Come here to laugh at Chavs

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Not particularly but nor is he a bad one. And he's very good when it comes to putting balls in to the box. His big chances created stats are always really solid (very stand-out in a couple of seasons) and he often gets a high xA rating.
Neither of these means he’s actually a good passer. Similar to Son (who is a decent crosser but not a great passer), he just gets into favorable positions which means there’s easy passes open for teammates. Example being our first goal vs city away last year. Kane’s ball is easily the real pass that created the chance. Yet Son gets a big chance created and a large xA boost for a 5 yard square pass to Dejan for a tap in.

This is a skill but very reliant on teammates to put you in this position. An actual creator is like De Bruyne, recent Kane or peak poch-Eriksen

And Son is far better than Sterling.
 
Neither of these means he’s actually a good passer. Similar to Son (who is a decent crosser but not a great passer), he just gets into favorable positions which means there’s easy passes open for teammates. Example being our first goal vs city away last year. Kane’s ball is easily the real pass that created the chance. Yet Son gets a big chance created and a large xA boost for a 5 yard square pass to Dejan for a tap in.

This is a skill but very reliant on teammates to put you in this position.

And Son is far better than Sterling.

I don't think he's a great passer. He's a competent passer.

But he isn't just some tap in/goalscoring merchant. He is an excellent ball carrier due to his dribbling ability & strength on the ball. He offers a lot beyond sneaking in at the back post. There's a reason he's had that City LW spot nailed down for years now.

Even the much hyped 100m asset who arrived last summer didn't really usurp him.
 
I don't think he's a great passer. He's a competent passer.

But he isn't just some tap in/goalscoring merchant. He is an excellent ball carrier due to his dribbling ability & strength on the ball. He offers a lot beyond sneaking in at the back post. There's a reason he's had that City LW spot nailed down for years now.

Even the much hyped 100m asset who arrived last summer didn't really usurp him.
True he is not just a tap in merchant. But his G/A stats are better than he actually is IMO.

He will improve Chelsea but he won’t be some sort of game changing talisman.
 

Airfixx

"I brekka yorz back ind make-a yew humbil"
FYI I don't think City attackers, on the whole, benefit statistically that much from playing for City at all.

Peps not a progressive footballing god that's produced one of the highest scoring teams in PL history?

They're very good players and usually play for City for a reason. Grealish fell off a cliff statistically last season after moving from Villa.

According to the popular narrative..... Pep's players always struggle in their first season whilst they adapt to the intricacies of Pep-ball.....

Sterling (poignantly!) & Mahrez were both said to be examples of this.

Also, such a drop off isn't too suprising considering Grealish was Villa's big fish and their tactics were "give it to Jack".

Sure, but he'll be their main source of goals/assists IMO. He's the star man of that front 3 now and I expect most play to go through him.

Slightly confused by this as a counter-point; I thought your point was that he would have been hampered by their being no focal point at City.....? Yet your expectation is that he would be said focal point at CFC?

......Essentially dropping Havertz (or completely revamping their formation) to afford Sterling a central roll?

Absolutely fine by me..... They'll be left still playing those vastly inferior wingers you spoke of earlier and lacking an elite finisher.
 

Airfixx

"I brekka yorz back ind make-a yew humbil"
I don't think he's a great passer. He's a competent passer.

But he isn't just some tap in/goalscoring merchant. He is an excellent ball carrier due to his dribbling ability & strength on the ball. He offers a lot beyond sneaking in at the back post. There's a reason he's had that City LW spot nailed down for years now.

Even the much hyped 100m asset who arrived last summer didn't really usurp him.

See above point about debut City seasons.... Regardless, Pep saw fit to sell him anyway; so Sterling clearly has taken a hit in the pecking order.
 

Airfixx

"I brekka yorz back ind make-a yew humbil"
True he is not just a tap in merchant. But his G/A stats are better than he actually is IMO.

He will improve Chelsea but he won’t be some sort of game changing talisman.

Raumdeuterz Raumdeuterz - You liked this post. This was very much my OG take...... You seemed quite offended y it at the time.

[Not sore but genuinely confused....]
 
See above point about debut City seasons.... Regardless, Pep saw fit to sell him anyway; so Sterling clearly has taken a hit in the pecking order.

Nobody who has joined City, to my knowledge, has boosted their G/A. That's from Mahrez to Grealish. I really don't think the weight of evidence supports the idea that City attackers benefit from playing there statistically.

