Bacary Sagna agrees to sign for Manchester City

ResurrectionRooney wrote:Manchester City have reached an agreement to sign Bacary Sagna from Arsenal on a three-year deal.

The France right-back spent seven years at Arsenal but his contract expired at the end of the season.

And now City have confirmed the 31-year-old as their first major addition to manager Manuel Pellegrini's Premier League title-winning squad.

He has already been handed the same number three shirt he had at Arsenal, last worn at City by former Brazilian defender Maicon.

Gunners boss Arsene Wenger paid Auxerre £7m for Sagna in July 2007.

He went on to make 284 appearances for the north London outfit and was twice voted into the PFA Premier League team of the year.

However, he did not win a trophy until last month, when he featured in the 3-2 FA Cup final victory over Hull at Wembley.

"Everyone at Arsenal Football Club would like to thank Bacary for his fantastic contribution and wish him all the best for the future," said a club statement. "We would also like to congratulate him on graduating to our parent club."

Sagna becomes the fifth player to leave Arsenal for City in recent times, following on from Emmanuel Adebayor, Kolo Toure, Gael Clichy and Samir Nasri.

He will link up with Pellegrini's squad at some point on their pre-season tour of the United States, providing competition for popular South American right-back Pablo Zabaleta.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27829545

Decent signing, provides back up in two positions.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:Top maths there, Dave.

Glen Miller wrote:Toure, Clichy, Nasri, Sagna, and Adebayor?  The only that really mattered out of those (so far) is probably Nasri, I doubt they are overly upset.

Grenade wrote:Sagna Nasri and Adebayor are the only ones who were considered important players when they left. In the past 5 years Chelsea have signed Torres Benayoun and Meireles from Liverpool lel.

Keyser Söze wrote:All three of those were more important to Liverpool than any one of the 5 (maybe bar Sagna, but we've yet to see) that moved from Arsenal to City..

Scouser_Dave wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:All three of those were more important to Liverpool than any one of the 5 (maybe bar Sagna, but we've yet to see) that moved from Arsenal to City..

Torres was, Benayoun and Meireles were rotational players at best towards the end of their time with us. In fact the reason Meireles wanted to leave was due to him not getting enough game time.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Scouser_Dave wrote:

Torres was, Benayoun and Meireles were rotational players at best towards the end of their time with us. In fact the reason Meireles wanted to leave was due to him not getting enough game time.

Total bullshit, he left because he wanted to play for a better team and win important trophies.  He made 32 starts for you in the season before he left and was a key figure for you, and there was far stronger competition for places at Chelsea.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:No, it didn't, Chelsea giving up on Modric nailed the decision.  If playing time was a major consideration he wouldn't have gone from a team where he was an important figure, competing with Charles Adam and Jordan Henderson for a starting spot, to a team where he had to compete with Essien, Lampard, Mata, Romeu and Ramires.

Scouser_Dave wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:No, it didn't, Chelsea giving up on Modric nailed the decision.  If playing time was a major consideration he wouldn't have gone from a team where he was an important figure, competing with Charles Adam and Jordan Henderson for a starting spot, to a team where he had to compete with Essien, Lampard, Mata, Romeu and Ramires.

That's the problem though Kenny was always going to play those two ahead of him. Obviously Chelsea would have been a harder squad to break into but their was a better chance he could get success there regardless of being a starting for them or not.

Scott_LFC wrote:Actually, I believe there was more to it than just that, RR.

I remember he came on as a sub against Arsenal, second game of the season and assisted Suarez, then proceeded to stick his middle finger up to the bench.

Something wasn't right.






We had signed Adam and Henderson, and both started ahead of him.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Scott_LFC wrote:Actually, I believe there was more to it than just that, RR.

I remember he came on as a sub against Arsenal, second game of the season and assisted Suarez, then proceeded to stick his middle finger up to the bench.

Something wasn't right.






We had signed Adam and Henderson, and both started ahead of him.

He was unhappy because Liverpool wouldn't let him leave without screwing him out of his loyalty bonus, that's why he gave Dalglish the finger.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Scouser_Dave wrote:

That's the problem though Kenny was always going to play those two ahead of him. Obviously Chelsea would have been a harder squad to break into but their was a better chance he could get success there regardless of being a starting for them or not.

Not if they played badly he wouldn't, because Meireles would have been able to force his way into the team.  Obviously.

On your second point, you're correct, it was the success that he moved for, not the playing time.  I'm glad you've admitted being wrong for once.

Scott_LFC wrote: Okay, RR.

Sturridge scored, my friend

Scouser_Dave wrote:
Well they didn't play badly often enough because he only managed a season there.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Scott_LFC wrote: Okay, RR.

Sturridge scored, my friend

It's true, they made him hand in a transfer request before letting him leave, costing him millions.

Did you make the bet?

Scouser_Dave wrote:
Well they didn't play badly often enough because he only managed a season there.

I meant the shower of shit ahead of him at Liverpool.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Scott_LFC wrote: Okay, RR.

Sturridge scored, my friend

It's true, they made him hand in a transfer request before letting him leave, costing him millions.

Did you make the bet?

Scouser_Dave wrote:
Well they didn't play badly often enough because he only managed a season there.

I meant the shower of shit ahead of him at Liverpool.

Scouser_Dave wrote:
Kenny always talked about giving players time to settle so he would have had a long wait. Plus he didn't want to be a sub which was why I made my previous point.

Scott_LFC wrote:Yes, I did, but it was Sturridge to score and England to win, so I didn't win.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Scouser_Dave wrote:
Kenny always talked about giving players time to settle so he would have had a long wait. Plus he didn't want to be a sub which was why I made my previous point.

He was happy to be a sub, just not at your shit club under that nasty vindictive old drunk.

Scott_LFC wrote:Yes, I did, but it was Sturridge to score and England to win, so I didn't win.

How unfortunate for you that you didn't follow my advice.

Scouser_Dave wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:All three of those were more important to Liverpool than any one of the 5 (maybe bar Sagna, but we've yet to see) that moved from Arsenal to City..

Torres was, Benayoun and Meireles were rotational players at best towards the end of their time with us. In fact the reason Meireles wanted to leave was due to him not getting enough game time.