Manchester City are an upgrade for Raheem Sterling but one poor season would make them vulnerable... it'll be years before they achieve the same Bank of England status as Manchester United or Arsenal

• Liverpool's Raheem Sterling completed his £49m move to Manchester City
• The 20-year-old's methods to push through a move were questionable
• If City endured just one poor season they could face a similar situation
• But for now the move represents an upgrade for new signing Sterling
• Liverpool must now invest well, unlike their use of the Luis Suarez money
• They should look to spend most of it on one player to make a difference 

By Martin Samuel - Debate for the Daily Mail

Published: 02:41 EST, 16 July 2015 | Updated: 03:10 EST, 16 July 2015

Raheem Sterling's £49million transfer from Liverpool went through this week, after what might be termed some pretty ordinary behaviour.

I wondered what made Manchester City think he would treat them any differently if the chips were down. That's here.

Your thoughts – and some more of mine, plus an amazing pop fact about the Butthole Surfers, algebra for idiots and the story behind Paul Ince's Manchester United shirt debacle – are below.

Raheem Sterling's £49million transfer from Liverpool to Manchester CIty finally went through this week

Let's stop with the Sterling bashing articles. He's young, ambitious, and slightly misguided. Manchester City, on the other hand, have been foolish to cough this money for an unproven commodity. Funk It, San Francisco.

Everybody is entitled to pursue a career. Sterling's methods, however, were highly questionable and he must surely have expected criticism when he travelled that path. Anyway, Funk It, let's get funky. 

There's a lot of 'ifs' in your article Martin. It's hard to make good points when you've overused the 'ifs'. What if all those 'ifs' you pointed out were the opposite. We'll be made up at City if that's the case. Ima soul, Greenland.

Actually, there's one 'if' and it concerned the possibility that Manchester City had a poor season. I'll admit their resources make that less of a possibility, which is why Raheem Sterling fancies them more than Liverpool, but it can happen. A few injuries, an aging squad, improvement on the part of rivals. My point was that 'if' this happened – that word again – Sterling had shown he wasn't the type to stick around and was prepared to use extreme methods to get his way. Equally, I'm not really prepared to take lectures on grounded reporting from a bloke with a daft alias and an address in Greenland. While we're dealing in reality, son, you're not Santa Claus.

It's a shame, Martin, that you continue to write such nonsense to satisfy your sensationalist tabloid tendencies. To claim that Manchester City are similar to Liverpool is just ridiculous and further evidence of the heavily biased English media. Liverpool are unfortunately not rivals for the league, at best they might win a cup. Their fans dine out on those five European Cups, and although no one will deny their illustrious history, frankly it's an irrelevance in the modern age. To have never won the Premier League and hit 25 years since a title shows how far they have fallen. Sterling was very aware of that and also doesn't think much of Brendan Rodgers, like the rest of the country. EConan, London.

Actually, Manchester City are exactly like Liverpool in as much as they are a considerably less attractive proposition for any player without Champions League football and one poor season would make them vulnerable. Barcelona and Real Madrid are big enough to ride a blip and remain appealing, as Manchester United were, but if Atletico Madrid dropped out of the top four they would be a far harder sell as history gives no guarantee that they would swiftly return. City have money, yes. But so do a lot of other elite clubs and it will be many years before they achieve the same Bank of England status as Manchester United or Arsenal. Your whole premise is that things remain the same. Liverpool never win the title, Manchester City never falter. History suggests football isn't like that. Do you know how the last 10 years of matches between Liverpool and Manchester City have panned out? Liverpool wins 9, Draws 9, Manchester City wins 4. So four wins in 22 matches. And that is not bias, it's fact. You might want to wind your neck in about what is certain in football.

Sterling holds aloft a Manchester City scarf after some questionable behaviour in the build-up to his move

Meanwhile, Manchester United spend £77m, and nobody blinks an eye. City have already recouped £34m of that with players being sold. Stretford Born Blue, Manchester.

