RAHEEM STERLING

[Coach]

Natural progression, a tremendously philosophical question? What is natural progression? Is it circumstantial and if so, is circumstance a facet of nature or nurture? ‘Twas suggested above that Sterling’s ascent to greatness by Anglicised standard was more a consequence of natural progression than nurture. Does natural not imply by the ordain of nature alone, programed cellular processes powered by ATP producing mitochondria? The lateral folding of the embryonic disk, the regression of Wolffian ducts, the twisting of a bulbus cordis, nature, consistsent irrespective of host, geography or time. Sans teratogenicity of course (atoms and embryology, minus one quick science).

So, to Raheem’s natural progression, irrespective of circumstance, can it be assumed the player today is merely one who has followed a preset developmental curve? Be it from Liverpool to City or Scunthorpe, such is the way of nature, triumphant over circumstance, those lateral folds and cellular divisions occur with the very same efficiency. Raheem today is not a consequence of advice and instructions, repetitive training drills, criticism and commendation, this was always the player he was to be. Right wing or false nine, ‘tis itrelevant, nature is the omnipresent, omnipotent overseer of all. Why then the argument of players brought through the academy setup, a charge levied at Guardiola, what feather is it for his cap, of nature takes the plaudits and merit? Why bother, why not acquire the world’s very best and take credit for spending billions to build a force as magnificent as the Roman army, than gift nature the stage for applause.

A fabulously mind boggling argument, “natural progression”, couldn’t agree more and Peperempe, the greatest ‘hey bigger spender’, the courter of OPP, is no more than naughty by nature. Developmentalist? Hardly. To nature, cheers!

[airwolex]

I think it was after the Euros in which all the English players effed up that some thought Sterling's career was more or less dead. He was horrific and had a lot of caps for England with maybe two goals overall. All the England players played badly, but Hart and Sterling, the two City players were particularly dire imho.

Pep was the new coach of Man City and he made two moves with the Euro English flops. He got rid of Hart and reached out to Sterling saying he saw a lot of potential in him and would like to work with him to develop his game.

People saying Sterling was doing great under Brendan Fraser are reaching. He was a hard working, no chance taking, inconsistent player. As y'all know I do not like Pep, but imho if it wasn't for him Sterling wouldn't be where he is now. Some coaches DO have an effect on players.

[danfo driver]

I think it was after the Euros in which all the English players effed up that some thought Sterling's career was more or less dead. He was horrific and had a lot of caps for England with maybe two goals overall. All the England players played badly, but Hart and Sterling, the two City players were particularly dire imho.

Pep was the new coach of Man City and he made two moves with the Euro English flops. He got rid of Hart and reached out to Sterling saying he saw a lot of potential in him and would like to work with him to develop his game.

People saying Sterling was doing great under Brendan Fraser are reaching. He was a hard working, no chance taking, inconsistent player. As y'all know I do not like Pep, but imho if it wasn't for him Sterling wouldn't be where he is now. Some coaches DO have an effect on players.

[kajifu]

I think it was after the Euros in which all the English players effed up that some thought Sterling's career was more or less dead. He was horrific and had a lot of caps for England with maybe two goals overall. All the England players played badly, but Hart and Sterling, the two City players were particularly dire imho.

Pep was the new coach of Man City and he made two moves with the Euro English flops. He got rid of Hart and reached out to Sterling saying he saw a lot of potential in him and would like to work with him to develop his game.

People saying Sterling was doing great under Brendan Fraser are reaching. He was a hard working, no chance taking, inconsistent player. As y'all know I do not like Pep, but imho if it wasn't for him Sterling wouldn't be where he is now. Some coaches DO have an effect on players.

So you are taking euros to believed those people who thought his career was dead?You sure you are not one of those people judging someone just for a short competition

[Prince]

I think it was after the Euros in which all the English players effed up that some thought Sterling's career was more or less dead. He was horrific and had a lot of caps for England with maybe two goals overall. All the England players played badly, but Hart and Sterling, the two City players were particularly dire imho.

Pep was the new coach of Man City and he made two moves with the Euro English flops. He got rid of Hart and reached out to Sterling saying he saw a lot of potential in him and would like to work with him to develop his game.

