"I'D love to play against John Stones every week! I’d get 40 a season! #soft #weakasp***"
When a tweet originating from journeyman striker Tom Pope re-entered the nation’s consciousness ahead of Manchester City’s FA Cup tie with Port Vale recently City fans were annoyed anew. Some waded in on the 34-year-old, justifiably claiming it had been disrespectful, not to mention unprofessional to air such views. Others concentrated solely on the jibe and defended a defender who has made a meaningful contribution to his team winning back-to-back titles.
Not many ceded to the unfortunate truth that Pope’s flagrant disrespect was revealing in itself. Would the League Two striker have been so dismissive of Virgil Van Dijk or Harry Maguire? It is inconceivable that similar insults would have been flung Aymeric Laporte’s way or Vinnie Kompany for that matter. In fact, though it is subjective, it requires a stretching of the imagination to find any other Premier League centre-back on the receiving end of such impertinence without it being scoffed out of town. Even the much-maligned Phil Jones puts his body on the line and is up for a battle. It was not the claim itself that concerned, but that it was made in the first place.
Sorry I can’t reply to everyone it’s gone mental! I’d just like to say I was completely wrong and bang out of order to say I’d score 40 a season….. it’s more like 50 enjoy your weekend
— Tom Pope (@Tom_Pope9) January 4, 2020
The player formerly known as the ‘Barnsley Beckenbauer’ was weak again at the weekend though it was unfair that immediately his part in both Crystal Palace goals were upgraded to gaffes. They were not. He was just weak: easily outmuscled at a corner and then standing off Wilfried Zaha in the dying moments when aggression and decisiveness was needed. “It is just not possible Zaha can run and we allow it,” Pep Guardiola said later, failing to hide his exasperation while his public coaching of his struggling stopper throughout the game is damning given that Stones has seven years of top flight experience with 157 appearances to his name.
While we have our studs sharpened consider this too. From those who loyally back the player – stick for Stones may not break their bones but words certainly hurt them – it is the common consensus that he needs a leader alongside him. Is this reliance on guidance normal for an England international with the fourth most caps of anyone in the current squad? It is not.
By common consensus, Stones has a ‘mistake in him’ and even his backers admit to that. It’s an axiom that played itself out last summer in the Nations League for England and earlier this season away at Norwich, and it’s an unfortunate habit that goes right back to his first season with the Blues. “Everyone keeps saying to me, and to the rest of the football world, that he is going to be a top player. But I keep seeing John Stones make mistake after mistake after mistake”. That was Alan Shearer in 2016/17 and it would be quite a different matter if these errors were sliced clearances or stumbles but they’re not. They derive from poor decision-making and lapses in concentration, or from being outmuscled, this Bambi in boots.
If this reads like a hatchet job then to this point perhaps it is but there is a counter-argument that needs to be made when assessing the castigation of John Stones, a castigation that has seen him scapegoated of late by significant sections of the Etihad. It is that he reflects and epitomises the institutionalising of Pep-ball into English football more than any other player.
When he signed for a notable £47.5m in the summer of 2016 his continental style of defending was directly linked to Guardiola’s intention to play out from the back so when that audacious new methodology initially came unstuck – to the delight, it must be said of many dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists – guess who primarily got it in the neck? “Mistake after mistake after mistake,” chided Shearer, following a 4-0 loss at Goodison Park that was City’s nadir that term. It was a game that saw Gael Clichy cheaply give away possession, leading to the opening goal and Claudio Bravo endure a horror-show.
Would be absolutely amazed if Stones plays the next game. Guardiola's been on his case all day about all sorts of stuff; passes, lack of challenges etc
— Sam Lee (@SamLee) January 18, 2020
A fruitful partnership was then struck up with Nicolas Otamendi for the first half of the next campaign that ultimately accrued a hundred points with City conceding a goal every 127 minutes from August to May. Similarly last season there was an impressive pairing with Laporte during a spell that ground out clean sheets at Anfield and away to Spurs. Against Liverpool last January a clearance off the line was as crucial a moment as any in City’s charge to a second title.
Were there any apologies forthcoming during these two years; any backtracking or revision on his perceived flaws? There were not. Only Guardiola was granted that while the attacking excellence of De Bruyne and co was praised to the rafters.
This time out City’s defensive frailties have returned; a collective failing that is there for all to see and there are no prizes for picking out who has been highlighted the most, with his reputation exhumed from the shallowest of graves. It can feel at times like people know they cannot criticise Pep because of his recent, estimable achievements. So they instead target the player who most perfectly represents his philosophy, for great or for bad.
Lastly, what must be factored in too is that via injuries and the frequent prioritising of team-mates Stones has played only 48% of Premier League games under Guardiola. “To reach the potential he has, John has to play regularly,” his manager admitted earlier this month. This is undeniable. Yet for all of this it is hard to envisage a sustained period now where such consistency in game-time and performances is allowed to happen. Rightly or wrongly the centre-back has become too associated with the concession of costly goals and forgettable afternoons while Eric Garcia’s stock continues to rise.
This is not a hatchet job, nor is it a siding with the scapegoating that can only be counterproductive. Rather it is a reluctant acknowledgement that any defence of City’s defender is becoming softer and weaker with every mishap and that maybe, alas his time has been, his time has gone.
