Manchester City Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2011/2012

ironbluedun

Xavi6 wrote: »

The Mirror are reporting that we've bid for one D. Agger. If that happened the Pool thread would be an awesome place to browse :pac:

why would one be bothered going in there?

DoctorGonzo08

Xavi6 wrote: »

The Mirror are reporting that we've bid for one D. Agger. If that happened the Pool thread would be an awesome place to browse :pac:

I hope not. I think we are past buying mediocre players. If we are going to get a centre half in, he has to be at least as good as Lescott.

amiable

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

I hope not. I think we are past buying mediocre players. If we are going to get a centre half in, he has to be at least as good as Lescott.

You honestly think Lescott is better than Agger?

DoctorGonzo08

amiable wrote: »

You honestly think Lescott is better than Agger?

I honestly do. I didn't think much of Agger last year. While he's not a bad defender, I don't see anything in him that would justify him being a top class defender.

Melion

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

I honestly do. I didn't think much of Agger last year. While he's not a bad defender, I don't see anything in him that would justify him being a top class defender.

Good god almighty. Lescott better than Agger?? We can close the entire forum now because we have reached the very bottom of the barrel

amiable

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

I honestly do. I didn't think much of Agger last year. While he's not a bad defender, I don't see anything in him that would justify him being a top class defender.

I would suggest you didn't watch him play too much then as he is without doubt in my mind a top class defender. He oozes class.
Not only can he defend well he is also excellent on the ball and capable of bringing the ball out of defence.
I think if Liverpool were to sell Agger it would only be for a fee in excess of what Man City paid for Lescott as he is head and shoulders above Lescott.

DoctorGonzo08

amiable wrote: »

You honestly think Lescott is better than Agger?

Melion wrote: »

Good god almighty. Lescott better than Agger?? We can close the entire forum now because we have reached the very bottom of the barrel

Before this goes any further. Shock horror, Liverpool fans think they're centre half is better than a City fan thinking there's is better.

It is my opinion, that Lescott is a better player. I'm expressing my opinion in the City forum as a City fan.

I don't know why Liverpool fans would be bothered trolling in here tbh, but I have no interest in beinng dragged into an argument which will consists of buzz word defences of Agger, rather than actually intellectual argument.

amiable

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Before this goes any further. Shock horror, Liverpool fans think they're centre half is better than a City fan thinking there's is better.

It is my opinion, that Lescott is a better player. I'm expressing my opinion in the City forum as a City fan.

I don't know why Liverpool fans would be bothered trolling in here tbh, but I have no interest in beinng dragged into an argument which will consists of buzz word defences of Agger, rather than actually intellectual argument.

What difference does it make what forum/thread it's in? It's an open forum.

NukaCola

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

I hope not. I think we are past buying mediocre players. If we are going to get a centre half in, he has to be at least as good as Lescott.

If Agger signed for ManCity, him and Kompany would be MEGA!.....that CB pairing would be no doubt the best in the league and a top pairing in Europe.....Agger mediocre? Thats a Dunphy statement if ever i heard one....

NukaCola

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

It is my opinion, that Lescott is a better player.

This is a message forum, if you state your opinion usually you back it up.

Bounty Hunter

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Before this goes any further. Shock horror, Liverpool fans think they're centre half is better than a City fan thinking there's is better.

It is my opinion, that Lescott is a better player. I'm expressing my opinion in the City forum as a City fan.

I don't know why Liverpool fans would be bothered trolling in here tbh, but I have no interest in beinng dragged into an argument which will consists of buzz word defences of Agger, rather than actually intellectual argument.

Warning: Accusations of trolling are also considered against the charter, if you think someone is trolling report it if you wish and the mods can handle it if they deem it infraction-able.

DoctorGonzo08

amiable wrote: »

What difference does it make what forum/thread it's in? It's an open forum.

NukaCola wrote: »

If Agger signed for ManCity, him and Kompany would be MEGA!.....that CB pairing would be no doubt the best in the league and a top pairing in Europe.....Agger mediocre? Thats a Dunphy statement if ever i heard one....

OK, I'll bite. And I'll ignor the great argument of 'no doubt', 'dunphy statement' and 'mega', because as cool as those words sound they make no sense to me at all.

Pros for Agger: Strong, tough tackler, good reading of the game and generally positions himself well for interceptions. He also has a thunder of a left foot.

Pros for Lescott: Strong, good header of the ball and quite commanding at centre half, but is also very versatile and can provide good cover in the full back area. Big threat from set pieces and is worth a couple of goals every season.

