santa turd

[Dronny]

Santa Cruz is a good player that thrives on service from the wings. We have gone through this ad nauseum. If he cost 5 mill we would not be having this discussion. However, NQDP has an agenda to work with his argumentations and is venting his frustrations about our losing on him. Can't be Mancini, so he picks a fringe player. He has wriggled out of every question put to him in this thread- as per usual.

It's like he's been taking lessons from Socrates.

What the FUCK are you on about? Agenda? What fucking agenda? Yeah, I have agenda...... I hate seeing SHIT players for City. There, that's my hand played there. You got me.

You never seem to signal out Vieira too much though. Obviously he was free, but what a silly signing when the team was crying out for an attacking midfielder, not an old, old man.

One signing may have cost 17m (we're loaded though, right?!).... the other signing (or lack of) cost us champions league IMO.

Vieira is on loan and I felt he was brought as much for his off field leadership and experience of winning things as his actual football ability. And in couple of games he DID take the command and lead us. Unfortunately for us and Mancini not often enough.

I don't think he'll be back in july. In fact, I think he might hang up his boots after the World Cup.

Santa Cruz on the other hand we are stuck with. But it's just not that, every time I heard from him he has been making excuses for himself which for me indicates that he thinks he is doing alright. Which couldn't be further from the truth. Also, strikers with first touch of Pub League left back are my pet hate. Also, I don't like one dimensional targetmen in modern game. Look at someone like Crouch. Sure he is great in the air but he can also trap the ball, spread it around him, dribble, shoot and finish goals with his feet. Proper targetman.

And why Patrick Vieira cost us Champion's League compared to Santa Cruz??? I don't know. NEITHER of them cost us Champion's League imo. But Vieira did very little and apart from Sunderland Santa Cruz did NOTHING to get us there. And that's what I'm looking for in player, especially anyone who cost over 5m, is to improve.

The only fair critism directed on this topic, which no one seem to have mentioned, would be that it's not his fault we spent that sort of money on him. That's right. Neither was it Benjani's fault we spent that money on him. But I'm still pissed off about them.

He's not cut the mustard since his arrival and yes, if Hughes had listened to you we wouldn't have had to endure this repetitive drivel from you every other month. However, RSC now plays for Mancini and he clearly feels he can offer something to the team or he wouldn't select him. If you wish to twist any othe above then I give you Robinho who Mancini was very happy to bomb out of the club as he felt he offered City sweet fa

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

Santa Cruz is a good player that thrives on service from the wings. We have gone through this ad nauseum. If he cost 5 mill we would not be having this discussion. However, NQDP has an agenda to work with his argumentations and is venting his frustrations about our losing on him. Can't be Mancini, so he picks a fringe player. He has wriggled out of every question put to him in this thread- as per usual.

It's like he's been taking lessons from Socrates.

What the FUCK are you on about? Agenda? What fucking agenda? Yeah, I have agenda...... I hate seeing SHIT players for City. There, that's my hand played there. You got me.

You never seem to signal out Vieira too much though. Obviously he was free, but what a silly signing when the team was crying out for an attacking midfielder, not an old, old man.

One signing may have cost 17m (we're loaded though, right?!).... the other signing (or lack of) cost us champions league IMO.

Vieira is on loan and I felt he was brought as much for his off field leadership and experience of winning things as his actual football ability. And in couple of games he DID take the command and lead us. Unfortunately for us and Mancini not often enough.

I don't think he'll be back in july. In fact, I think he might hang up his boots after the World Cup.

Santa Cruz on the other hand we are stuck with. But it's just not that, every time I heard from him he has been making excuses for himself which for me indicates that he thinks he is doing alright. Which couldn't be further from the truth. Also, strikers with first touch of Pub League left back are my pet hate. Also, I don't like one dimensional targetmen in modern game. Look at someone like Crouch. Sure he is great in the air but he can also trap the ball, spread it around him, dribble, shoot and finish goals with his feet. Proper targetman.