The article wasn't criticising Manchester City's spending at all, but £34m back? I'm working hard for you here, Blue, so I'll include Alvaro Negredo's delayed £19m from Valencia, but after Scott Sinclair (£2.5m), Matija Nastasic (£1.5m) and Karim Rekik (£3.5m), I'm still roughly £8m short of your total.

It is a pity that Martin Samuel just can't get his head around any club model that doesn't rely on free money from a wealthy overseas billionaire owner. It is almost as if the thought of running a football club without enormous hand-outs or unsustainable debt is an anathema to him. Along with the manager who lets his dog do his accounting, it is a real blind spot. IWWT, London.

Blind spot? As the only one who said from the start that Financial Fair Play couldn't work, I really don't think I was blind. So one more time for the hard of thinking. You were wrong. Michel Platini was wrong. FFP was wrong. It was poorly-conceived, ill-considered and didn't work. Everyone knows it. Everyone understands that now. It had to be changed. It wasn't fair. It cemented the elite in place. Just as I told you it would. The very people who shaped it admitted their mistake. You cannot outlaw sustainable investment in business. Now this may be personally humiliating for you, having banged on about its wisdom so many times. But let's not pretend that nothing has changed, eh? Oh, and as for a dog doing the accounting, rather Rover than the FFP expert from Belgium that Platini employed. The one who was frequently waylaid because his bank kept going skint.

The subtle difference is that Manchester City have a manager who appreciates and knows how to treat talented players. Chrissp, Redhill.

Rodgers gave Sterling his chance and almost won the title with him in the team. How many young Manchester City players have come through on Manuel Pellegrini's watch? He's merely capitalising on the moment, it's nothing to do with man management.

Brendan Rodgers gave Sterling his chance at Liverpool and they came close to winning the Premier League

The other big issue is whether Sterling has the maturity to handle the pressure and live up to the price tag. If he hasn't, are there the characters at the club to pull him in the right direction? Wayne Rooney had some issues moving from Everton to Manchester United for such a huge fee at a young age, but he had Sir Alex Ferguson to answer to, and players such as Ryan Giggs, Paul Scholes, Rio Ferdinand and Gary Neville to help. I don't see any equivalents at City. The careers of several young English players have stalled there – Scott Sinclair, Adam Johnson and Jack Rodwell, for instance. Perhaps that is what put Fabian Delph off. Sterling is more talented than any of those, but if he isn't right between the ears he is in danger of going backwards. William White, Cheshire.

Correct. Unfortunately Manchester City have condoned his behaviour and purchased him. A sad day for football. Paul, Sweden.

It's a fair point William, although I think he has been bought to go straight into the first team which sets him apart from the other players you mention. Also I feel you are mistaken on Rooney's first season at Manchester United. He scored a hat-trick on his debut against Fenerbahce – making him the youngest player to score a hat-trick in the Champions League – was the club's top Premier League scorer with 11 goals and won the PFA Young Player of the Year. It wasn't the best season for United, who finished third, but Rooney hit the ground running considering his age and the pressure of his move. As for City condoning Sterling's behaviour, it is fair to say clubs do not help themselves, Paul.

Why do the media have to give a negative slant on every Manchester City story but manage to go over the top to show all Manchester United stories in the best light possible? Blueandproud, Manchester.

Because we all hate City, and support United. There – has that satisfied your ridiculous, paranoid fantasies?

Wayne Rooney hit the ground running at Manchester United, firing a hat-trick on his debut against Fenerbahce

If you fast forward 12 months, the only party who has risked anything is Sterling. Liverpool have got a very good price and if they spend wisely the goals and assists that Sterling has provided should be very easily covered. Manchester City need English players and youth to rejuvenate an aging squad – plus, the money is tiny in relation to the owner's wealth. It is Sterling who has left a guaranteed starting position for the chance to play Champions League football and a better opportunity of winning the Premier League. But if he does not play… Neil S, Surrey.

I think he starts, Neil, but you are right. It will be harder to hold his place at Manchester City than it was at Liverpool. He needs to find his form quickly.

A request for change does not necessarily mean one is stubborn or will be a trouble maker for life. Liverpool should accept the decision of the player and move on. The Daily Mail should stop this biased and unjust reporting on a 20-year-old guy. He is not rude. He just wanted to win something and felt change was needed. Peace Loving, London.

