Kane looks like something you could pick up on Amazon Black Friday free with a wok.
Jack Grealish | Man City
- Thread starter RDCR07
- Start date
I'm sorry, but an orange is far better than an apple any given day!
When City get Haaland next year he will prove you all wrong!
An average player who's been overhyped way beyond his true abilities. Next Beckham, they said.
Last edited:
Good description on Bluemoon: Samir Nasri rehashed.
He likes to take too many touches when the momentum of City's game require at most 2 touches. He is a bad fit but you'd think he'd change his game a little but no
He isn't average player. Yes he was overhyped especially by few who probably never watched a good dribbling English player but he was always very good player. He was one of the best PL player last season, especially before his injury.
Zidane, Ronaldinho comparison was hilarious though, it was like a competition to see who comes up with more ridiculous posts at that time.
Nasri was pissed off at hip yesterday on french TV and kept asking for either Mahrez or Sterling to replace him
Dunno why Pep is playing him as a touchline hugging winger, that was never his game. He needs to play in the half spaces, Foden does much better on the left.
I don't get it either, especially considering that Jack's quite a slow player and can't beat his man on the wing but he can surely beat 1-2 men in tight spaces.
Also he looks kinda lost at times, maybe he didn't fully grasp Pep's system yet. He's always 1-2 seconds behind the play, be it when receiving or passing the ball.
Yep, looks half the player. Even at Villa when he played from the left, it was usually him drifting inside and linking up with players. Complete mismanagement so far. Similar to Sancho in that way I guess.
This team from City would be much more balanced with the same personnel as yesterday, just in a different system,
--Foden--KDB--Jesus
----Grealish---Silva
-------------Rodri
I always got the impression they signed more for the media exposure than anything to do with football. He was meant to be their Rooney or Beckham but Grealish isn't anywhere near the same level both in talent and with media attention.
This is what I don't understand.
His attacking midfielder game looks lost.
Anyway, Grealish as a winger without a striker is just shooting yourself in the foot.
He isn't the dribble and scores a goal type, he is a more chance created type.
Wrong position, no partner and I just don't think he fits possesion football that much.
He is better with the ball and doing what he wants with it than giving it to someone else as soon as you kind of get it.
Which is okay I guess , not every player is going to fit every manager.
I agree with this, it might sound quite arrogant but I think him and Kane were supposed to almost be their version of United style signings where united sign the most well known English players. Like you said Beckham/Rooney.
Who was that poster that compared him to Ronaldinho again? Didn't he also say pep would make him a balloon d'Or player?! I mean there's still time but the outlook isn't great at the mo...!
There's a reason why he didn't play that much at the Euros. Quite simply isn't as good as the players who started ahead of him. Not saying he's bad at all, he's good and sometimes great, but there are lots of players who can be described that way
We shouldn't have signed Sancho then and forget Greenwood too.
I just watched a replay - he set up a clear chance for Rodri who hit the shot above the goal, a striker would score that chance yesterday.
Grealish without a striker is just wrong.
He is a chance creator, he isn't a sterling player who goes and finishes moves off or something for them or anyone.
Is Grealish the most well known English player though? Many of my friends had never even seen him play before the Euros. I really don't think he was a household name before his big money transfer.
He was huge throughout the euros in terms of coverage and had ridiculous pressure from the media for Southgate to play him. In terms of in the UK he was certainly one of the most known names.
That would never work because Grealish is pretty much a 0 defensively, so you can't play him in the midfield 3. Maybe as the most advanced ahead of a DM and Gundogan as the 8. But he isn't fit to lace De Bruynes boots in that position anyway.
The left or #10 is his position, but I said it loads... City don't need a 10 and don't need a wide player like him. They desperately needed a Rashford on the wing or a Haaland through the middle. Grealish doesn't improve them at all imo.
Not sure why City brought him as he wasn't needed. He is a good player never a £100m one.
At the moment I don’t see how he fits in a system with no obvious striker
So hes a James Harden then James Hardens stats are woeful this year.
It was funny hearing Pep predict how the go to refrain would be "they need a striker" anytime they lose.
Or anytime they fail to break down a compact defence?
Yep
Not to say that they don't "need" a striker, but they have other issues (their play is too slow). Plus their finishing across the board is shit.
Not sure I agree.
Grealish is not 0 defensively, actually he has a pretty decent workrate. He has played multiple times as the advanced #8 before, and that's his best position, he says so himself as well. Even when he played at Villa for the left, if you look at his heatmaps, those are the positions he occupied, kinda like Pogba. Morever, City play with their fullbacks tucked in helping out their DM, so they are fine with two attacking #8s anyway. Grealish rarely loses the ball and is press resistant, a very good fit in that position for City.
