In Kane's worst season where he played less games than Sterling because of injuries, but let's just ignore context?? Kane had a better goal to minutes ratio than Sterling, he just played less.
And it's arguable whether Sterling is the key player at City, very arguable.
Yes, it is fair. If you are consistently shite for England outside of your comfort bubble then something is probably up. If you score 1 goal and get no assists at multiple tournaments, then maybe that should be noted. If you have to have Guardiola's system to perform, then maybe you aren't as super duper great as people on here think, I mean this is meant to be a ballon d'or level footballer according to some of you.
You two will never agree face it. A wise man once said in an article after the Holland match that without the superior technical qualities of their club teammates, the true level of many of Southgates players become apparent I.e. you see the real level of Englishmen when playing with other Englishmen......Those stats are per 90 mins stat, so number of mins doesn't count, if anything it adds in Sterling's favor that even after playing more mins, he maintained higher standards.
So player who is focal point of the team, takes penalties has better mins per goal compared to wide forward, not surprising.
Yeah, it's just Pep's system, it's not as if he was superb when he was just 18 or something in 2013-14 season, playing under Rodgers.
Also in 2017-18 season, Kane averaged 90 mins per G+A in PL and CL. Sterling averaged 91 mins per G+A. This is with Kane's 7 goals from penalty spot.
If you go by chances created, take ons completed and few more again Sterling will come out on top. So it's not like Sterling was better only last season.