Sterling wants to leave City, for whatever reason. If he was willing to stay I'm pretty sure the club would want to keep him.
 
True he is not just a tap in merchant. But his G/A stats are better than he actually is IMO.

He will improve Chelsea but he won’t be some sort of game changing talisman.

He will hit double figures for goals (almost certain of that) and a good amount of assists. Werner gets loads of chances playing off that left, Sterling is essentially a much better Werner. It's a really big upgrade for them in terms of going from one of him or Pulisic to Sterling.

I agree he won't totally transform them, but he will give them a far more threatening left hand side.
 
Peps not a progressive footballing god that's produced one of the highest scoring teams in PL history?



According to the popular narrative..... Pep's players always struggle in their first season whilst they adapt to the intricacies of Pep-ball.....

Sterling (poignantly!) & Mahrez were both said to be examples of this.

Also, such a drop off isn't too suprising considering Grealish was Villa's big fish and their tactics were "give it to Jack".



Slightly confused by this as a counter-point; I thought your point was that he would have been hampered by their being no focal point at City.....? Yet your expectation is that he would be said focal point at CFC?

......Essentially dropping Havertz (or completely revamping their formation) to afford Sterling a central roll?

Absolutely fine by me..... They'll be left still playing those vastly inferior wingers you spoke of earlier and lacking an elite finisher.

He's a good coach but rarely do his players individually hit silly numbers, unless they're Messi. Goals at City are spread around a lot.

Mahrez has been there a while and has dropped off since Leicester. Sterling was still very, very young when he joined City. I think Grealish will up his numbers but will never exceed what he was doing at Villa in that regard.

Havertz will remain through the middle but Sterling will play off the left and be their primary source of goals, IMO. I'd put money on him being their top scorer next season.

Sterling/Havertz/New RW? will probably be their front 3.
 

Airfixx

"I brekka yorz back ind make-a yew humbil"
Nobody who has joined City, to my knowledge, has boosted their G/A. That's from Mahrez to Grealish. I really don't think the weight of evidence supports the idea that City attackers benefit from playing there statistically.

Sterling doesn't score more for City than he did for Liverpool?

Liverpool EPL:
P: 95 / G: 18 / A: 21
7047mins / 90 = 74.1
= 0.24 goals per game.

Man City EPL:
P: 225 / G: 91 / A: 56
17129mins / 90 = 190.32
= 0.48 goals per game

<<<< Double the goal output at City.

-------------------------------------------------------

Or how about Mahrez:

Lester EPL:
P: 139 / G: 39 / A: 28
10930m / 90 = 121.44
= 0.32 goals per game.

Man City EPL:
P: 115 / G: 38 / A: 27
6725m / 90 = 74.72
= 0.51 goals per game.

<<<< 2/3rds higher goal output at City.

(I'm not scared to crunch numbers....... Seems my eyes didn't let me down in this instance however.)

Sterling wants to leave City, for whatever reason. If he was willing to stay I'm pretty sure the club would want to keep him.

Last year of his deal....... Leaving due to decreasing game-time and no reassurances from the club (Allegedly).
 
Sterling doesn't score more for City than he did for Liverpool?

Liverpool EPL:
P: 95 / G: 18 / A: 21
7047mins / 90 = 74.1
= 0.24 goals per game.

Man City EPL:
P: 225 / G: 91 / A: 56
17129mins / 90 = 190.32
= 0.48 goals per game

<<<< Double the goal output at City.

-------------------------------------------------------

Or how about Mahrez:

Lester EPL:
P: 139 / G: 39 / A: 28
10930m / 90 = 121.44
= 0.32 goals per game.

Man City EPL:
P: 115 / G: 38 / A: 27
6725m / 90 = 74.72
= 0.51 goals per game.

<<<< 2/3rds higher goal output at City.

(I'm not scared to crunch numbers....... Seems my eyes didn't let me down in this instance however.)



Last year of his deal....... Leaving due to decreasing game-time and no reassurances from the club (Allegedly).


Sterling was still a kid when he moved to City. He had a couple of years developing & then his numbers went up, they didn't for a couple of years & that is easily attributed to him just ageing and naturally improving.


