Put him in our team and I doubt he does a fat lot.
Raheem Sterling
- Thread starter mitchmouse
- Start date
- Status
I'll never understand the reputation Havertz has.
His goal return is excellent, even last 2 seasons when he's maybe dropped of a bit for City, still hitting double figures for the Pl. Typical wide player, rewarding and frustrating in equal measure. He's a very good player, maybe the City and Liverpool connections make us undervalue him. Even his England record is decent, 1 in 4.
Would never come to us, and another one that would demand massive wages. Don’t think we need that at the mo
I think we'd be making a massive mistake letting both Gabby and Sterling go. I'd rather we keep Sterling who, for all his flaws, is a major asset for the team because of his pace and directness. His positional play and ability to get in behind the backline is easily the best we have at the club, and for that reason he is a very good option to have. Gabby - I love the boy but I'd rather we sell him and can use that money for another incoming transfer this summer, especially with the arrivals of Haaland and Alvarez to bulk up our attacking options.
This is unless both are desperate to leave, of course. In which case we should stick to our policy of "if you want to leave, you can go for the right price" and sell both. That "right price" for Sterling should be higher than what's being reported though and we shouldn't be letting him go so easily.
This is unless both are desperate to leave, of course. In which case we should stick to our policy of "if you want to leave, you can go for the right price" and sell both. That "right price" for Sterling should be higher than what's being reported though and we shouldn't be letting him go so easily.
It's hardly the most controversial take in the world is it.
I can think of 5 takes more controversial and that's just from my end!
I don't think Havertz has displayed much in his career to warrant such faith from Chelsea fans. Apart from age and 'yung n learnin'.
Fair enough. The issue is not that many top club that can afford the transfer fee and his wages has opening in wide forward. I don't even know where he can go to be honest. Dembele is also in the market this summer for "free".
I believe in his potential. He's shown glimpses and moments here and there. Your response made it seem like it was blasphemy to not want Sterling to replace Havertz
Last edited:
I'd get him totally. He's fast, a goalscorer, a winner. He can also play through the middle, we've seen him play as a 9/false 9 many times, so he could cover Ronaldo.
Boyhood Man Utd fan...
I’m assuming City simply wouldn’t sell him to us?
Once you score a winner in a CL final, you're endeared eternally...
He's definitely better than either.
Chelsea fans talk about Mount's goal contributions as evidence of him being underrated but Sterling's worst seasons are still better than that.
Sterling is miles ahead of both of those. Havertz could have a better career from here, but that's far from guaranteed.
I certainly wouldn't have him over Havertz and Mount.
I mean, Havertz can play as a false 9 I guess, and Mount can play a little deeper otherwise... Sterling as a winger? Easily. As an inside forward in a front 3? Absolutely.
Presumably. I'd take him in a heartbeat. Wouldn't scoff at a potential deal like the Chelsea crew
Managerial material for sure
In a way it says a lot that City are at least ok with him leaving, possibly trying to get rid.
Next you'll tell me that Origi is the better player.
I mean he didn't win the CL final, and he's absolutely adored by the dippers?
It's not a hard concept. Players who score big goals are endeared by fans...
I'm sure he won the CL final for Liverpool against Tottenham...
And I'm saying that it is an irrational basis for rating players. Selecting Havertz over Sterling because of his age/potential, ok. Selecting Havertz over Sterling solely because the former scored in a CL final...
Not really, having Halland, Álvarez, Foden, Mahrez, Grealish. It would be a waste to have a player like Sterling warming the bench. Too much quality in attack but Sterling would be a starter in most big teams.
Yea hes fallen down the pecking order, I would not be surprised if City buy another wide player.
From the Athletic...
I’ve begun to warm to the idea the more I’ve thought about it. I read that athletic piece this morning and I’m not gonna lie, I’m almost convinced.
Check the comments on the article. Full of people saying "feck the stats I'll believe my own eyes"
He's extremely polarizing that's for sure
I think Danny Murphy on Talksport was right [shock horror], in a big must win game, I'd still start Sterling before Mahrez and/or Grealish. I'd also start him ahead of those 2 in general, Grealish - I just dont see the fuss. Genuinely
I’d put Mahrez ahead of him for the biggest games.
He's such a strange player. Cannot make my mind on him at all
Seems crazy to me Sterling is only a year older than Grealish.
I think a couple of years ago he was superb, just lacking somewhat in his end product, but it seems that since last season his star has been rapidly falling. Still a good player, but just nothing really special anymore.
Got his best years then sold him for a small profit. That’s the way to do business.
He is only 27 years old. He might have games in his legs but his best years as a proper starter for Chelsea may still be ahead of him. He is a player who has constantly matured.
I think it’s bad business by City. It may not matter with Haaland, but I think he is a great player and was underused last season.
When Richarlison/Raphinha go for £10 million more, this is a great bit of business from Chelsea in my opinion. He is far better than both of them.
We can look forward to his return to City next year for a £4m loan fee
It’s definitely cheap for a player of his quality. I’m surprised City were ok selling to a title rival.
Their forward line is far improved losing the useless tosspot Lukaku and bringing in this fella'.
- Status