He toyed with City's midfielders last year when we met. Put in pretty amazing performance in both games against Bayern, especially in the second leg, when he dominated the game. We know how good he is.
your statements already told the whole story. what you seem to see is not what is supported by the numbers. for you pogba is the most skillfull player who will dribble past anyone and should be the target and verratti on the other side is cack, even though the numbers say verratti gets dispossed less and has only 30% of the bad ball controlls that pogba has.
there is no point in discuss with guys that do not go for reason and measurable things but just what their brain fabricates them to believe. it is like the people on the internet that spew wild shit and say "but i have the RIGHT TO BELIEVE what i believe and you can not take away my right to feel that bla bla bla". Today every mad man can say what he wants and it's not even something rare anymore.
i will not get surprised about statements i read here since i read "trezeguet was more of a creative player/second striker that will create for himself" by i think cronios it was.
you can not heal mental conditions by talking to people, for some people it is just too late and there are only meds that can help.
I love how people here say Verratti is better or makes his team better when they only watch 1 or 2 games of PSG per year
this is the age of the internet and everything being recorded.
perhaps i should not believe the numbers and question if bayern won the bundesliga .... perhaps the numbers and statistics lie and they did not really get 88 points, i should rewatch every bundesliga game to make sure that nobody cheated while writing down the results ... oh i think we are on to something here ... freaky conspiracy shit here.
the numbers and results are there to see for anybody and while we can argue about if move A or B of pogba or verratti was good/bad/horrible we could just base our findings of objective numbers that people without any bias have come up with, but oh no, that does not support your predisposition, so all of a sudden one needs to revisit the evidence, because how can the numbers say something that is different than how you feel
i know it's only the internet, but we drift away into fantasy world quite a bit.
you know the scientific method is pretty much like this:
1) observe something
2) build a hypothesis
3) validate the hypothesis by experiments/numbers or cognitive data
4) proof or discard hypothesis
5) formulate thesis/conclusion
but obviously the method in here is:
1) observe something
2) formulate ultimate conclusion without regard of any research
i am really astonished that these simple things are not taught in the school systems you guys stem from.