And why Patrick Vieira cost us Champion's League compared to Santa Cruz??? I don't know. NEITHER of them cost us Champion's League imo. But Vieira did very little and apart from Sunderland Santa Cruz did NOTHING to get us there. And that's what I'm looking for in player, especially anyone who cost over 5m, is to improve.

The only fair critism directed on this topic, which no one seem to have mentioned, would be that it's not his fault we spent that sort of money on him. That's right. Neither was it Benjani's fault we spent that money on him. But I'm still pissed off about them.

He's not cut the mustard since his arrival and yes, if Hughes had listened to you we wouldn't have had to endure this repetitive drivel from you every other month. However, RSC now plays for Mancini and he clearly feels he can offer something to the team or he wouldn't select him. If you wish to twist any othe above then I give you Robinho who Mancini was very happy to bomb out of the club as he felt he offered City sweet fa

Yes, I think Mancini is foolish to play him. Granted, he has no one else on the bench with any experience but still. I'd probably use Nimley before Santa Cruz.

Edit. And if you think this is about fucking Hughes then you couldn't be more wrong. I didn't like Benjani one bit either but I loved Sven. I was a proper Sven licker if you will. But he made giant mistake in signing Benjani.

[Original Dub]

Santa Cruz is a good player that thrives on service from the wings. We have gone through this ad nauseum. If he cost 5 mill we would not be having this discussion. However, NQDP has an agenda to work with his argumentations and is venting his frustrations about our losing on him. Can't be Mancini, so he picks a fringe player. He has wriggled out of every question put to him in this thread- as per usual.

It's like he's been taking lessons from Socrates.

What the FUCK are you on about? Agenda? What fucking agenda? Yeah, I have agenda...... I hate seeing SHIT players for City. There, that's my hand played there. You got me.

You never seem to signal out Vieira too much though. Obviously he was free, but what a silly signing when the team was crying out for an attacking midfielder, not an old, old man.

One signing may have cost 17m (we're loaded though, right?!).... the other signing (or lack of) cost us champions league IMO.

Vieira is on loan and I felt he was brought as much for his off field leadership and experience of winning things as his actual football ability. And in couple of games he DID take the command and lead us. Unfortunately for us and Mancini not often enough.

I don't think he'll be back in july. In fact, I think he might hang up his boots after the World Cup.

Santa Cruz on the other hand we are stuck with. But it's just not that, every time I heard from him he has been making excuses for himself which for me indicates that he thinks he is doing alright. Which couldn't be further from the truth. Also, strikers with first touch of Pub League left back are my pet hate. Also, I don't like one dimensional targetmen in modern game. Look at someone like Crouch. Sure he is great in the air but he can also trap the ball, spread it around him, dribble, shoot and finish goals with his feet. Proper targetman.

And why Patrick Vieira cost us Champion's League compared to Santa Cruz??? I don't know. NEITHER of them cost us Champion's League imo. But Vieira did very little and apart from Sunderland Santa Cruz did NOTHING to get us there. And that's what I'm looking for in player, especially anyone who cost over 5m, is to improve.

The only fair critism directed on this topic, which no one seem to have mentioned, would be that it's not his fault we spent that sort of money on him. That's right. Neither was it Benjani's fault we spent that money on him. But I'm still pissed off about them.

Ok, the first highlighted part - I said the signing of Vieira cost us champions league. Mancini felt he was the missing piece. Instead of being the focal part of our midfield, he turned out to be a passanger. I believe had we gone for a younger, hungrier, attacking midfielder, we'd be in the champions league now. I firmly believe that. I said at the time Vieira's signing, when it was clear as day we could achieve champions league, would cost us. I thought for what was our number one target, it was completely ridiculous to go for a guy who was in steep decline when he left this league FIVE FUCKING YEARS AGO!

