I'm very conscious that this came out on Friday night; but I haven't written about it yet and I want to.
It's two pieces in Saturday's papers (Danny Taylor and Ian Ladyman) reporting that Hughes wants to sell Robinho because of his troublesome attitude. As disappointing as it would be to see him leave - we would not realistically sign a replacement of similar calibre - the bravery of ADUG in so wholly retreating from footballing decisions would be worthy of applause.
Who'd have thought that they'd let Hughes get rid of their marquee signing?
And after today's performance I would shed few tears for Robinho should he leave. What's the point in having a football genius when he only chooses to deploy his genius once a month?
This won't be the last we hear of this sort of story.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Wish he was one tenth of the talent he thinks he is.
Good grief, 3rd time lucky...
Re: Daniel Taylor's article. As far as I remember, there was one quote, unattributed and that related to the unrest of a player or players. City have chosen to do their business behind closed doors when possible, and I fail to see why they would choose, at this point, to start leaking stories to the press. Speculation and agents talking in my opinion.
Would I take John Terry, yes. Would I swap a player who is at City and has incredible talent for him? Probably not. If City think they can get talent like that at the club at the drop of a hat then they are still some way off reality. We might be able to buy Frank Ribery but would he want to come?
That said, I look forward to the day Petrov is back and we can mix it up a little bit more.
nonsense articles from two bad journalist. // ladyman has written several articles that simp;y have not been true. why choose to beleive this?
Robinho still created more chances than anyone else yesterday. He passes better than any one else..and we would be relegated without his goals.
ireland was shit yesterday...have a go at him!
shame elano came on and did well, or we could all have a dig at him aswell
Ian Ladyman and Daniel Taylor (along with Ian Herbert at The Independent) are the best journalists for Manchester City stories. They have very good sources within the club and are the best place to find the inside story on what's going on at City.
Not sure that there's any truth to these stories. Why would Robinho want to go to Chelski now that his mate Scolari has gone?
I'd be interested to see any evidence that Daniel Taylor is well placed. A quick flick through his stories on the Guardian website shows a "Santa Cruz and Scott Parker to sign" story, a lot of "aren't the Brazilians troublesome" post event stories and one possibly good one about Hughes identifying TBH, EB & Jo as being troublemakers he'd rather be without. And a lot of "Aren't United wonderful" but I digress. Nothing to show me that there he has a particularly consistent inside source.
I don't pore over these as I should though, so perhaps some specific comments are telling, rather than the piece itself.
I can't help but wonder if this is some of the "City aren't worth a player the calibre of Robinho" hit pieces. If Robinho had gone to United, Chelsea or Liverpool for the same price do you think for one second the media would continue to harp on about his price tag. I certainly don't see the media mentioning Berbatov's pricetag every time he plays for United even though his goal tally is way below a player of his calibre
Also curious about the following. Even if Robinho leaves over the summer, if its anything short of "Hughes and I don't respect each other" BS, then isn't he only playing into the notion that he only came to City for the money, which would only hurt his credentials.
Call me crazy but I actually think he came to City under the notion that City will build a team around his talent which (like the man or not) is quite considerable. The only way he can move and save face is a like for like player swap or another club matching L32 million.
Post a Comment