The quality of play that Man City have shown this season hasn’t been matched by the number of goals they’ve scored, as evidenced by Sunday’s thrilling 2-2 draw at Liverpool.
As good as City were at Anfield for long stretches – and they were very good indeed, and looked dangerous – there were times when I thought they’d never find the net. The debate over whether they needed a striker became more prominent than ever.
I know City supporters will say, ‘wait a minute, we already scored five against Norwich and another five against Arsenal,’ but those types of games will not define their season.
Games like this one, as well as the one in France earlier this week, in which they dominated Paris St-Germain but were unable to score, demonstrate that they require a goalscorer in their lineup.
From now until the January transfer window, Pep Guardiola will be asked how much of a difference a recognized striker would make for City. Unless they sign someone before then, it will continue for the rest of the season.
As good as their big summer signing Jack Grealish is, when they don’t win a game, people will wonder if they really needed him and if they needed a striker more.
Guardiola may argue that they didn’t need a striker to win the Premier League last season, but what he did have was Ilkay Gundogan’s goals, which were all over the place.
Gundogan had 13 in the league last season, but has only one so far this season and is currently injured. Raheem Sterling is also not scoring right now, so who is replacing all those goals – especially at critical junctures in big games?
Yes, they came back from two goals down this time, but they should have been out of sight before Liverpool took the lead.