People saying Sterling was doing great under Brendan Fraser are reaching. He was a hard working, no chance taking, inconsistent player. As y'all know I do not like Pep, but imho if it wasn't for him Sterling wouldn't be where he is now. Some coaches DO have an effect on players.

Load of rubbish scoring more goals and making more assist than mbappe at age 19. The only time he lacked confidence was when he played for England.

John Barnes, Andy Cole, Ian Wright all went through the same thing.

He improved under pelligrini and also scored goals and would have improved under any coach employed.
Why not admit the guy has been improving from QPR till now under every coach he has played under.
He learns and he adapts. Mahrez was suppose to displace him, then Silva, then Sane but the boy steps up every single time.

[Comrade Machel]

Sterling was already the best English player during his time at Liverpool and said that at the time (not like I'm some football fountain of knowledge) but it simply isn't true that Pep has improved him. There is nothing Sterling is doing now under Pep that is new

Airwolex which Euros are these where Raheems career was supposedly dead. Without listening to the stupid commentators for me he has been England's best player at last two tournaments. The unjust criticism was he wasn't scoring goals. If Raheem was terrible then how about that donkey Dele Ali

[Donzman]

I think it was after the Euros in which all the English players effed up that some thought Sterling's career was more or less dead. He was horrific and had a lot of caps for England with maybe two goals overall. All the England players played badly, but Hart and Sterling, the two City players were particularly dire imho.

Pep was the new coach of Man City and he made two moves with the Euro English flops. He got rid of Hart and reached out to Sterling saying he saw a lot of potential in him and would like to work with him to develop his game.

People saying Sterling was doing great under Brendan Fraser are reaching. He was a hard working, no chance taking, inconsistent player. As y'all know I do not like Pep, but imho if it wasn't for him Sterling wouldn't be where he is now. Some coaches DO have an effect on players.

Should we list all the other players Pep did not improve?

Sterling improved because of Sterling. It's his natural progression as a footballer.

You can't have 10 players who stagnate under Pep and 1 who progresses, then turn around to say it is due to Pep's coaching. If most players improved under Pep the argument might be more reasonable. As it stands, nah.

[Prince]

I think it was after the Euros in which all the English players effed up that some thought Sterling's career was more or less dead. He was horrific and had a lot of caps for England with maybe two goals overall. All the England players played badly, but Hart and Sterling, the two City players were particularly dire imho.

Pep was the new coach of Man City and he made two moves with the Euro English flops. He got rid of Hart and reached out to Sterling saying he saw a lot of potential in him and would like to work with him to develop his game.

People saying Sterling was doing great under Brendan Fraser are reaching. He was a hard working, no chance taking, inconsistent player. As y'all know I do not like Pep, but imho if it wasn't for him Sterling wouldn't be where he is now. Some coaches DO have an effect on players.

Should we list all the other players Pep did not improve?

Sterling improved because of Sterling. It's his natural progression as a footballer.

You can't have 10 players who stagnate under Pep and 1 who progresses, then turn around to say it is due to Pep's coaching. If most players improved under Pep the argument might be more reasonable. As it stands, nah.

Dunceman well said and the boy is only 24, the guy has improved from year to year

[maceo4]

Sterling was already the best English player during his time at Liverpool and said that at the time (not like I'm some football fountain of knowledge) but it simply isn't true that Pep has improved him. There is nothing Sterling is doing now under Pep that is new

Airwolex which Euros are these where Raheems career was supposedly dead. Without listening to the stupid commentators for me he has been England's best player at last two tournaments. The unjust criticism was he wasn't scoring goals. If Raheem was terrible then how about that donkey Dele Ali

Sterlings biggest issue had been his finishing, all those years at liverpool his finishing was poor and his goal tally then shows this. His first season at City he showed the same poor finishing, but since then his finishing has improved dramatically. I get the argument that maybe it improved for reasons other than Pep, but to argue that there is nothing 'new' in what Sterling is doing is absolute BS. Everybody has seen the improvement and he's now even scoring for England because of this and you can check his overall scoring stats how they've improved since coming to City. Now as far as who gets credit for the improvement, I'd argue Pep others might say its Sterlings natural progression, but at the very least acknowledge the improvement, haba!

[danfo driver]

I think it was after the Euros in which all the English players effed up that some thought Sterling's career was more or less dead. He was horrific and had a lot of caps for England with maybe two goals overall. All the England players played badly, but Hart and Sterling, the two City players were particularly dire imho.

