1.) 10 Jun 2016
10 Jun 2016 06:52:38
I've heard Stones to City is a done deal unfortunately. Gutted. They're doing some serious business those Berties.


2.) 10 Jun 2016
10 Jun 2016 08:59:33
I'm really not bothered if they sign him, can't remember seeing him have a good game if I'm honest.


3.) 10 Jun 2016
10 Jun 2016 09:33:58
Well overrated. I agree with RedAndy94, every time I have watched him this season he's been dreadful.
Lots of potential but I wouldn't waste 35-40 million on him when you could probably get a world class centre back in Varane for that sort of price.


4.) 10 Jun 2016
10 Jun 2016 09:44:19
John Stones is a wildcard for City not a primary target according to Ed, unless something changed overnight, if we make a move for him maybe that'll prompt city to act.


5.) 10 Jun 2016
10 Jun 2016 10:24:22
If a wildcats becomes available then they'll go for him, which they have.


6.) 10 Jun 2016
10 Jun 2016 10:24:33
Or wild cards!


7.) 10 Jun 2016
10 Jun 2016 11:33:08
I hope they dish out 45 to 50 mill pounds for him. It will impact their ability on doing other signings and they seem to be collecting englands most overpriced players. He will be sitting next to Sterling on the bench:)

I hope they also get Barkeley at 40. that should set them back 3 to 4 years. Doing poor transfer business takes a few years to clean up and kills a lot of clubs because of wages that come with it.


8.) 10 Jun 2016
10 Jun 2016 12:34:19
I agree Shahram, looks like we were happy t sign a young raw CB but went for Bailly. Because Stones can pass and run with the ball does not make him a great CB.


9.) 10 Jun 2016
10 Jun 2016 12:40:19
I really don't see the Stones thing to City, reports suggest they are all but done on Laporte from Bilbao and for me it is one or either.
THat will leave them stacked at CB unless they are planning on getting rid of some.
I can see Mourniho going for stones as last year he seemed a bit obsessed.