The second highlighted part - I take it your talking about the sunderland away game? I'm sorry, I remember Vieira wasn't overly shit in that game, but MOTM? Its funny you mention Sunderland and "Santa Cruz did NOTHING" in the same sentance, because it immediately made me think of the brace he scored in the home game - you know the brace that got us three points? Three points that HELPED put us in a position to fight for fourth.

Now, I know he is not top draw. I also know that strikers like him work off through balls and cracking crosses - both of which we are lacking a lot lately. You make it out that he can only score with his head which is complete horse shit. I said I felt Santa Cruz would play a role in our end of season run, and I was wrong, but I honestly didn't think our strikers would have to depend on an old man instead of a much needed attacking mid.

I feel if we had signed the playmaker we so obviously needed, instead of Granpa V, then we wouldn't have a stupid thread like this.

Aside from all of this, my original point was that you seem to not notice how much more important the signing of Vieira SHOULD have been in comparrison to the signing of a back up striker.

If anything, a Vieira thread would have been MUCH more apt than this crap. This isn't a magic show, strikers need great service from the flanks and the centre, particularly if they are to make an impact as a substitute and change a game.

Your anger, once again, has been misdirected.

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

Santa Cruz is a good player that thrives on service from the wings. We have gone through this ad nauseum. If he cost 5 mill we would not be having this discussion. However, NQDP has an agenda to work with his argumentations and is venting his frustrations about our losing on him. Can't be Mancini, so he picks a fringe player. He has wriggled out of every question put to him in this thread- as per usual.

It's like he's been taking lessons from Socrates.

What the FUCK are you on about? Agenda? What fucking agenda? Yeah, I have agenda...... I hate seeing SHIT players for City. There, that's my hand played there. You got me.

You never seem to signal out Vieira too much though. Obviously he was free, but what a silly signing when the team was crying out for an attacking midfielder, not an old, old man.

One signing may have cost 17m (we're loaded though, right?!).... the other signing (or lack of) cost us champions league IMO.

Vieira is on loan and I felt he was brought as much for his off field leadership and experience of winning things as his actual football ability. And in couple of games he DID take the command and lead us. Unfortunately for us and Mancini not often enough.

I don't think he'll be back in july. In fact, I think he might hang up his boots after the World Cup.

Santa Cruz on the other hand we are stuck with. But it's just not that, every time I heard from him he has been making excuses for himself which for me indicates that he thinks he is doing alright. Which couldn't be further from the truth. Also, strikers with first touch of Pub League left back are my pet hate. Also, I don't like one dimensional targetmen in modern game. Look at someone like Crouch. Sure he is great in the air but he can also trap the ball, spread it around him, dribble, shoot and finish goals with his feet. Proper targetman.

And why Patrick Vieira cost us Champion's League compared to Santa Cruz??? I don't know. NEITHER of them cost us Champion's League imo. But Vieira did very little and apart from Sunderland Santa Cruz did NOTHING to get us there. And that's what I'm looking for in player, especially anyone who cost over 5m, is to improve.

The only fair critism directed on this topic, which no one seem to have mentioned, would be that it's not his fault we spent that sort of money on him. That's right. Neither was it Benjani's fault we spent that money on him. But I'm still pissed off about them.

Ok, the first highlighted part - I said the signing of Vieira cost us champions league. Mancini felt he was the missing piece. Instead of being the focal part of our midfield, he turned out to be a passanger. I believe had we gone for a younger, hungrier, attacking midfielder, we'd be in the champions league now. I firmly believe that. I said at the time Vieira's signing, when it was clear as day we could achieve champions league, would cost us. I thought for what was our number one target, it was completely ridiculous to go for a guy who was in steep decline when he left this league FIVE FUCKING YEARS AGO!

The second highlighted part - I take it your talking about the sunderland away game? I'm sorry, I remember Vieira wasn't overly shit in that game, but MOTM? Its funny you mention Sunderland and "Santa Cruz did NOTHING" in the same sentance, because it immediately made me think of the brace he scored in the home game - you know the brace that got us three points? Three points that HELPED put us in a position to fight for fourth.

