Departures, ctd.

Despite what I just wrote about the departures of Hamann, Ball, Mills and Vassell, it is not his exit that is the most newsworthy this week - but that of Danny Sturridge to Chelsea.

This is more upsetting than it is surprising. The chaos in which MCFC was convulsed for most of 2008 up until the ADUG takeover meant that Sturridge was not offered the new contract he otherwise would have been, and when serious negotiations did start under Mark Hughes it was Sturridge and his representatives who were in a position of strength. And this position was used to present a series of ludicrous wage demands, which, coupled perhaps with a frustration to become a regular in the first team, pushed Sturridge towards his eventual separation from City.

It's obviously a huge disappointment. Sturridge is arguably the most talented youngster to come out of the Academy since Shaun Wright-Phillips (I think that Michael Johnson is the most gifted of them, ahead of even Stephen Ireland, not that it matters.) We've only seen glimpses of Sturridge's talent, but it's certainly there, and so the realisation that we will never see his flowering in a City shirt is difficult to take.

The strange thing about Sturridge's departure is just how anomalous it is. The last ten months have been the most positive and optimistic time to be a City fan in my lifetime. We've played rubbish for most of it (though that's nothing new), but the mood of the club is one of an inexorable journey to success. This bad news, then, runs counter to the good news that has been coming out of City since last September; an unlikely dark cloud in an otherwise clear blue sky.

But that is why we should be able to move on quickly from this. Imagine just how traumatic this would have been under Wardle's ownership, or even under Thaksin's. And then remember that we're now owned by neither, but by the richest men to ever invest in football. And think of how much better Santa Cruz and Tévez are going to be than any frontline that includes Danny Sturridge.