‘We couldn’t convert our chances’ | Will having no striker affect Man City’s title hopes?



SUBSCRIBE ▻ http://bit.ly/SSFootballSub PREMIER LEAGUE HIGHLIGHTS ▻ http://bit.ly/SkySportsPLHighlights2122 Pep …

source

33 thoughts on “‘We couldn’t convert our chances’ | Will having no striker affect Man City’s title hopes?”

  1. Everytime city don’t win it’s a ‘striker problem’ but they pretty much always win anyway lol.
    Maybe the other team just defended well !

  2. Said before the season started they should buy a striker got away with it last season but was obvious they wouldn't be able to keep doing it. Dont understand why they spent £100 million on Grealish when they already had so many quality players to play in his position and should used that money to get Lewandowski or Kane even if it cost them £125/130 million it would have been better than getting Grealish. If I was them I would pay whatever it cost to get either Mbappe or Haaland this summer

  3. Mad to think what’s happened. Mind falling out with someone because he said Chelsea had this league won at the beginning to it’s between city and Liverpool.

  4. People act as though City not having 'a striker' means they're playing every match with 10 men. As if replacing one midfielder with a striker won't affect how they play and will suddenly lead to goals flowing….except they've already scored a ton of goals and they're already in first place.

    If they really just needed 'a striker' they didn't need to loan Alvarez back to a River and the press could ask why Gabriel Jesus and Liam Delap don't play.

  5. I don't know whether it's a British media thing or more general a Western media thing.
    When something works they praise you.
    When it doesn't the point to something they think you lack, and reverse again.
    Never say anything really intelligent.
    They just had a bad night period.

  6. Stop this striker thing welcome to modern football I've seen a team win a WC without one, I've seen another win a league title n UCL too, if they were fourth then you have a point analyse something else if you read the game well, coz there are other 17 teams behind them…🤷‍♂️

  7. All season pundits and fans praising city saying they are proving you don’t need an out and out st. Draw 1 game, will city lose because they don’t have a st 😂

  8. Two well matched teams. Clearly pound for pound Liverpool are the better team all things considered and have been for a few years, but it is what it is, and City have some fantastic players who've played brilliantly at times. I'd still put City as favourites, but it does look like it could go to the wire.

  9. As a Liverpool fan, watching the game as it went on, City started to look desperate. You notice towards the end they start to just fire endless balls into the box. For that to work they need an out and out striker. Generally they bore the hell out of you with maximum possession and scrape a 1.0 or 2.0 win. This time they failed

  10. Why use photo of Mehrez in thumbnail (here and in Dailymail), while Silva was clearly the one who wasted the 2 points with his many missed chances? Do you have something against him?!

Comments are closed.

Scroll to Top