Pep was the new coach of Man City and he made two moves with the Euro English flops. He got rid of Hart and reached out to Sterling saying he saw a lot of potential in him and would like to work with him to develop his game.

People saying Sterling was doing great under Brendan Fraser are reaching. He was a hard working, no chance taking, inconsistent player. As y'all know I do not like Pep, but imho if it wasn't for him Sterling wouldn't be where he is now. Some coaches DO have an effect on players.

Should we list all the other players Pep did not improve?

Sterling improved because of Sterling. It's his natural progression as a footballer.

You can't have 10 players who stagnate under Pep and 1 who progresses, then turn around to say it is due to Pep's coaching. If most players improved under Pep the argument might be more reasonable. As it stands, nah.

Dunceman well said and the boy is only 24, the guy has improved from year to year

Odiegwu!

[airwolex]

Nobody can say for sure one way or the other. You guys are arguing as if coaches can have ZERO effect on a young player. That's absolutely crazy. Most managers just manage but some are interested in coaching and personal development.

Lampard has been open on how Mourinho gave him the confidence to become a top quality player.

Sterling's finishing was terrible, his record for England until this year was like 3 goals in 30 or something silly. He was not on an upward trajectory. Everybody in England is surprised at how good he has become, but you CE guys want us to believe you knew.

[airwolex]

I think it was after the Euros in which all the English players effed up that some thought Sterling's career was more or less dead. He was horrific and had a lot of caps for England with maybe two goals overall. All the England players played badly, but Hart and Sterling, the two City players were particularly dire imho.

Pep was the new coach of Man City and he made two moves with the Euro English flops. He got rid of Hart and reached out to Sterling saying he saw a lot of potential in him and would like to work with him to develop his game.

People saying Sterling was doing great under Brendan Fraser are reaching. He was a hard working, no chance taking, inconsistent player. As y'all know I do not like Pep, but imho if it wasn't for him Sterling wouldn't be where he is now. Some coaches DO have an effect on players.

Should we list all the other players Pep did not improve?

Sterling improved because of Sterling. It's his natural progression as a footballer.

You can't have 10 players who stagnate under Pep and 1 who progresses, then turn around to say it is due to Pep's coaching. If most players improved under Pep the argument might be more reasonable. As it stands, nah.

All players develop because of themselves, but most get help as well.

Players are different. Some are more coachable than others. I am not saying Pep is best at developing young talent but there's a whole lot to improvement than showing people how to score.

Like I said, there's a whole load of evidence out there that Pep took a special interest in Sterling and the player responded.

[Donzman]

I think it was after the Euros in which all the English players effed up that some thought Sterling's career was more or less dead. He was horrific and had a lot of caps for England with maybe two goals overall. All the England players played badly, but Hart and Sterling, the two City players were particularly dire imho.

Pep was the new coach of Man City and he made two moves with the Euro English flops. He got rid of Hart and reached out to Sterling saying he saw a lot of potential in him and would like to work with him to develop his game.

People saying Sterling was doing great under Brendan Fraser are reaching. He was a hard working, no chance taking, inconsistent player. As y'all know I do not like Pep, but imho if it wasn't for him Sterling wouldn't be where he is now. Some coaches DO have an effect on players.

Should we list all the other players Pep did not improve?

Sterling improved because of Sterling. It's his natural progression as a footballer.

You can't have 10 players who stagnate under Pep and 1 who progresses, then turn around to say it is due to Pep's coaching. If most players improved under Pep the argument might be more reasonable. As it stands, nah.

Dunceman well said and the boy is only 24, the guy has improved from year to year

Odiegwu!

Can you imagine the handkerchief tycoon called Prince? SMH...

[eyan]

Nobody can say for sure one way or the other. You guys are arguing as if coaches can have ZERO effect on a young player. That's absolutely crazy. Most managers just manage but some are interested in coaching and personal development.

Lampard has been open on how Mourinho gave him the confidence to become a top quality player.

Sterling's finishing was terrible, his record for England until this year was like 3 goals in 30 or something silly. He was not on an upward trajectory. Everybody in England is surprised at how good he has become, but you CE guys want us to believe you knew.

Could it be the english players also improve?
Could it be that the english have a better players now?