Also disagreed that City need someone like Rashford. City's wingers need to hug the touchline, and stay very wide. Rashford plays best closer to goal from the left, and when he has space to run into. He would be a horrible fit at City.
Will take a season or two before Pep can beat the ball dawdling out of him, if he can, that is.
Gundogan scored almost 20 goals last season, a lot of them turned draws into crucial wins. His highest total before that was 6 goals. That seemed unsustainable last season and it seems like it's turning out that way. Without a striker, they need a prolific season from someone improbable again.
Someone like Rashford would be huge for City as he's an inside forward, he's a player with excellent off the ball movement who is a scorer. Can't have your whole team be creators who like coming short and don't want to run in behind. That's why Rashford or Haaland as the ultimate option would be huge for them. Pep can work around the options he has. His wingers don't have to hold wide all the time, he adapts his instructions and can have his fullbacks hold width too (or have it lopsided). In fact he's always had an inside forward type until now.
And I dunno, agree to disagree then. Grealish for me does less defensively than Rashford or Sancho, and the per 90 stats from last season back that up. They're all essentially non factors defensively. Doesn't matter what Grealish says is his best position, his coaches never play him there in the prem. He's always the guy with the least defensive responsibility because he's just not good at it. Grealish likes getting on the ball a lot and roaming around the pitch. A smaller club like Villa gets the best out of him as he can have free reign to dominate the ball and do his thing while others cover for him. At a big club, it just isn't the same. He's not the best player at the club, he's not the most effective, therefore he doesn't get free reign to roam anymore. Not to mention he loves just being on the ball constantly which isn't a thing Pep likes unless you're Messi pretty much. It just wasn't a good fit IMO.
Bet they wish they'd kept Sane
He is a very good player, but definitely not Beckham.
Rather Lego or Poundland Becks.
Rather Lego or Poundland Becks.
City have struggled this season when teams have parked the bus. Rashford also struggles against teams like that, if he plays for City 90% of the time he wont have space to run in behind. Moreover like you said Rashford is an inside forward. As you are seeing with Grealish or Mahrez, City's wingers stay wide, very wide. Sure once in a while the fullbacks overlap, but it would be a complete misuse of Rashford.
Ehh, Grealish has played that role for England and has done well too. Grealish was moved from CM to advanced areas because he's Villa's best player and they wanted him closer to goal. Regardless of his best position, its certainly not touchline hugging winger. And its not back to his goal as a second striker either. Its in the left halfspaces, and that's where he's always played his best football, regardless of his starting position. Dunno how anyone who's watched Grealish play, can deny that. And its not like Silva or KdB are amazing defensively, Grealish can certainly play that role.
He's a very good midfielder, his stats last season showed that. He will never be a 100M player, just like Maguire will never be a 80M player. Now its upto him and Pep whether he will be a good player for them, or a flop. After all, its not his fault that City didnt buy Kane. He's just been played out of position so far, and has not been good fit. I'm glad tbh
Agree with you on the Grealish and Kane signings. They were meant to be used as a statement by City to show everyone else they are now taking over the role from United on signing the best English talent. But Kane never happened and imo I think City overestimate the appeal of Grealish. Most of the hype and comparisons to the likes of Beckham really come from the media and due to the fact Grealish is a good looking lad who in interviews seems to be as thick as pig shit(Also Beckham football talent has always been massively underrated in England by non United fans).
Plus the Ronaldo transfer back to us pretty killed the hype around every other transfers and still showed that United are easily the biggest club in England if not the world. So City are stuck with a very good player who doesn't really fit in although tbh there are worse problems to have at a football club.
This, letting Sane leave was just a stupid decision in the context of them a few years later splashing 100 mil on Grealish.
I think he wanted to leave and refused to sign any new contract with them.
Yap, he was upset at playing time and refused to extend.
He was never going to be allowed to monopolize the ball at City as he did at Villa. That should have been obvious, they aren't going to allow him to meander around with the ball searching for fouls while other, and better players watch him. To succeed there he needs to show he can play off ball, make unselfish runs in behind, play simple and quick more often.
Foden is already better than him, just has a consistently more valuable skillset. Grealish will have some moments over the season where he looks amazing but he is not going to be the one who makes the difference between winning and losing a title. City have their Pogba.
Foden is already better than him, just has a consistently more valuable skillset. Grealish will have some moments over the season where he looks amazing but he is not going to be the one who makes the difference between winning and losing a title. City have their Pogba.