Felt my time at Manchester City was getting limited on playing time, reveals Raheem Sterling

SportsCafe Desk
no photo

Chelsea new boy Raheem Sterling has admitted that the reason he left Manchester City was because he felt his game-time had reduced for different reasons and that he couldn’t afford to waste time. The Englishman spent seven years at the Etihad, making 337 appearances while contributing to 225 goals.

Ever since he signed for Manchester City, Raheem Sterling has thrived at the Etihad Stadium with the forward making well over 300 appearances for the club. Not only that, the now 27-year-old contributed to 225 goals over his seven year spell although he particularly impressed fans and critics alike while playing under Pep Guardiola. However, with game-time coming sparingly towards the end of last season, it saw Sterling linked with a move away this summer.

Parimatch

Explore Parimatch review and find out what the best India cricket betting bookmaker is capable of!

Find Out

Eventually, Chelsea won the race to sign the Englishman and it had many fans wondering why the 27-year-old opted to leave the Cityzens and sign for the Stamford Bridge side. Sterling has now revealed that he believed that his “time at City was getting limited on playing time for different reasons” than what was told to him. Not only that, the Englishman added that he “couldn’t afford to waste more time” and wanted to keep playing regular football. 

"I just felt my time at City was getting limited on playing time for different reasons. I couldn't afford to waste more time. When I look back in the future, I didn't want to see a rise and then a decline. A fresh challenge was to be made,” Sterling said, reported Goal.

"Since 17, I've been regularly starting. When getting to a peak time, not playing as regular, wasn't something I would accept. I always try to fight and change the scenario. But it didn't come and that was it."

laught0
astonishment0
sadness0
heart0
like0
dislike0

Comments

Sign up or log in to your account to leave comments and reactions

0 Comments