There’s a new debate going around at the moment – did Man City make a mistake selling Cole Palmer?
One would think the answer is obviously yes, because he’s so good. But there’s a counter argument that he never would have been this good had he stayed, so it’s not as egregious a whiff as it seemed at first.
Rory Smith was on 5Live’s Monday Night Club yesterday, where of course the focus was on Palmer after his four goals at the weekend. The journalist tried to figure out why Pep Guardiola had been happy to let the attacker leave:
“It is strange that Pep Guardiola thought he was not going to play at City, but maybe that is because he was not willing to centre the team around him like Enzo Maresca is. City probably should be thinking they have made a mistake!”
For Chelsea fans, this debate is an enjoyable one. We don’t care whether City made a mistake or not. We just get to keep Cole and watch him thriving.
New York Times journalist Rory Smith on Palmer:
🗣️ “It is strange that Pep Guardiola thought he was not going to play at City, but maybe that is because he was not willing to centre the team around him like Enzo Maresca is. City probably should be thinking they have made a… pic.twitter.com/9JpBvRcTNH
— Vince™ (@Blue_Footy) October 1, 2024
Phun over Philosophy
Frankly, for the footballing world in general, it’s far better to have the Wythenshawe Wizard playing for us, even through last year’s chaos. He’s able to do pretty much whatever he likes, be the star of the team and play every week.
Compare that to his old teammate Phil Foden or the other bright talents who end up cogs in the Guardiola machine. Yes they retire with a boat load of medals, but for the footballing public at large it’s a disappointment. The fun and creativity is sucked out of them, and they’re certainly not allowed to just take a touch and shoot every time they get the ball when they feel like it.
Removing that from Palmer’s game wouldn’t just be bad for Palmer, it would be bad for football.