Peace loving, maybe, but not very bright. I think you'll find he had something called a contract. So it was not entirely his decision to make. That's why there was conflict.

Martin Samuel must have been rubbing his hands waiting to write the line that Sterling has left to upgrade. OK, Martin, we get it – you don't like Liverpool very much. Foldy, Chester.

Manchester City are in the Champions League, Liverpool are not. Manchester City have won the Premier League twice in the last four years, Liverpool have not won it since 1990. Of course, Manchester City represent an upgrade right now. That line was nothing to do with a dislike for Liverpool. It's a statement of fact.

Manchester City have won the Premier League twice in four years, Liverpool have not won it since 1990

Congratulations to Manchester City on signing the new Wilfried Zaha/Adam Johnson/Peter Marinello/Insert name of choosing and fighting off the fierce competition from, er...no one. Ha ha ha. £49m? No stop, please, you're killing me. What next, £80m for Brooklyn Beckham? The sad thing is, no City fan with any pride wants Sterling anywhere near the club. CGF, Manchester.

I doubt that you speak for Manchester City fans, mate. I doubt that very much indeed.

We must always remember that this is Sterling's job and 90 per cent of football supporters would throw a sickie for an interview for a better paid job, then leave their current one at the drop of a hat. They then think footballers should be loyal – unless the club doesn't want them anymore when loyalty goes out the window. Steviejay99, Colchester.

Steve, I agree. Most people go with the money or take a job with better potential. But if a player signs a contract he has to accept that he wanted the security of that arrangement and has certain responsibilities, too. I just think Sterling's agitation to get his move crossed a line and became disrespectful. It cannot be that any behaviour is justifiable as a means to an end.

I hope he and his advisers do well. Will his next move be for more or less money? We have seen this before from Arsenal players. Chasing the cash, not the medals. Bexhill Bill, Bexhill-on-Sea.

I'd say he is chasing both. Plainly, Manchester City's medal prospects are better than Liverpool's right now. As for Arsenal players, just about every one that left won more than he would have done had he remained – Cesc Fabregas, Samir Nasri, Ashley Cole, Gael Clichy, Robin van Persie. The exception would be Emmanuel Adebayor.

Cesc Fabregas is one of a number of players to have left Arsenal and won more medals as a result

Why do Liverpool get so bitter and personal when players want to leave the club? If they don't want that to happen they have to improve consistency. BenQ, London.

I don't think this is a Liverpool thing, Ben. No club likes losing its best players. They fought and, ultimately, drove a hard bargain. They have that right.

Ben, did fans get bitter when players like Dirk Kuyt, Javier Mascherano or Xabi Alonso left us? It's the way the player leaves that matters, not the fact they're leaving. But I wouldn't expect anyone from London to be intelligent enough to understand this. Matt, Haywards Heath.

Sort of killed your own argument with that last line, didn't you Matt? Shame, it was well-reasoned until then.

I beg to differ. The only thing needed in today's game is money. If a player does not want to join City if they are out of the Champions League, City will just pay more money. Boweigo, Monrovia.

And it won't always work, and here's why. Say Manchester City were outside the Champions League next season. Then Sterling would have been no better off than he was at Liverpool. So, he would have agitated to go to another club, who could pay an excellent salary but with a better chance of achievement. They've all got money. Manchester United, Chelsea, even Arsenal, if they wish to spend it. City might attract a certain type of player by spending a fortune, as Manchester United did last season – but it is hard to argue that the signings of Radamel Falcao or Angel di Maria were resounding successes. The market is more complex than you paint it.

Until Sterling turned on Liverpool the fans rated him as world class. Now they rate James Milner and (Roberto) Firmino, who most people had never heard of, as better. Stretfordender20x, Droylsden.

Yes, but they're not alone in that. Remember when you lot were telling the world you were better off without Cristiano Ronaldo?

Watch this space. Diva on the loose. Elsie, Alresford.

