A lot of nonsense is being said and written about Cole Palmer, who is really showing Pep Guardiola with his four penalties…
‘Inside Sir Jim Ratcliffe plans for new Man Utd transfer team with Premier League rival lined up after Richard Arnold axe’ trumpets The Sun.
Don’t know about you guys but whenever we think of a Man Utd ‘Premier League rival’, the first name that comes to Mediawatch’s mind is Jurgen Klopp. The next by a co*k-hair is Dougie Freedman.
In the Daily Mail, Ian Ladyman is losing his mind about the concept of Manchester City selling Cole Palmer to Chelsea and Pep Guardiola being really quite sanguine about the fact despite Palmer helping Chelsea into *checks table* tenth.
After saying last week that Palmer should be fast-tracked into the England squad, Sunday’s 4-4 draw with City saw Ladyman call Treble-winning manager Pep Guardiola “naive” for selling a player who had started two Premier League games last season.
“Pep said on Friday, only small clubs, that’s his quote, only small clubs refuse to sell to rivals.
“Really? I think it’s slightly naive to sell to a rival which is something that you rarely say about Manchester City.
“Only small clubs refused to sell to rivals, what does that mean?”
It’s not a difficult concept, Ian. He means that if a player wants to leave and the club receives a big offer – and £40m and rising was a big offer for a 21-year-old with limited experience – then it’s churlish to keep them at the club against their will.
It might be harder to understand if Manchester City had not literally sold two players to Arsenal and one to Chelsea last summer and then promptly won the Premier League, Champions League and FA Cup.
“With each passing game, with each passing move, with each passing kind of wave of that magical left foot, with each passing goal for Cole Palmer, with each passing contribution of note and merit, we ask that question, ‘why did City sell one of the best young players to a rival? Baffling.”
Now Mediawatch likes Palmer but he has scored four Premier League goals and every one has been a penalty. Of his 15 shots in the Premier League, the only four that have been on target have been from the spot. And Manchester City are absolutely not missing a penalty-taker.
As for ‘rival’…Chelsea are literally 12 points behind Manchester City, who have five players who have equalled or bettered Palmer’s combined goals and assists total this season.
Why did City sell one of their best young players to a ‘rival’? We have three answers but we think there may be more..
1) Chelsea offered £40m.
3) Jeremy Doku.
“Frankly, I would just have said no. I’d have said no to him. I would have said, I’d have done him a deal.
“What I would have done, I’d have said, look, you’re under contract until 2026, so at the time of this conversation, he would have had three years left. Stay for one year, stay for one year.
“And if you want, if I’m not true to my word and you do not get the games that I’m telling you will, next summer we’ll sit down and talk about a transfer.
‘That is what I would have done if I was Manchester City.”
Mediawatch has checked and Ian Ladyman has not won three Champions Leagues as a manager.
But he is nothing if not a dog with a bone and in Thursday’s Daily Mail he writes:
Pep Guardiola’s reasons for sanctioning Palmer’s move to Chelsea will long be discussed. Watching him play for Mauricio Pochettino’s team in London, it is hard to imagine he would not have found his way into the City XI at some stage.
Yes, he would have done. Which is why Guardiola tried to persuade him to stay. He literally cited the departure of Riyad Mahrez as a reason to stay and yet Palmer chose to leave for more first-team football at a mid-table club. Like many, many other players before him.
Is this you, Ian? Writing in 2019: ‘Guardiola does not owe Foden anything special just because the player is young and home grown. He owes him fair treatment and objective judgement and he will get that.’
We would certainly describe promising Palmer more minutes after Mahrez’s departure as ‘fair treatment’ and ‘objective judgement’.
It’s certainly more objective than the “each passing kind of wave of that magical left foot” clap-trap from Ladyman about a player he had literally never mentioned in print before he moved to Chelsea.
Reach for the bottom
Daily Mirror man Andy Dunn is far more sensible, beginning his piece on Palmer thus:
‘Cole Palmer cannot get used to London traffic but is glad he is no longer stuck in the tailback of talent at Manchester City.
‘When Palmer swapped the Etihad for Stamford Bridge, it looked like he might be going from one bench to another, such was the level of recruitment at Chelsea. But the 21-year-old from Wythenshawe had analysed Mauricio Pochettino’s playing roster and decided he had a better chance of starting regularly under the Argentine than he did under Pep Guardiola.’
All fair. So how was this headlined by some click-chasing web monkey at Reach?
Chelsea’s aggressive transfer strategy set to continue after Cole Palmer comments
We have seen some nonsense over the years but it’s rare that a headline is entirely unrelated to the content.
Dunn makes no mention of Chelsea’s ‘aggressive transfer strategy’ because, well, why the f*** would he?
The sub-headline is almost as bad:
Chelsea have spent more than £1billion on players since Todd Boehly’s takeover in May 2022 – but Cole Palmer’s comments prove they are still some way behind Manchester City
Pretty sure the Premier League table does that.
Meanwhile, on MailOnline:
Fans joke Everton star Dele Alli should be ‘arrested’ after footage of his PINK summer haircut is revealed online… with one supporter quipping: ‘I’d love to see Sean Dyche’s reaction to this!’
Yes, a November news story about Dele’s hair being pink (sorry, PINK) in the summer. What a time to be alive.
It’s all absolute mindless bollocks until we reach the final paragraph:
The revelation about his struggles cast his difficulties on the pitch in a new light and caused many to rethink how they should communicate towards players on social media and in the stands.
But not tabloid websites. They re-thought nothing. And continue to use that name.