chunk of the Agger fee, then I think that is good business and will ultimately make City's squad stronger.
 
I don't understand how it would be career suicide. If he he good enough them he will make an impact. Surely it is better to challenge yourself at the top level rather than not try at all?
 
newtonheathdave said:
I don't understand how it would be career suicide. If he he good enough them he will make an impact. Surely it is better to challenge yourself at the top level rather than not try at all?
Click to expand...

Trying at the top level and trying to make the city 11 ahead of the attackers you have are 2 very different things. He'd get feckall starts.
 
Would be a terrible move for him. He just isnt good enough for that level, and I'm not sure if he ever will be.
 
newtonheathdave said:
I don't understand how it would be career suicide. If he he good enough them he will make an impact. Surely it is better to challenge yourself at the top level rather than not try at all?
Click to expand...

You don't have to test yourself right away though. Sinclair's only had one good season in the PL, much like Ashley Young at the same age, and Young eventually found his way to the top level but developed his game at a Uefa Cup-level team.
 
newtonheathdave said:
I don't understand how it would be career suicide. If he he good enough them he will make an impact. Surely it is better to challenge yourself at the top level rather than not try at all?
Click to expand...

As a player, he may keep saying that to himself; but as outsiders we know he is not good enough & honestly believe he is heading towards a failure.

Since he has already experienced how it is with a similar club in Chelsea, it would be foolish of him to agree.
 
newtonheathdave said:
I don't understand how it would be career suicide. If he he good enough them he will make an impact. Surely it is better to challenge yourself at the top level rather than not try at all?
Click to expand...

City's level is way too high for him and you're absolutely stacked with top attackers. He'd have some semblance of a shot with the 4th place challengers but not the title ones. Although for City it would be a good option to have.
 
I can understand some of the misgivings but I think it would be a good move for both parties. City need some directness and pace as an option plus he is home grown. Sinclair would get the chance to play at a higher lever, with better players and he should develop his game.

At the end of the day all any of us can do in life is make the most of any opportunity that arises. The chance to play for this city team is a pretty big opportunity and if it happens then I really hope he applies himself and surprises us all.

From a personal point of view, I prefer Sinclair to Johnson so imo relacing one with the other strengthens us.
 
Trionz said:
He would become another player they would find it difficult to move, once they get better player.
Click to expand...

True, but City still need the width from substitutes. They play centrally most of the time and their main impact substitute on the wings, Adam Johnson, doesn't seem to get a real look in from Mancini.

Now, I'm not saying Sinclair is going to be a regular starter for City, no chance. But you would agree for now that, if City do not acquire any other wingers in this transfer window, Sinclair would make a great addition to the wings. Honestly, City don't really have that many traditional wingers. They play with Milner and Silva on the wings and both of those are naturally more central players.

Sinclair gives them a cheap way out to solve the winger situation for now. This would actually be a very smart move by City because, instead of spending money on Lucas Moura (pure assumptions, no facts to back this up) just for a place on the bench, they are spending very little money, by their own standards, on a good squad player.

The high standards that City have will be difficult for Sinclair to live up to, definitely, but I like the fact that City are willing to give a young British player the chance to play with high caliber players spending "sensible" amounts of money.
 
It's a fairly simply argument, IMO. At the moment Sinclair isn't good enough to play regularly with the players City have. He might be in the future but that depends on him developing as a footballer which may prove difficult if he isn't playing very often.

Johnson looks a better player at the moment to me and he doesn't play all that much. Obviously they have different styles but City doesn't look like the sort of club that will risk results to blood youngsters.
 
Brophs said:
It's a fairly simply argument, IMO. At the moment Sinclair isn't good enough to play regularly with the players City have. He might be in the future but that depends on him developing as a footballer which may prove difficult if he isn't playing very often.

Johnson looks a better player at the moment to me and he doesn't play all that much. Obviously they have different styles but City doesn't look like the sort of club that will risk results to blood youngsters.
Click to expand...

Fair enough on your other points Brophs but I think your young with the youngster bit. Mancini played Boyata in the carling cup semi against you lot before more established stars in out most important game in 20 odd years. He played Savic last year when it would have been the easy option and probably the better option to play Richards there. He also plays with Mario when ever he can and brought him in as a teenager at Inter. I think if youngsters are good enough then they will get their chance.
 
newtonheathdave said:
Fair enough on your other points Brophs but I think your young with the youngster bit. Mancini played Boyata in the carling cup semi against you lot before more established stars in out most important game in 20 odd years. He played Savic last year when it would have been the easy option and probably the better option to play Richards there. He also plays with Mario when ever he can and brought him in as a teenager at Inter. I think if youngsters are good enough then they will get their chance.
Click to expand...