Now, I know he is not top draw. I also know that strikers like him work off through balls and cracking crosses - both of which we are lacking a lot lately. You make it out that he can only score with his head which is complete horse shit. I said I felt Santa Cruz would play a role in our end of season run, and I was wrong, but I honestly didn't think our strikers would have to depend on an old man instead of a much needed attacking mid.

I feel if we had signed the playmaker we so obviously needed, instead of Granpa V, then we wouldn't have a stupid thread like this.

Aside from all of this, my original point was that you seem to not notice how much more important the signing of Vieira SHOULD have been in comparrison to the signing of a back up striker.

If anything, a Vieira thread would have been MUCH more apt than this crap. This isn't a magic show, strikers need great service from the flanks and the centre, particularly if they are to make an impact as a substitute and change a game.

Your anger, once again, has been misdirected.

What makes you think Mancini signed Vieira INSTEAD of world class attacking midfielder? We had basically no cover on central midfield. Which became painfully apparent later in the season and even at the time Vieira signed when we had to play untried kid (Ibrahim) there. We were also lacking in experience and winning mentality department. You are trying to make it sound like he was signed instead of Kaka. Yet no top central midfielder moved AGAIN this january. We had little or no options and I'd say Vieira was best of very bad options available to us. You seem to be making stuff up as you go.

AND like I said, Vieira is on loan. He wasn't even signed. After sunday he is gone. That is NOT the case with Santa Cruz.

Regarding RSC, you do NOT sign back up strikers for 17m. You just don't do that. Especially to club that was already filled with second rate back up strikers. And apart from Sunderland HOME (obviously...... he was his usual shite self in away game..... good that you reminded about that) he did nothing that showed any skill whatsoever.

Oh, and Tevez and Adebayor don't seem to have struggled scoring goals without "cracking crosses and through balls". You know why? Because they are good players unlike Santa Cruz.

[Slim]

Ummm, Vieira was indeed signed by City on a 6 month deal with a 12 month optional extension.

[Original Dub]

No, Tevez is world class and Ade isn't far behind him - that's why they've scored goals. That and a consistant run in the side.

Its funny you forgot about the sunderland home game where Santa Cruz scored a brace and we got the three points.... and you say he was shit against Sunderland away?

He came on and our play changed for the better - no doubt about it.

You don't really watch football anymore mate, I don't think - I reckon you just sit at home with your hughes doll, stabbing it and thinking of new ways to keep old arguments going. This thread is fucking ridiculous and has been pointed out as such over and over. Like with many threads you started over the last year.

I've never witnessed such a disintegration of a cracking poster in the history of this board. Its panto stuff at this stage, it really is. Santa Cruz is the easy target of the hughes legacy and that and that alone is why you wanted to start a thread about him. Vieira was signed by Mancini, so that's ok then.

Starting a thread about our back up striker right when we were all looking for why we didn't make champions league football was a fucking joke - when you know right well that Vieira was our main signing supposed to carry us there from January.

And you think a 33 year old (yeah right) slow, slow midfielder was the "best option available" to the richest club in the world on the cusp of champions league football?!! Mancini, YOU and a couple of random posters thought so.

In fact, you gave me shit for pointing out that it was a stupid signing. I believe you said "We've nothing to lose".

Hmmm...

[Wooders]

Santa Cruz is a good player that thrives on service from the wings. We have gone through this ad nauseum. If he cost 5 mill we would not be having this discussion. However, NQDP has an agenda to work with his argumentations and is venting his frustrations about our losing on him. Can't be Mancini, so he picks a fringe player. He has wriggled out of every question put to him in this thread- as per usual.

It's like he's been taking lessons from Socrates.

What the FUCK are you on about? Agenda? What fucking agenda? Yeah, I have agenda...... I hate seeing SHIT players for City. There, that's my hand played there. You got me.