Cons for Agger: For a centre half he is very poor in the air, affecting both at the back and as a threat from set pieces. He also has a very short fuse, and is affected badly when not being played regularly. Added to this is his long lost of injury concerns.

Cons for Lescott:
At times he has looked very nervy when caught on the break, and can be vunerable to attackers with a quick turn of pace.

Comparing both, I would choose Lescott, less injury prone, better disciplined and more verstaility. Although Agger would be better postion wise, the fact that he would be rotated at City would mean he wouldn't get the regularity he needs to play his best.

DoctorGonzo08

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

Warning: Accusations of trolling are also considered against the charter, if you think someone is trolling report it if you wish and the mods can handle it if they deem it infraction-able.

Apologises, wrong choice of word.

amiable

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

OK, I'll bite. And I'll ignor the great argument of 'no doubt', 'dunphy statement' and 'mega', because as cool as those words sound they make no sense to me at all.

Pros for Agger: Strong, tough tackler, good reading of the game and generally positions himself well for interceptions. He also has a thunder of a left foot.

Pros for Lescott: Strong, good header of the ball and quite commanding at centre half, but is also very versatile and can provide good cover in the full back area. Big threat from set pieces and is worth a couple of goals every season.

Cons for Agger: For a centre half he is very poor in the air, affecting both at the back and as a threat from set pieces. He also has a very short fuse, and is affected badly when not being played regularly. Added to this is his long lost of injury concerns.

Cons for Lescott:
At times he has looked very nervy when caught on the break, and can be vunerable to attackers with a quick turn of pace.

Comparing both, I would choose Lescott, less injury prone, better disciplined and more verstaility. Although Agger would be better postion wise, the fact that he would be rotated at City would mean he wouldn't get the regularity he needs to play his best.

Better disciplined. How many yellow/red cards has Agger received in his Liverpool career.
Very little injury problems last season and seems to be behind him.
I personally think you are waffling

DoctorGonzo08

amiable wrote: »

Better disciplined. How many yellow/red cards has Agger received in his Liverpool career.
Very little injury problems last season and seems to be behind him.
I personally think you are waffling

Taking last season alone, Agger 7 YC, Lescott 1 YC. Hence better disciplined.
'Very little' and 'seems to be behind him' doesn't really qualify the fact that he has a history of injury problems.

You are entitled to you're personal opinion, but if you can't offer anything worthwhile to the debate, you should prob not bother.

amiable

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Taking last season alone, Agger 7 YC, Lescott 1 YC. Hence better disciplined.
'Very little' and 'seems to be behind him' doesn't really qualify the fact that he has a history of injury problems.

You are entitled to you're personal opinion, but if you can't offer anything worthwhile to the debate, you should prob not bother.

Plenty of players had injury problems and recovered from them.
Agger had 7 yellows over the course of a season as a Centre back and received not bans so that is hardly a disciplinary issue.
Thank you for allowing me the right to my opinion, how generous of you?
I still see no relevance to your point about a Liverpool fan posting in the Man City thread. Please elaborate.
You think by adding to your post that I've offered nothing to the debate actually offers anything itself? I think not.
You are still waffling IMO.

Lescott is a decidedly average defender IMO and was bought for a silly amount of money.
In general he has been poor for Man City IMHO and only the fact he has such a good defender in Kompany playing next to him saves him at times.

But carry on making silly accusations. It's funny

DoctorGonzo08

amiable wrote: »

Plenty of players had injury problems and recovered from them.
Agger had 7 yellows over the course of a season as a Centre back and received not bans so that is hardly a disciplinary issue.
Thank you for allowing me the right to my opinion, how generous of you?
I still see no relevance to your point about a Liverpool fan posting in the Man City thread. Please elaborate.
You think by adding to your post that I've offered nothing to the debate actually offers anything itself? I think not.
You are still waffling IMO.

Lescott is a decidedly average defender IMO and was bought for a silly amount of money.
In general he has been poor for Man City IMHO and only the fact he has such a good defender in Kompany playing next to him saves him at times.

But carry on making silly accusations. It's funny

I don't know why I bother tbh. And I have noticed that anytime I have been in an argument with you I end up with warnings. I forget that I have to be very careful how I word things around you, so in answer to 'I still see no relevance to your point about a Liverpool fan posting in the Man City thread. Please elaborate.' I apologise and take it back. However I would like to acknowledge your effort to turn the argument away from the point, and towards another possible warning.

I added that you made no contribution, because I didn't see one. I didn't add it to as a stand alone comment as that would be very silly statement to make. You raised the issue of discipline and cards, and I answered it. You said you don't think he might not be maybe will be injury prone, to which I said his history says otherwise.