Indeed. And she's got the mighty Was Not Was backing her on this one.

Liverpool can't complain if they got £49m for a brat. That can buy you a world class winger and a world class striker. Tricktrack, London.

Not sure it can in the current market. They should be looking to invest most of it on one player who will make a difference.

Manchester City have bought an over-rated, over-blown, egomaniac, who is not even half as good as he thinks he is. A one season wonder. Misterblue58, London.

John Terry puts him among the three players that caused him most aggravation last season. I'll trust his judgement on this. He seems to know what he's doing.

Sterling's first season was 2012-13, when he started well and disappeared, as young players do. He spent most of the first half of the next season on the bench and was only outstanding in the last four or five months. Last season it was back to year one, good start and gradually worse as the season wore on. He was awful for the last half, just when we needed him to perform. So this is £49m for someone who has only had a consistent impact for half a season, and who is still just potential at this point. His final ball is non-existent and his finishing poor. It's amazing business. He might come good, but his attitude makes me feel he won't fulfil his promise. Josh, Wirral.

I think that's quite a harsh appraisal, Josh. Sterling's second season impact for Liverpool was huge. He was the best young English player I had seen in a while. Again, I think Liverpool have got good money for him – but I think there are a few Liverpool fans focusing quite hard on every negative to make this deal seems less disappointing.

Sterling's second season impact for Liverpool was huge as the Anfield club finished in second place

I bet he has a clause inserted in his contract stating that he will not play at Anfield. If he thought the boos while playing for England were bad, he hasn't seen or heard anything yet. Rogerz, Wolverhampton.

I can't believe City would agree to such a clause. What if the meeting with Liverpool was a title decider, last day of the season? Equally, will Sterling be that bothered? He seems to have quite a thick skin to me.

Is this Manchester City showing Pep Guardiola that they can buy who they want, and that he can, too, if he becomes their new manager? UKDean, Redditch.

I don't think so, Dean. There is a difference between Sterling and Lionel Messi, and Guardiola will recognise that.

The fee is definitely excessive, but Sterling is exactly the type of player that City need. They lacked pace and direct movement throughout last year and he delivered in his breakthrough season with Luis Suarez. City would expect that to be replicated with Sergio Aguero. Adam10, Derby.

Good point. You'd fancy a front three of Sterling, Aguero and David Silva, certainly.

I look forward to reading the headline in summer 2017: 'Sterling signs for Sunderland for £12m'. Hektor, Warsaw.

Slow day in Warsaw, obviously.

Off with him now. Unleash Jordon Ibe in that role. I am volunteering to push Sterling and his belongings in a wheelbarrow and dump him at the Etihad Stadium. Wrence95, Liverpool.

And Liverpool, evidently.

As well as Sterling, Liverpool have lost another of their best players in the form of captain Steven Gerrard

What does make me laugh is all the one eyed ex-Liverpool players suddenly talking about what a great deal they're getting for Sterling, completely ignoring the fact that with Steven Gerrard also going they've lost their two best players this summer. And £75m in the bank didn't make much difference when Suarez left. Lewis, Manchester.

I know. As much as £49m is good money, it only remains so if the funds are reinvested in players of similar ability. That didn't happen with Suarez, the money was spread too thinly, and Liverpool went backwards.

I don't understand it – spending so much on an over-rated, egotist whose attitude stinks. My love affair with City started in 1968 and I shared the joy along with the heartache but no more. This deal has taken the soul out of the club and, like the Manchester United fans a few years ago, I'm off to support my local team. I'd like to wish you luck City, but I can't, not after this. In time I will be back when you realise the error of your ways and the mercenary has gone. But not until then. Mal, Bradford.

Having been ignored since 1968, and in the knowledge that your change of allegiance is only temporary, if I was Bradford City I'd start the season on a high by banning you.