You never seem to signal out Vieira too much though. Obviously he was free, but what a silly signing when the team was crying out for an attacking midfielder, not an old, old man.

One signing may have cost 17m (we're loaded though, right?!).... the other signing (or lack of) cost us champions league IMO.

Massively unfair on Paddy there mate, its not his fault we dropped points at home to Burnely and Hull (arguably the games which cost us champs league footy in my opinion) – its not his fault that we didn’t score a goal in the 3 vital games on the run in for 4th, its not his fault that we went to sleep in the last ten mins for 2 of the games and ended up with 0 points – THESE are the things that cost us champs league football

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

Its funny you forgot about the sunderland home game where Santa Cruz scored a brace and we got the three points.... and you say he was shit against Sunderland away?

WHAT??????

I said TWICE that apart Sunderland game and obviously referred to Sunderland home, only good game he has had for us. I said it myself..... not you. So it's quite clear I didn't forget anything.

And reagrding not watching football, I KNEW Santa Cruz was shite when we signed him. That's because I had seen him more than just some highlights for Blackburn in one season. I had actually seen him play numerous of games.

[Slim]

You two are both idiots, if anything has cost us the champions league spot this season it's been our dodgy as fuck fullbacks.

[Original Dub]

Santa Cruz is a good player that thrives on service from the wings. We have gone through this ad nauseum. If he cost 5 mill we would not be having this discussion. However, NQDP has an agenda to work with his argumentations and is venting his frustrations about our losing on him. Can't be Mancini, so he picks a fringe player. He has wriggled out of every question put to him in this thread- as per usual.

It's like he's been taking lessons from Socrates.

What the FUCK are you on about? Agenda? What fucking agenda? Yeah, I have agenda...... I hate seeing SHIT players for City. There, that's my hand played there. You got me.

You never seem to signal out Vieira too much though. Obviously he was free, but what a silly signing when the team was crying out for an attacking midfielder, not an old, old man.

One signing may have cost 17m (we're loaded though, right?!).... the other signing (or lack of) cost us champions league IMO.

Massively unfair on Paddy there mate, its not his fault we dropped points at home to Burnely and Hull (arguably the games which cost us champs league footy in my opinion) – its not his fault that we didn’t score a goal in the 3 vital games on the run in for 4th, its not his fault that we went to sleep in the last ten mins for 2 of the games and ended up with 0 points – THESE are the things that cost us champs league football

Mate I didn't say he was the sole reason we aren't in the champions league, or that he himself was the blame at all. But for everything you mention, we were well in with a chance of champions league in January, thanks to both managers and we needed an attacking mid and we got Vieira. That left us with a lumbering old man and totally dependant on wing play. The top sides knew they could nullify this by congesting the full back positions, thus leaving our strikers having to retrieve the ball from deep and tire themselves out for the last 20 mins.

Come on, am I the only one who knew for a fact we needed an attacking midfielder? We got an old man instead and THAT cost us dearly IMO.

[Douglas Higginbottom]

My thoughts on Santa are that he has been seriously underused in the last few months.I know he is far from perfect but he is a goalscorer and he would have scored goals. On his performances apart from the Sunderland home game he was very significantly part of us turning the game around away at Sunderland and also lead the line well away at Fulham where he scored the opener.

I can only assume Mancini didn't use him more because he doesnt really fancy him.That's fair enough even if I think he was wrong and I would expect he won't be with City next year as we sign 2 or 3 different strikers.I also wouldnt be surprised if Ade isn't with us either.

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

My thoughts on Santa are that he has been seriously underused in the last few months.I know he is far from perfect but he is a goalscorer and he would have scored goals. On his performances apart from the Sunderland home game he was very significantly part of us turning the game around away at Sunderland and also lead the line well away at Fulham where he scored the opener.

I can only assume Mancini didn't use him more because he doesnt really fancy him.That's fair enough even if I think he was wrong and I would expect he won't be with City next year as we sign 2 or 3 different strikers.I also wouldnt be surprised if Ade isn't with us either.