I listed pros and cons of both players, and showed why I made my original statement. You have brought the sam two points up in both replies, added to your thought that I am waffling.

Can you pick on a pro or con about either player that you disagree with and we can discuss that, or will we just leave it as Liverpool fan prefers Liverpool player and City fan prefers City player?

TerryTibbs!

Im a neutral.

Lescott is good.

Agger is good.

Feck all between them. It is a dead heat.

That is that sorted.

amiable

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

I don't know why I bother tbh. And I have noticed that anytime I have been in an argument with you I end up with warnings. I forget that I have to be very careful how I word things around you, so in answer to 'I still see no relevance to your point about a Liverpool fan posting in the Man City thread. Please elaborate.' I apologise and take it back. However I would like to acknowledge your effort to turn the argument away from the point, and towards another possible warning.

I added that you made no contribution, because I didn't see one. I didn't add it to as a stand alone comment as that would be very silly statement to make. You raised the issue of discipline and cards, and I answered it. You said you don't think he might not be maybe will be injury prone, to which I said his history says otherwise.

I listed pros and cons of both players, and showed why I made my original statement. You have brought the sam two points up in both replies, added to your thought that I am waffling.

Can you pick on a pro or con about either player that you disagree with and we can discuss that, or will we just leave it as Liverpool fan prefers Liverpool player and City fan prefers City player?

I did that already

Kirby

amiable wrote: »

rabble rabble Agger's boss! rabble rabble

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

rabble rabble Lescott's boss! rabble rabble

The only person who is qualified to judge on which is the better player, is a neutral who watches alot of football. Two fans of Liverpool and City aruging is a completely pointless affair so I can't see why either of you bother.

As a neutral and expert on football*, I would wager they are about the same in terms of ability. I would add though that City can go buy whomever they want and Liverpool cannot. This would make Agger alot more valuable to Liverpool than Lescott is to City. I also think that Agger will fit in rather well with Rodgers so there is that also. If I was a pool fan, I wouldn't want him sold.

*May or may not be true.

amiable

Kirby wrote: »

The only person who is qualified to judge on which is the better player, is a neutral who watches alot of football. Two fans of Liverpool and City aruging is a completely pointless affair so I can't see why either of you bother.

As a neutral and expert on football*, I would wager they are about the same in terms of ability. I would add though that City can go buy whomever they want and Liverpool cannot. This would make Agger alot more valuable to Liverpool than Lescott is to City. I also think that Agger will fit in rather well with Rodgers so there is that also. If I was a pool fan, I wouldn't want him sold.

*May or may not be true.

So supporters of respective teams shouldn't debate about their players.
May as well shut down the soccer forum so. What a silly post IMO

Blatter

I'm a neutral also, and Lescott just isn't in Agger's league for reasons already mentioned.

Kirby

Debate away, just don't do it with a rival "fan" and expect anything productive to come of it. People attribute too much emotion when discussing such things and it invariably comes down to "my player can beat up your player!" which is exactly what just happened.

NukaCola

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

'dunphy statement' and 'mega', because as cool as those words sound they make no sense to me at all.

Dunphy statement = silly/idiotic comment
mega = excellent

Hope that clears that up

Xavi6

amiable wrote: »

Lescott is a decidedly average defender IMO and was bought for a silly amount of money.
In general he has been poor for Man City IMHO and only the fact he has such a good defender in Kompany playing next to him saves him at times.

But carry on making silly accusations. It's funny

You accuse people of waffling and making silly accusations then post clearly uninformed nonsense like the highlighted above.

Well done.

amiable

Xavi6 wrote: »

You accuse people of waffling and making silly accusations then post clearly uninformed nonsense like the highlighted above.

Well done.

The accusations I mention was not about what he posted on the players.

Well done yourself

Xavi6

amiable wrote: »

The accusations I mention was not about what he posted on the players.

Well done yourself

So no rebuttal on the bollox you posted about Lescott then?

Watch City much last season? Or at all, apart from Match of the Day highlights and 101GreatGoals snippets?

Kirby

No but he watches Liverpool every week so Agger is better than people he doesn't watch. duh.

amiable

Xavi6 wrote: »

So no rebuttal on the bollox you posted about Lescott then?

Watch City much last season? Or at all, apart from Match of the Day highlights and 101GreatGoals snippets?