Sterling started angling for the move before Christmas when first offered a new contract. First he was tired and was given a couple of weeks holiday. When offered the contract on his return his agent went public that they had turned down £100,000 a week. Then pictures started appearing of Sterling and the shisha pipe; then of Sterling with balloons. Then his agent went public again slagging off Liverpool and Jamie Carragher and said Sterling wouldn't sign for £900,000 a week. Then more pictures of balloons, more leaks to the press that he would not go on tour and then he phoned in sick. All of this after Liverpool had bent over backwards to further him. Good luck City, you had better hope his agent Aidy Ward doesn't need the money as Sterling will follow his instructions. And wait until you see what he gets up to when not at the club. Timmy Wa, Bedfordshire.

Not more balloon play? Personally, I think there should be more photographs of footballers with balloons. Here's one of Wayne Rooney, for instance.

The tweets I've seen from Liverpool fans to Sterling are absolutely disgusting. Racist and threatening his family. Then again, they have form for that. Just ask Gerrard. What happened to you'll never walk alone? Pottsy81, Liverpool.

Not all Liverpool fans, Pottsy. But, you're right, some of them should be ashamed.

Luke Shaw: £27m plus £4m add-ons, yet I don't remember a stink about that last season. If he's worth that, Sterling must be worth £49m. If he goes on to be as good as he could be and City get ten years out of him, no one will be complaining. Mundo13, Manchester.

'Actually, the most inflationary transfers this summer took Ross McCormack to Fulham and Luke Shaw to Manchester United.' That was from the debate column dated August 14, 2014, in response to poster MC, from London. And in a column item from July 21 last year I bemoaned the fact that new money clubs like Manchester City and Chelsea always get the blame for transfer inflation. Just because you can't remember it, doesn't mean it wasn't written.

By the time Carlos Tevez went to Manchester City he was the finished article, a player who would walk into most teams in the world. Sterling is far from this and his attitude will make it very difficult for him to reach his potential as he apparently thinks he's already there. He'll think he has won this fight by getting his move so let's see if City can get him under control. My feeling is when he is struggling to make the bench by December we'll see more tantrums. Steven, Liverpool.

Face it, Steven, he did win this fight. Liverpool didn't want to sell, they just made the best of it by extracting a large fee.

Rodgers has to take a lot of blame. When he took over the club and agreed to star in that ill-conceived documentary, he took great delight in showing what a tough guy he was by bullying a 17-year-old Sterling. Would he have treated Suarez, Carragher or Gerrard in the same way? Liverpool's problems remain post-Sterling with Rodgers still at the club. Arty Russell, Belfast.

The dressing-down in that scene was aimed at the young players, so the point about Suarez, Carragher and Gerrard is moot. And he wasn't bullying Sterling, he was rebuking him for what he perceived to be a lack of respect. The problem was the confrontation was made public through a documentary. The club is to blame for that, not Rodgers. I doubt if he had much choice in the matter and, once the decision was made, he could either do his job or hide every contentious moment from the camera, making it impossible to function. I agree it was a mistake to show private moments, but he wasn't wrong in what he said to Sterling – and it wasn't his fault the club had decided to go public.

If Manchester City actually produced their own English players they wouldn't have to pay so much. In the last few years they have ditched Joleon Lescott, Gareth Barry, Milner, Johnson, Rodwell, Sinclair and Micah Richards without making an effort to bring through replacements from the academy. Before anyone says they were not good enough then please look at the performances of Jesus Navas, Martin Demichelis, Fernando and Eliaquim Mangala. They have hardly set the world alight. The Voice of Reason, England.

City have invested a lot in their academy and should soon see results. Their record to here is not impressive, however, I agree with that.

This reminds me of Paul Ince before he left West Ham United, being photographed in a Manchester United shirt – the abuse he got! It's all about money and with Liverpool having the sympathy vote of the media and their army of pundits it is clear to see the biased coverage. Well done Raheem, look after yourself. I think he will progress at City instead of being confused by his manager's constant tinkering. Sakafaite, Hampshire.

