He was terrible at Hillsborough and Wenger said exactly that about all of the youngsters that started that day. He also struggled at Reserve level for a long time before it all came together for him. Played U18 football for a lot longer than, looking at him now, you would expect him to have and it was because he couldn't get into the U21 team. He had a very different type of progression to the likes of Fabregas and Wilshere.
General wrote:
Rick you're comparing apples and oranges here. Stones is playing football at a different level and with it comes different demands. Your hyperbolic assessment of Bielek's ability on the ball certainly cannot be put into context when comparing him to Stones and to be honest it's not a debate I want to get dragged into. And how do you know I don't know anything about Bielek? I've seen enough of him to know where he stands compared to other players we've had come through the youth ranks. I am not here to judge how his career might turn out but an assessment can be made on where he stands compared to his peers and in this regard he is nothing special. We've had better talented players at his age and that's fact. You then factor in the position he's in playing in, having switched from midfield, and the odds are strongly stacked against him.
Also, Chelsea were still after Stones but clearly lost out to City in the bidding war. He went for a bigger fee that what he would've gone for last summer and that should tell you how highly rated he is despite the dip in form. I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. He is not a good defender yet Guardiola is willing to sanction his purchase and pay good money for him?
As if the fee has anything to do with how good a player he is, have you seen the prices players are going for this summer? He was obviously gonna go for more so that's a measure of precisely nothing.
Barcelona, and Guardiola for that matter, have paid big fees for a lot of average players, as hindsight has proven. I remember, for example, them paying £30m for some young Ukrainian bloke called Chygrynsky - where does he play now? And in my opinion a centreback's ability to defend is measured heavily against his ability on the ball when Guardiola is selecting a centreback. More so than nearly all other managers out there. And I didn't say Chelsea didn't come back in for him, I said Mourinho didn't - which is who you were using as another reason for rating him.
As for whether Bielik is better on the ball and me being hyperbolic. If I take your view; "it's all just reserve football so you can't say anyone playing at that level is better on the ball than anyone playing at Premier League level". Well, I'm fairly sure I knew Jack Wilshere was a better footballer than Jamie Carragher long before he started doing it at first team level. I don't see the need for generalisations and sweeping statements when you have eyes. As Clarence said, Bielik was getting rave reviews playing first team football in Poland, playing as a midfielder. And given we didn't switch him back to centreback right away, your have to think we rated him enough as a midfielder, ie on the ball, to pay £3m for him at just 16. He is a gifted footballer; his touch on the ball, the quality of his passing and his ability to carry the ball stands out immediately. And I'd say that was even noticeable playing alongside first team players, even if it was only a few friendly matches.
Regardless, your opinion is your opinion, I just don't think you come across as having much to go on and yet you say what you say with such authority.