He played Boyata a couple of years ago and has since lost all faith in him. He played Savic in a number of cases because Richards was injured and Balotelli is a world class forward who was already performing at a first team level when he joined.

In the last season or so City have relied on a core group of senior players. The advent of success isn't likely to reverse that trend.
 
Brophs said:
He played Boyata a couple of years ago and has since lost all faith in him. He played Savic in a number of cases because Richards was injured and Balotelli is a world class forward who was already performing at a first team level when he joined.

In the last season or so City have relied on a core group of senior players. The advent of success isn't likely to reverse that trend.
Click to expand...

Point still stands though mate, Mancini has shown he will give youth its chance. Sinclair will sink or swim, that's up to him. But he will get the chance.
 
newtonheathdave said:
Point still stands though mate, Mancini has shown he will give youth its chance. Sinclair will sink or swim, that's up to him. But he will get the chance.
Click to expand...

Not really, no. Three isolated examples, none of whom were homegrown and two of whom were internationals prior to signing and cost big money. Chucking young players in for a couple of games and then jettisoning them isn't really "giving youth a chance". The profile of players you are buying doesn't suggest he's too concerned with bringing players through.

EDIT: I should say Mancini himself may do it occasionally but the signs are that City in its current guise is changing that for him.
 
Brophs said:
Not really, no. Three isolated examples, none of whom were homegrown and two of whom were internationals prior to signing and cost big money. Chucking young players in for a couple of games and then jettisoning them isn't really "giving youth a chance". The profile of players you are buying doesn't suggest he's too concerned with bringing players through.

EDIT: I should say Mancini himself may do it occasionally but the signs are that City in its current guise is changing that for him.
Click to expand...

Balotelli was a no one when Mancini stuck him in.
 
newtonheathdave said:
Hmmm when Mancini give Balotelli his chance at Inter was he a 25 million player and was he proven?
Click to expand...

No but he was recognised as an exceptional talent, hardly the same comparison can be made with Scott Sinclair!

Tbh Dave if you look hard enough you will find an exception to the rule here and there, but the general concensus of what is being said here is correct imo.

There is no way Mancini will risk results blooding youngsters he is not sure about. This signing if true, smacks to me of a squad filler because he cannot get rid of the likes of Adebayor and Santa Cruz and buy the players he really wants.

Let's face it City are now Champions and will be expected to retain the title and do far better in the CL, a signing like Sinclair would not fill me with any great confidence that he will contribute significantly to City achieving those goals.
 
newtonheathdave said:
Balotelli was a no one when Mancini stuck him in.
Click to expand...

Do you ever check anthing out before you post?

balotelli wasnt given his debut into adult football by mancini. His first club wasnt Inter. He made his debut in adult football at 15. It was know he was a special talent. It would be like given David Moyes credit for given Rooney a start. A complete no-brainer.
 
apotheosis said:
No but he was recognised as an exceptional talent, hardly the same comparison can be made with Scott Sinclair!

Tbh Dave if you look hard enough you will find an exception to the rule here and there, but the general concensus of what is being said here is correct imo.

There is no way Mancini will risk results blooding youngsters he is not sure about. This signing if true, smacks to me of a squad filler because he cannot get rid of the likes of Adebayor and Santa Cruz and buy the players he really wants.

Let's face it City are now Champions and will be expected to retain the title and do far better in the CL, a signing like Sinclair would not fill me with any great confidence that he will contribute significantly to City achieving those goals.
Click to expand...

The thing is though, City have a young age profile to their squad and it really is going to be difficult for ANY player not named Messi or Ronaldo to make a major difference. Youngsters need to be exceptional to make a difference.

Now City can not win. Spunk 25 million and everyone moans, spend 8 million on a youngish talent and everyone is underwhelmed.

For the record I think City would have retained the title anyway without buying anyone. The experience from last year and the fact the squad has played together for a year should help us in Europe. People forget this squad of players has only been together 1-2 seasons plus they are all young really.

If City managed to get Agger and Sinclair, manage to get rid of some dead wood then I will be more than happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.