[Donzman]

All players develop because of themselves, but most get help as well.

Players are different. Some are more coachable than others. I am not saying Pep is best at developing young talent but there's a whole lot to improvement than showing people how to score.

Like I said, there's a whole load of evidence out there that Pep took a special interest in Sterling and the player responded.

Why did he take a special interest in Sterling and not Mangala? Or Rodwell? Or Jovetic? Or Navas? Or Nolito? Or Iheanacho? Or Fernando? Or Bony?

Why did these players not improve under Pep's coaching?

At the elite level coaches can help players fit into systems and perhaps motivate them, but the coaches' input in terms of player development is very marginal. It largely comes down to the player's ability, and his willingness to work at his craft. This is true in almost every profession.

[airwolex]

Why did he take a special interest in Sterling and not Mangala? Or Rodwell? Or Jovetic? Or Navas? Or Nolito? Or Iheanacho? Or Fernando? Or Bony?

I don't know. But I remember hearing on a Sky tv show from a Journalist that Sterling was one of the first players he reached out to. Maybe he saw something in him.

By the way Pep is ruthless. Remember he showed no interest in Toure and Hart, more established players.

[Heliopolis]

The anti Guardiola lot here are talking out of both sides of their mouth. On the one hand, they blame Pep for not winning the CL with City and Bayern. Here, they are implying Pep has had a bad impact on those clubs. However they also argue Pep has no impact on Sterling, and Sterling has developed on his own.

Either Pep (and coaches in general) have an impact, or they do not. Which side are you anti-Pep gang on?

[tfco]

The anti Guardiola lot here are talking out of both sides of their mouth. On the one hand, they blame Pep for not winning the CL with City and Bayern. Here, they are implying Pep has had a bad impact on those clubs. However they also argue Pep has no impact on Sterling, and Sterling has developed on his own.

Either Pep (and coaches in general) have an impact, or they do not. Which side are you anti-Pep gang on?

anything said against your MCM, and you lot get very emotional

i asked a simple question re the other City players: Aguero, KDB, Kompany, Stones....
have they also become world beaters since youknowwho took over?

[danfo driver]

The anti Guardiola lot here are talking out of both sides of their mouth. On the one hand, they blame Pep for not winning the CL with City and Bayern. Here, they are implying Pep has had a bad impact on those clubs. However they also argue Pep has no impact on Sterling, and Sterling has developed on his own.

Either Pep (and coaches in general) have an impact, or they do not. Which side are you anti-Pep gang on?

anything said against your MCM, and you lot get very emotional

i asked a simple question re the other City players: Aguero, KDB, Kompany, Stones....
have they also become world beaters since youknowwho took over?

[wanaj0]

Why was Pepe buying players instead of 'IMPROVING' the ones he met???

He should have improved Hart, Managala, Iheanacho etc instead of splashing out CASH on their replacements. I am sure that there are players in the City youth team that he could have IMPROVED instead of spending MONEY.

That said, Pepe is a GOOD coach.

[Coach]

Why did Real buy Ronaldo, Kroos, Modric, Bale? Why did United re-sign Pogba? Why did Liverpool buy Mane and not build up Ben Woodburn? Why did Denzel have to be crooked before he took it? Why.

[Coach]

I am sure that there are players in the City youth team that he could have IMPROVED instead of spending MONEY.

The same King Louis XIV who blooded McNair, Tyler thingybob, Rashford and various others, was hung, drawn and quartered, by the very same masses condemning Peperempe for not following suit. 'Tis the job of fans to indulge fallacy, who amongst us, in their own vocation, would not repeat a tried and tested modus operandi, that had reaped rewards to and fro? Peperempe has a model and picks those that fit. Simple.

At what point will the actual purpose of this debate be revealed? #HarryMaguire

[Prince]

Why was Pepe buying players instead of 'IMPROVING' the ones he met???

He should have improved Hart, Managala, Iheanacho etc instead of splashing out CASH on their replacements. I am sure that there are players in the City youth team that he could have IMPROVED instead of spending MONEY.

That said, Pepe is a GOOD coach.

of course he is good coach my Raheem should be given credit for having the intelligence to adapt to his method and deliver what the coach wants, like he has adapted over the past 7 years. That is football intelligence of a great footballer. Let Messi try playing under Alladyce