I can tell you what happened with Ince and that photograph, if you're interested. It was actually an innocent misunderstanding. The Daily Star had a photographer who was very close to Ince's agent at the time, Ambrose Mendy. He had been promised the first photograph of Ince as a United player, but the move had dragged on and now he was going on holiday. It looked as if he would be away at the crucial time. So it was arranged that he would do the picture and it would then be held, ready for use when the deal went through. Except some dope put it in the Paul Ince picture file, where it could be seen by all, rather than storing it away. The Daily Star and Daily Express are part of the same newspaper group and shared a picture library. So, when the sports editor of the Express called up the Ince file to illustrate the latest twist in the long-running saga, he found a copy of the photograph of Ince in a United shirt. He published the image and it went nuts from there. It was nothing to do with the player. He was merely trying to help his agent, who was helping his friend the photographer. Of course, fat chance of trying to explain that one over Upton Park when everybody has had a few sherbets.

You say that everything was done by the book in dealing with Tevez. If you refuse to carry out the work you are being paid to do it should be gross misconduct and the sack. Unfortunately employees have more rights than employers. Saga Person, Norwich.

I was referring to Manchester City needing to act by the book for fear of giving Tevez a loophole and a way out of the club.

The Carlos Tevez incident, where he refused to get off the bench for City, caused huge issues for the club

I don't remember Martin Samuel writing similar articles when Dejan Lovren and Adam Lallana were engineering moves away from Southampton to Liverpool? CFC4, London.

That's because I don't remember either player engineering them quite so aggressively, or being as high profile as England international Sterling. I wrote extensively on how Southampton had been shafted by the elite clubs and FFP, however.

Neither side comes out if this with a great deal of credit. Maybe Sterling and his agent could have done some things differently but, for Liverpool to obtain £44m plus add-ons, it seems to have required a co-ordinated series of press leaks and personal attacks on the player from every Tom, Dick and Harry who has ever worn the Liverpool jersey. I'm sure that ultimately City felt as though they had to pay up if only to reassure Sterling of their commitment to him. Ethically this seems as bad, if not worse, than anything the player or his agent has done and reflects poorly on Liverpool. If City should be concerned about Sterling's behaviour, players considering signing for Liverpool would do well to remember how their Old Boys Association operates. Boz59, Manchester.

I think every major club has that association, Boz, but Liverpool's is more pronounced because of their fabulous history. I don't think you'll find Mike Summerbee or Francis Lee are any less vocal on City's behalf but because Liverpool were this country's most successful club they tend to have many more high profile ex-players. It is increasingly getting like that for Manchester United and Arsenal soon, and later Chelsea and finally Manchester City.

Sterling will be the next Shaun Wright-Phillips, for sure. He's a cat trying to be a lion. Milner is a much better player than him and he cost Liverpool nothing. Mojo Jo-Jo, London.

No. He's not.

Sterling's stamina is the biggest problem. Last season he had hardly got going before claiming to be too tired to play for England, although that could be connected to his general attitude to work. Drumboe, Copenhagen.

I think City have the squad to cope if he is unable to play every game of a league season.

Selling a forward who knows to score like Edin Dzeko for about £15m and buying a player with a ridiculous record for about £50m shows why Manchester City will fall behind five or six teams in the Premier League playing the same old midfield and defence. Emerson, Germany.

Dzeko knows how to score? Really? He should have reminded himself of that when he was scoring six goals in 31 matches last season (average 5.16 goals per game). This perhaps explains why he may be on his way to Roma. Sterling's 11 in 52 (average 4.72 per game) was better, and achieved in part from midfield. Dzeko has been a decent reserve for City, but that's what he is.

Tevez was a nightmare I agree. But he was also the catalyst that brought the title to City and shifted power across Manchester. Tevez was one of the most talented players to play for the club. City will sell Dzeko, who doesn't want to be at their club, and Stevan Jovetic and their combined transfers will make Sterling's net cost about £25m net over five years. Not bad for a 20-year-old English winger who City need; rather than two centre forwards surplus to requirements. Ericlo, Manchester.

You've left out that City expect to drop about £12m on each player, making £24m, which added to that £25m equates to…£49m. Please tell me you're not an accountant. Unlike this bloke, Gibby Haynes of the Butthole Surfers who genuinely was named Accounting Student of the Year at Trinity University. Just don't try to get your taxes done in San Antonio, Texas is my advice. (Big influence on Nirvana, this, for those who like that sort of thing. And it has me in fits every time.)