In what way? By being a striker and us not being able to score? That's massive contribution that.

I assume Mancini didn't use him because he has no first touch and can't do anything with the ball either if the unlikely happens and he traps the ball.

[Ted Hughes]

My thoughts on Santa are that he has been seriously underused in the last few months.I know he is far from perfect but he is a goalscorer and he would have scored goals. On his performances apart from the Sunderland home game he was very significantly part of us turning the game around away at Sunderland and also lead the line well away at Fulham where he scored the opener.

I can only assume Mancini didn't use him more because he doesnt really fancy him.That's fair enough even if I think he was wrong and I would expect he won't be with City next year as we sign 2 or 3 different strikers.I also wouldnt be surprised if Ade isn't with us either.

I agree completely. He was linking up with Tevez much better than Ade does. Whether Mancini likes him is hard to judge, it could be that even now they don't trust his fitness or perhaps the fact that we're so shit at crossing the ball they think he won't be any use. I would like to have him stay at the club if he's still capable of being the player he was at Blackburn but the truth is I've not even seen enough of him to judge. He wasn't match fit when they played him earlier & now he probably is technically fit, he has no chance of getting a run of games to get into any kind of touch/form. He gets stuck on for 5 mins, howled at by low quality supporters & the game finishes.

[Grob]

Santa Cruz hasnt lived up to the price tag because of injury and lack of chances.

He's played some good games for us (Sunderland at home, Fulham away, im sure there were one or 2 more), but he's a reserve striker for all intents and purposes. I dont think it suits him, he's a player who needs a team building around. But he;s not really good enough for that.

Not good enough to start for a top 4 club and has the game to be an impact sub as he's one of the best target men ive seen. But he's yet to show that regulally.

Ill give him another chance next season.

[Original Dub]

Santa Cruz hasnt lived up to the price tag because of injury and lack of chances.

He's played some good games for us (Sunderland at home, Fulham away, im sure there were one or 2 more), but he's a reserve striker for all intents and purposes. I dont think it suits him, he's a player who needs a team building around. But he;s not really good enough for that.

Not good enough to start for a top 4 club and has the game to be an impact sub as he's one of the best target men ive seen. But he's yet to show that regulally.

Ill give him another chance next season.

But you wouldn't call him a piece of shit in the immediate aftermath of us missing out on champions league?

Very misdirected anger IMO.

[Grob]

Santa Cruz hasnt lived up to the price tag because of injury and lack of chances.

He's played some good games for us (Sunderland at home, Fulham away, im sure there were one or 2 more), but he's a reserve striker for all intents and purposes. I dont think it suits him, he's a player who needs a team building around. But he;s not really good enough for that.

Not good enough to start for a top 4 club and has the game to be an impact sub as he's one of the best target men ive seen. But he's yet to show that regulally.

Ill give him another chance next season.

But you wouldn't call him a piece of shit in the immediate aftermath of us missing out on champions league?

Very misdirected anger IMO.

I wouldnt but i wasnt really in the mood to give Niall stick for that post, it would only increase his dissappointment in me.

[Douglas Higginbottom]

My thoughts on Santa are that he has been seriously underused in the last few months.I know he is far from perfect but he is a goalscorer and he would have scored goals. On his performances apart from the Sunderland home game he was very significantly part of us turning the game around away at Sunderland and also lead the line well away at Fulham where he scored the opener.

I can only assume Mancini didn't use him more because he doesnt really fancy him.That's fair enough even if I think he was wrong and I would expect he won't be with City next year as we sign 2 or 3 different strikers.I also wouldnt be surprised if Ade isn't with us either.

In what way? By being a striker and us not being able to score? That's massive contribution that.

I assume Mancini didn't use him because he has no first touch and can't do anything with the ball either if the unlikely happens and he traps the ball.