I'd say I watched Man City at least 30 times last season.
I rarely watch Match Of The Day and only use 101 Great Goals on the odd occasion when I've missed something I'm dying to see.
I already posted my thoughts on Lescott and I stand by them. He's average and looks better with Kompany playing alongside him.
IMO he's nowhere near as good as Agger and it would seem that Mancini would agree otherwise City wouldn't be interested in Agger.
Nice of you to imply the usual cliche that posters put up when they are struggling.

Kirby

amiable wrote: »

IMO he's nowhere near as good as Agger and it would seem that Mancini would agree otherwise City wouldn't be interested in Agger.

This is faulty logic. City can buy anybody they want and pay 20 million for them, even if they are going to be a squad player. Your assumption that Mancini rates Agger higher than Lescott is just that......an assumption. So if City sign a quality striker it automatically means that Mancini rates him better than Aguero, yeh?

amiable

Kirby wrote: »

This is faulty logic. City can buy anybody they want and pay 20 million for them, even if they are going to be a squad player. Your assumption that Mancini rates Agger higher than Lescott is just that......and assumption.

Of course it is. Like most things on this forum, it's an opinion.
But I also assume if Mancini was happy he'd prefer a settled back 4.
We have to assume some things otherwise all we'd be posting about are done deals.

amiable

Kirby wrote: »

No but he watches Liverpool every week so Agger is better than people he doesn't watch. duh.

This has been covered

Xavi6

amiable wrote: »

I'd say I watched Man City at least 30 times last season.

Why so much City? Because we're that good? Did you watch Stoke or Bolton as much?

Basically I don't believe you watched 30 full City games, but there we go.

I already posted my thoughts on Lescott and I stand by them. He's average and looks better with Kompany playing alongside him.
IMO he's nowhere near as good as Agger and it would seem that Mancini would agree otherwise City wouldn't be interested in Agger.

Signing someone does not mean you're unhappy with what you have. Was Nasri signed because Silva's average? Of course not.

If anything, the signing of someone like Agger is to allow more rotation which isn't currently possible with backups like Kolo and Savic.

We have a lot og games to play this coming season :cool:

Nice of you to imply the usual cliche that posters put up when they are struggling.

Lol why would I be struggling? Lescott is a first choice centre half for the Premier League champions and also played every one of England's Euo 2012 games. He's an excellent defender, and the case for the defence is far more water tight than some accusations based on one person's opinion.

I'm quite comfortable dealing in facts.

BINKY NIPPER

i dont follow either teams and imo Lescott is a much better centre half than Agger

Will I Amnt

Both good defenders but Agger is clearly the better footballer.
Without his injury history I would choose him every day of the week but if I had to take one right now I would probably have to go with Lescott.

Kirby

It seems from the 4 neutrals in here over the last few pages, it's fairly even. Fancy that! And both fans were so sure they were right!

amiable

Xavi6 wrote: »

Why so much City? Because we're that good? Did you watch Stoke or Bolton as much?

Basically I don't believe you watched 30 full City games, but there we go.



Signing someone does not mean you're unhappy with what you have. Was Nasri signed because Silva's average? Of course not.

If anything, the signing of someone like Agger is to allow more rotation which isn't currently possible with backups like Kolo and Savic.

We have a lot og games to play this coming season :cool:



Lol why would I be struggling? Lescott is a first choice centre half for the Premier League champions and also played every one of England's Euo 2012 games. He's an excellent defender, and the case for the defence is far more water tight than some accusations based on one person's opinion.

I'm quite comfortable dealing in facts.

I watched so much of Man City because like most people I was interested to see how they get on this season and they were top of the league and on TV as much as most teams. They were also in Europe as were Stoke but Stoke play crap football and sometimes on obscure tv channels. I have no problem admitting City were good.
I guessed how many City games I watched and I still stand by it. I couldn't give a rats arse if you believe it or not. Why ask if you then don't like the answer.

On the Nasri/Silva logic you mention, that is silly IMO because there are several players in that position and by your logic it could be Kompany that Agger is wanted to replace.
No the dogs on the street know that Nasri wasn't to replace Silva like Agger wouldn't be to replace Kompany but the less reliable Lescott.

First choice centreback for England by default because Rio Ferdinand wasn't being selected for whatever reasons and Cahill was injured in a friendly before the Euros.

It merely highlights how poor Englands centrebacks are that they had to rely on him.

DoctorGonzo08

Kirby wrote: »

It seems from the 4 neutrals in here over the last few pages, it's fairly even. Fancy that! And both fans were so sure they were right!

I would agree with you Kirby, but if you look back at the start of all this, I summed up where this was going to descend to:

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Before this goes any further. Shock horror, Liverpool fans think they're centre half is better than a City fan thinking there's is better.