I can't help but wonder how this is going to work unless Wilfried Bony is constantly benched. A four man midfield consisting of Silva, Yaya Toure and Sterling will be dominated by any team willing to put in a bit of effort. SOTV, Birmingham.

Not least because you've only named three players. Looking at City's squad I don't imagine he'll play four anyway. It now looks set up for 4-3-3 or 4-2-1-3 with Sterling, Aguero and Silva up front, and Toure as the main attacking midfielder with Fernandinho and Fernando holding. Obviously, if Paul Pogba came in, someone other than Toure would drop to the bench – and sit alongside Bony.

People must not forget that Liverpool have Jordan Ibe, who last season was better and made more of a difference than Sterling. He is 19 and has skill, pace, can defend, score and create. So Liverpool haven't lost anything but have gained £49m. Sudique Abrahams, Cape Town.

How can they not have lost anything? Last year they had Ibe and Sterling, now they've just got Ibe. Let's say Ibe is X and Sterling Y. Liverpool with both players are XY. Now they're just X. Look, I was really bad at mathematics at school but even I can see there's something missing.

Sterling can only improve. Better players round him, a manager who has won the league who'll get something more from him, too. The lad wants to win things and play at the highest level of the game and he's not getting that from Liverpool. At the same time he has no loyalty to Liverpool because he didn't come through the tanks. Paul, England.

The tanks? I should hope not. Refusing to go on tour was bad enough without threatening people with heavy artillery.

Jordan Ibe offers pace and skill but even with his emergence Liverpool are losing an excellent player

I cannot understand the vitriol Sterling is receiving. He is only behaving in the same way as 90 per cent of Premier League players and going where the money is. Carter14, Southampton.

Yes, but don't you think people are a little bit fed up with it?

The difference is he won't act like this at Manchester City. He wanted out because Liverpool are pathetic – at least City have been challenging for titles for a good few years now. Liverpool get close for the first time in ages and it went down as an amazing season. JTREDDEVIL, Leytonstone.

It was an amazing season, they were very close to pulling it off and had they won the title it would have represented the greatest leap since Everton's championship in 1984-85. Seventh to first doesn't happen in the modern era. The biggest jump of any champions in Premier League history is two places, third to first, and the average progression is 1.16 spots, so second to first. And before you mock, think how excited Louis van Gaal got at the end of season dinner, when he talked about Manchester United rising from seventh to third (although they eventually came fourth).

I think people get clouded by the name Liverpool. If Sterling had done that to Sunderland, barely anyone would bat an eyelid. The truth is, Liverpool have a sub-standard team, a sub-standard manager and without their history are simply a small club. Of course Sterling wants out. Star Lord, London.

Yes, but they're not without their history, are they? They've got a wonderful history. That's why they're not a small club. And of course people would pay attention if the same narrative unfolded at Sunderland. This, of course, presumes that Sunderland had an England international worth £49m in their ranks. As they have sold two English players at over £5m in their history – Darren Bent for £24m and Jordan Henderson for £20m – perhaps that is why they don't command the same attention as Liverpool.

Like Suarez, Sterling has lost confidence with Liverpool's direction. This happened to Arsenal who also couldn't hold onto their best players. When you look at the Liverpool squad it falls well short of Manchester City, Manchester United, Chelsea and Arsenal. Shifu Tony, Bristol.

I think that's exactly what has happened, Tony. That's why people talking about Ibe as the next big thing at Anfield are missing the point slightly. If he is successful, the same could happen, unless Liverpool change their narrative.

I wouldn't even put him ahead of Navas on the teamsheet. Mikuz64, Manchester.

You're mad, then.

Sterling will be just fine at City. The real question is who will the Liverpool fans be talking about after the end of next season? I suspect it won't be a player. Tracy Snail, United States.

If you're talking about a new manager, that's a valid point. As much as I like Rodgers, he needs a trophy this season. Liverpool cannot afford to be in permanent transition with the promise of better down the line.