Mahrez when he peaked at Leicester was hitting 17 goals 11 assists & 12 goals 10 assists. His numbers are skewed by his season prior when he was breaking through & the season he left where Leicester actually dropped him as he threw a strop. He's never hit his Leicester peak statistically.
 
Raumdeuterz Raumdeuterz - You liked this post. This was very much my OG take...... You seemed quite offended y it at the time.

[Not sore but genuinely confused....]

I think there's a gap between not game changing and slight upgrade. I think he'll be a BIG upgrade over their current options but won't transform them going forward, they need more. What I gathered from your OG post is that you were suggesting he's not much better than their current LW options, which I disagreed with.
 

Airfixx

"I brekka yorz back ind make-a yew humbil"
Sterling was still a kid when he moved to City. He had a couple of years developing & then his numbers went up, they didn't for a couple of years & that is easily attributed to him just ageing and naturally improving.

:dawsonlol:

Taking your caveats here at face value; how can you even claim with a straight face that he hasn't improved since moving...... You've just rendered it impossible to measure either way.

So contrary to popular narrative, Pep hasn't improved Sterling 1 iota; it's all just organic growth?

If City/Pepe isn't a factor, why doesn't he currently score 1 goal in 2 for England too then?


Me, I'd blame Gary-ball for comparatively shit numbers cos he's still got quality around him, but your many caveats won't allow him that excuse..... So what's your take?

Mahrez when he peaked at Leicester was hitting 17 goals 11 assists & 12 goals 10 assists. His numbers are skewed by his season prior when he was breaking through & the season he left where Leicester actually dropped him as he threw a strop. He's never hit his Leicester peak statistically.

:dawsonlol:

Just how exactly do you expect improving numbers to be quantified????????

Again; I'll indulge you.

Best Leicester season: 17 EPL goals / 3054 mins. = 0.52 gpg
Last season at City: 11 EPL goals / 1491 mins. = 0.66 gpg

= IMPROVEMENT..... Even with all the "yeh-buts".
 
Last edited:
Sterling is good but he’s been getting back post tap ins at city for ages. Like an overwhelming amount. He’s in a system that provides him chance after chance after chance.

He will see nowhere near the level of domination at Chelsea and will be asked to create more… and he’s not a creator. He will occasionally beat a man and bend one far post or get in behind and finish but I will be extremely surprised if he scores 15+ in the PL, even with the additional playing time he’ll get.

When I watch him with England, I don’t see a smart player. Just a Lucas that is slightly more aware with decision making and a better passer. But not near Mane in these areas.
Not sure what the stats say but I've watched both live prehaps a dozen times. It's a no contest watching from a stadium off the ball and on it Mane is a far better and smarter player. So glad the buggers gone. Horribly clever and decisive elite footballer.
 
:dawsonlol:

Taking your caveats here at face value; how can you even claim with a straight face that he hasn't improved since moving...... You've just rendered it impossible to measure either way.

So contrary to popular narrative, Pep hasn't improved Sterling 1 iota; it's all just organic growth?

If City/Pepe isn't a factor, why doesn't he currently score 1 goal in 2 for England too then?


Me, I'd blame Gary-ball for comparatively shit numbers cos he's still got quality around him, but your many caveats won't allow him that excuse..... So what's your take?



:dawsonlol:

Just how exactly do you expect improving numbers to be quantified????????

Again; I'll indulge you.

Best Leicester season: 17 EPL goals / 3054 mins. = 0.52 gpg
Last season at City: 11 EPL goals / 1491 mins. = 0.66 gpg

= IMPROVEMENT..... Even with all the "yeh-buts".


You wanna start trying to engage with me without the childish laughing images or?
 

Airfixx

"I brekka yorz back ind make-a yew humbil"
You wanna start trying to engage with me without the childish laughing images or?

"Start"?

I have been perfectly respectful for quite a few pages now.

However; you figuratively crucified me earlier for not going stato...... You blame me for not finding the irony just a tad amusing?


(First getting up-tight with me cos OTHER people gave you neg rep..... Now this......Lighten up mate.)
 
Last edited:
"Start"?

I have been perfectly respectful for quite a few pages now.

However; you figuratively crucified me earlier for not going stato earlier...... You blame me for not finding the irony just a tad amusing?


(First getting up-tight with me cos OTHER people gave you neg rep..... Now this......Lighten up mate.)

No. You and shady are peas in a pod. I'm done here.
 
Top Bottom