OK so you cant remember it in your desire to slaughter him but as Ted replied he did link up with Tevez well and he gave us an out ball that was not there in the first half.It all helped us take over the game and run all over Sunderland in the second half and only their keeper stopped us from scoring a few to win the game. Had we been positive and played RSC from the start in the game we would most likely have won easily.

[Slim]

Santa Cruz is a good player that thrives on service from the wings. We have gone through this ad nauseum. If he cost 5 mill we would not be having this discussion. However, NQDP has an agenda to work with his argumentations and is venting his frustrations about our losing on him. Can't be Mancini, so he picks a fringe player. He has wriggled out of every question put to him in this thread- as per usual.

It's like he's been taking lessons from Socrates.

Page four and only one person mentions it...worse yet, it's fucking dazby. The day he becomes the new Eion I would expect Satan to be skating to work yet here it is.

Santa Cruz is a player who works in a certain system, a 4-4-2 with genuine wingers and someone to run off him. At Blackburn he had Bentley and Gamst-Pedersen who are very good crossers of the ball, when Mancini seems to be our best crosser(according to Doug) then we obviously lack the system to provide Santa Cruz with the right service. When our wingers are opposite footed to the side they are playing on, their immediate instinct is to drift in cause the backline to bunch up, which means you either have to be very accurate with crossing or you will be banging you head against a wall. Playing the 1-3-2-4 attack like we do means no width, no delivery and unfortunately for Santa Cruz means he will never be a success at City under this system.

[Original Dub]

Santa Cruz is a good player that thrives on service from the wings. We have gone through this ad nauseum. If he cost 5 mill we would not be having this discussion. However, NQDP has an agenda to work with his argumentations and is venting his frustrations about our losing on him. Can't be Mancini, so he picks a fringe player. He has wriggled out of every question put to him in this thread- as per usual.

It's like he's been taking lessons from Socrates.

Page four and only one person mentions it...worse yet, it's fucking dazby. The day he becomes the new Eion I would expect Satan to be skating to work yet here it is.

Santa Cruz is a player who works in a certain system, a 4-4-2 with genuine wingers and someone to run off him. At Blackburn he had Bentley and Gamst-Pedersen who are very good crossers of the ball, when Mancini seems to be our best crosser(according to Doug) then we obviously lack the system to provide Santa Cruz with the right service. When our wingers are opposite footed to the side they are playing on, their immediate instinct is to drift in cause the backline to bunch up, which means you either have to be very accurate with crossing or you will be banging you head against a wall. Playing the 1-3-2-4 attack like we do means no width, no delivery and unfortunately for Santa Cruz means he will never be a success at City under this system.

BANG!

Right on brother, right on.

And folk thought you were a stupid cunt?

Pfff...

[Blue2]

Santa Cruz is a good player that thrives on service from the wings. We have gone through this ad nauseum. If he cost 5 mill we would not be having this discussion. However, NQDP has an agenda to work with his argumentations and is venting his frustrations about our losing on him. Can't be Mancini, so he picks a fringe player. He has wriggled out of every question put to him in this thread- as per usual.

It's like he's been taking lessons from Socrates.

Page four and only one person mentions it...worse yet, it's fucking dazby. The day he becomes the new Eion I would expect Satan to be skating to work yet here it is.

Santa Cruz is a player who works in a certain system, a 4-4-2 with genuine wingers and someone to run off him. At Blackburn he had Bentley and Gamst-Pedersen who are very good crossers of the ball, when Mancini seems to be our best crosser(according to Doug) then we obviously lack the system to provide Santa Cruz with the right service. When our wingers are opposite footed to the side they are playing on, their immediate instinct is to drift in cause the backline to bunch up, which means you either have to be very accurate with crossing or you will be banging you head against a wall. Playing the 1-3-2-4 attack like we do means no width, no delivery and unfortunately for Santa Cruz means he will never be a success at City under this system.

Some good points, but that wouldn't explain why he cant control the ball or find teamates with a pass though.