I don't see any great difference between Sterling and Aaron Lennon. Bags of pace, but little else to offer. Liverpool have got a brilliant transfer fee for him and after a cut goes to Queens Park Rangers, they'll have about £36m left, of which £32m will probably be spent on Christian Benteke. If I were a Liverpool fan, I'd want Pedro from Barcelona or go all out for Isco at Real Madrid: two fantastic footballers. Hendrox, Newcastle.

Indeed, but why would they come when they would no doubt have other options at established Champions League clubs, if they even wanted to leave?

Sterling and Tevez are two totally different situations. One has family in Argentina and is returning home to play for his first club, and the other for some selfish reason wanted to leave for another domestic team. Cunny, Detroit.

I was referring to Tevez's walk-out at Manchester City in 2011, not his recent move to Boca Juniors; or was that before your time?

He isn't a trouble-maker, he caused no trouble before this transfer fiasco. Fozz, Portsmouth.

He was a teenager playing in Liverpool's first team. What was there for him to cause trouble about?

Maybe he actually was sick and he pulled out of the tour because his move was nearly completed? Why do the Daily Mail have to make things out to be worse than they actually are? Joshua Thorpe, Birmingham.

Mate, if I'm ever in court I want you on the jury.

Troublesome youngsters with an attitude problem hardly ever go on to be superstars. It wouldn't be the biggest shock if Sterling was playing for a mid-table team with a bit of money in two years' time, and didn't play for England beyond 2017. Fergus Sira-Lexon, England.

It would be a shock to me, Ferg.

Sterling had little to cause trouble over at Liverpool before the transfer fiasco as a youngster in the first team

A load of what ifs and maybes by Martin. City's board do not envision themselves doing a Manchester United and finishing seventh, so your point is moot. City have the wealth and resources to sustain themselves at the top in a way Liverpool cannot and are clearly a step up. They have won the league twice in the last four years, Liverpool haven't won it in 25 years. Rob, Bristol.

Thanks for stating the obvious there, Rob. And here's something else that's obvious. Of course City do not envision themselves finishing seventh. United didn't either. No elite club does, but this doesn't mean it can't happen.

The Sterling and Tevez situations are completely different. You state that the Tevez saga was a nightmare for City. Are you aware that City won their first league title for 44 years in that campaign? You can't just leave information out or be selective to fit your narrative. Historically there are without doubt bigger clubs than City, but it's where you are now not where you were 25 years ago. Lots of players have downed tools in order to get their move. Lovren, Dimitar Berbatov and plenty of others. Did they do it over and over? No, they got their move and were happy with it. Theusednation, Manchester.

Of course I know that. I was there. Ask the people at City about the drain on the club that year, though. Ask them about the endless conference calls and meetings. Your point would stand up if Tevez's behaviour made a positive contribution to the campaign. You won with the last kick of the season in circumstances that are unlikely to be repeated. Maybe, with Tevez available throughout, you would have wrapped it up earlier. As for Lovren and Berbatov, one is a year into his move and playing poorly, so Liverpool are the best he could get right now. The same applied to Berbatov at Manchester United. Pick a player whose career was on the up, say, Wayne Rooney. He seemed pretty determined to leave Everton, but since then he's not caused United a moment's trouble. No, wait…

John Stones or Fabian Delph would have been better for City. With £50m they could have got Pedro from Barcelona, Stones and Delph. Alexis Sanchez, Chile.

Pedro signed a new four year contract on June 4, 2015. And neither Stones nor Delph are in Sterling's class if he realises his potential.

Milner is nearly 30 and Liverpool fans are questioning Manchester United buying Bastian Schweinsteiger. Biggest hypocrites in the world. SAF 13, United Kingdom.

Remind us how much we paid for Milner. Jimboin, Preston.

You've got to admit, SAF, he's got you there. Until next time… 

Comments (118)

Share what you think

• Newest
• Oldest
• Best rated
• Worst rated

 View all

The comments below have been moderated in advance.

 View all

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

Add your comment

Enter your comment

By posting your comment you agree to our house rules.

Submit Comment Clear

Who is this week's top commenter? Find out now