I did try to make a rational argument and back up my opinion, against better judgement. It was wishful thinking that amiable would have anything of use to say.

It is refreshing though that there are a couple on here that do have something to add.

amiable

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

I would agree with you Kirby, but if you look back at the start of all this, I summed up where this was going to descend to:



I did try to make a rational argument and back up my opinion, against better judgement. It was wishful thinking that amiable would have anything of use to say.

It is refreshing though that there are a couple on here that do have something to add.

I did make points but you seem to have your mind made up about me and implying it's other peoples fault you get infractions when you interact with them.
I don't have your password and I don't force you to post something that gets you an infraction.
I posted my points about Agger and Lescott and you just dismissed them .
You keep saying I have nothing to add. Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true

DoctorGonzo08

amiable wrote: »

Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true

But then how does the logic in your posts work if not by the above pearl of wisdom :eek:.

Be honest, is there any point talking to you? Do you want people to reply to your posts and offer a debate, or are we all supposed to take in whatever you spout and be grateful?

Apart from the question on discipline and injury (of which I have addressed both) what points have you raised?

You do realise expressing opinion that a player is better than another, in your opinion, does not constitute fact?

I have offered to leave it as you rate Agger, I don't.

And above all, there seems to be an assumption that City have actually made any sort of approach for him based on a rumour from the Mirror!

NukaCola

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

It was wishful thinking that amiable would have anything of use to say.

What an incredable pompous thing to say....

Xavi6

Btw, I think comparing the two is pointless anyway. They're two different types of defender and I'd love to have both.

I'm just challenging the statement that Lescott is average or anything less than very good.

amiable

Xavi6 wrote: »

Btw, I think comparing the two is pointless anyway. They're two different types of defender and I'd love to have both.

I'm just challenging the statement that Lescott is average or anything less than very good.

Which you are entitled to do but to assume I only watch Match of the Day is wrong

DoctorGonzo08

NukaCola wrote: »

What an incredable pompous thing to say....

It really isn't. I have no air of self importance or vanity about the statement. I have expressed my opinion based on what the poster has contributed, to the best of my knowledge.

amiable

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

But then how does the logic in your posts work if not by the above pearl of wisdom :eek:.

Be honest, is there any point talking to you? Do you want people to reply to your posts and offer a debate, or are we all supposed to take in whatever you spout and be grateful?

Apart from the question on discipline and injury (of which I have addressed both) what points have you raised?

You do realise expressing opinion that a player is better than another, in your opinion, does not constitute fact?

I have offered to leave it as you rate Agger, I don't.

And above all, there seems to be an assumption that City have actually made any sort of approach for him based on a rumour from the Mirror!

The Times actually along with The BBC

I do realise my opinion is my opinion and I thanked you earlier for allowing me to voice my opinion.

Is there any point in talking to me? That is completely up to you. I have made valid points like his injury woes are behind him and he didn't get any ban last season so has no disciplinary issues and never causes trouble in the camp.

You seem to have offered to leave it as long as you can have the last word.

NukaCola

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

It really isn't. I have no air of self importance or vanity about the statement. I have expressed my opinion based on what the poster has contributed, to the best of my knowledge.

Which is limited to a few posts interchanged between the two of you.
Amiable is a good poster and i would bet i've read more posts from him than you have.

DoctorGonzo08

Xavi6 wrote: »

Btw, I think comparing the two is pointless anyway. They're two different types of defender and I'd love to have both.

I'm just challenging the statement that Lescott is average or anything less than very good.

Agreed, but do you really want both at the club? With Kolo, Savic added to Lescott and Agger, we would have 4 3rd choice centre halves, if we were to try to get in a top class player to play alongside Kompany.

amiable

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Agreed, but do you really want both at the club? With Kolo, Savic added to Lescott and Agger, we would have 4 3rd choice centre halves, if we were to try to get in a top class player to play alongside Kompany.

Savic was woeful on a couple of occasions last season and lots of links that Kolo Toure could be leaving too

DoctorGonzo08

NukaCola wrote: »

Which is limited to a few posts interchanged between the two of you.
Amiable is a good poster and i would bet i've read more posts from him than you have.

No, I have read and interacted with amiable several times on here. I would no doubt agree that you have read more posts as you would be reading what he contributes to the Liverpool forum.

amiable

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

No, I have read and interacted with amiable several times on here. I would no doubt agree that you have read more posts as you would be reading what he contributes to the Liverpool forum.

And each time we do you assume a superiority complex and resort to put downs. Carry on