There aren't (Edwards is probably more talented that's it) but Gribbin has always been a bit inconsistent and unconvincing when he was called up (they played him mostly as CM or on the wing though).
Surely not?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Not surprising.Chelsea paid 50k/month or so for Christensen who's not their first team player.If you want to poach one of the best talents from your rival who has been with the club for nearly 10 years you have to offer crazy money.
Yeah I just edited as I realised it's by Bates - who I haven't actually seen get much wrong United related in the past couple years.
Is the point of the article not to admit that they fabricated or failed to verify the story?City not happy they were getting bad press on trying to get him
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-city-correction-6787480
I think Mirror are making fun of City for making them retract the story.
Seen loads of stuff from city fans about that recently. They seem genuinely bothered when a negative article is written about the club. Proper weirdos.City not happy they were getting bad press on trying to get him
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-city-correction-6787480
Think how shit they'd feel if they followed a big club then. Bad press for days.
Negative=OK
It's so predictable that our coaches know who they'll approach every year.They also offered RoShaun Williams last summer.
You're on a Manchester United forum... What do you expect?
No. He is a lovely balanced player, but not on the same level Morrison was.
People not to call Blues "weirdos" for taking exception to a newspaper blatantly lying about their club?
If clubs took exception to every lie written about their club in a paper then there wouldn't be enough space to issue corrections. City are spending a lot of time working on their holier than thou image though so hardly surprising.
I feel like they're different players. Ravel was less of a creator than Gribbin, and more of a direct threat.
The figures might not be correct but they did try to sign him and the figures aren't that far off. They also tried to sign Williams and tried to sign Rashford last year. For a club who are supposedly not talking to the press anymore and are letting their success do the talking according to recent articles they were fairly quick to brief the press as soon as something was written which didn't reflect well on them
I think it's a bit whiny of a club that claims to be among the best in the world to be cringing about negative articles in tabloids. Imagine how we'd be mocked if we set about trying to correct journo's trying to sensationalize stuff! That's all the PR team at the club would have time to do. They deserve to get some stick for that.
Pretty much sums up why it's daft to be demanding retractions on sports journalism. Corrections to normal journalism tend to be along the lines of 'We mistakenly identified Mrs Wagner as Mrs Wagger. We are happy to set the record straight', or 'We represented Mr Jones and Mr Smith as business partners when they are in fact unaffiliated. We are happy to set the record straight.'City not happy they were getting bad press on trying to get him
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-city-correction-6787480
He's right though, at this level Morrison was even better. Gribbin's class, mind.
Part and parcel of youth development, fluctuations in form etc. He is an interesting one, sometimes looks like he could be a top player one day and other times seems to be a headless chicken.
Seemed a little sloppy from that video, his passing ability still shone through on occasions though so overall not bad.
He so reminds me of Ozil. Even in his inconsistencies.
Don't like the assertion that we somehow failed Morrison, we gave him every chance under the sun. Other than that, good article.http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...lum-gribbin-has-raw-ingredients-for-greatness
Very good article on him.
Also highlights why the FA ignored him. Defensive liability
