mu4c_20le
Full Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2013
- Messages
- 43,912
Because he only wanted CityWhy didn't we sign Mahrez back then ?
Because he only wanted CityWhy didn't we sign Mahrez back then ?
That doesn't mean it's a good league. And that's also not true. It might be at the minute but there were plenty of years when Spain was stronger. But city are edging England closer to the SPL by the season in terms of competitiveness.It quite clearly is. You take the best side out of each league every season and the Premier League pisses all over any other league.
Not like Messi did it vs Vidic and RioYou've got to consider your level if you let Sterling beat you to a header.
We probably made some genius signing that we are still regretting.Why didn't we sign Mahrez back then ?
He's a right winger if I'm not wrong? Why would we sign him?Why didn't we sign Mahrez back then ?
We decided to go for some other fella instead, Sanchez I think his name was...think we payed him 500 grand a week as well.Why didn't we sign Mahrez back then ?
What I like about him is the way he plays with his head up.Barnes is good as well.
Agree. There is nothing worse than somebody who runs with their head down and just puts a hit and hope ball in.What I like about him is the way he plays with his head up.
They will. They'll probably have a tougher game against West Ham than Arsenal.I genuinely don’t think City will drop points again this season.
Can you imagine Moyes taking Mou's and Pep's scalp in the same seansonThey will. They'll probably have a tougher game against West Ham than Arsenal.
Go on Didier...by footballing gods you mean the great managerial master yaya toure
Both Manchester clubs went for Sanchez. We were interested in Mahrez the year before but Leicester weren't willing to sell. The player had to go through a bit of antics and force the move when City came in.We decided to go for some other fella instead, Sanchez I think his name was...think we payed him 500 grand a week as well.
West Ham were negative against Spurs, they will get a new arse hole against City.They will. They'll probably have a tougher game against West Ham than Arsenal.
Yes, once Ole has been backed with £1 Billion in transfer kitty.Will we ever play football like City.
Made so much sense at the time. Funnily enough — Luke Shaw did an interview with Soccer AM/Sky/someone on YouTube just the other day and he said that accordingly to Maguire, Amad really reminds him of Mahrez. So there’s that!Why didn't we sign Mahrez back then ?
Aye we were both after Sanchez and we won his signature due to Woodward offering him an obscene contract. City then went and signed Mahrez instead despite him being tailor made for us in a position we’ve been crying out the be filled for years. Certainly know who got the better deal anyway.Both Manchester clubs went for Sanchez. We were interested in Mahrez the year before but Leicester weren't willing to sell. The player had to go through a bit of antics and force the move when City came in.
Perhaps but I don't see City winning all their remaining fixtures even if they've all but won the league. They will drop points sooner or later, that's just football.West Ham were negative against Spurs, they will get a new arse hole against City.
Poor, poor United, getting by on mere scraps.Yes, once Ole has been backed with £1 Billion in transfer kitty.