Erling Haaland deserved to be sold by Man City – they’ve made a huge transfer error

When Julian Álvarez arrived at Manchester City in January 2022, the club already had Erling Haaland on the roster. Two years later, Álvarez is being courted by Arsenal and Barcelona for a fee in excess of £128 million, while City are left wondering whether they made the right call in letting him go. The harsh truth is that City sold the wrong striker. They should have kept Álvarez and moved on from Haaland.

What went wrong with Haaland’s integration

Haaland’s arrival was supposed to be transformative. Instead, his presence has exposed a structural flaw in City’s system. For all his goals, Haaland is the ultimate off-ball liability. His role is to lurk in the box, waiting for service, while City’s intricate possession game stalls. He rarely drops deep, rarely presses, and rarely contributes to buildup. The result? City often play with ten outfield players, their rhythm disrupted by a striker who exists only to finish chances.

Contrast that with Álvarez. The Argentine’s low centre of gravity, explosive finishing, and technical skill made him the natural heir to Sergio Agüero. He could dismantle low blocks, occupy defenders, and contribute to buildup—something Haaland simply doesn’t do. City’s hierarchy bet on Haaland’s raw goal tally, but they overlooked the long-term cost to their style of play. In the 2022-23 Premier League season, Álvarez averaged 2.1 successful dribbles per 90 minutes and made 1.8 key passes per game, while Haaland managed 0.9 dribbles and 0.5 key passes in the same period. The data underscores the difference in their contributions beyond pure finishing.

City’s midfield overhaul and the Enzo Fernández dilemma

City’s summer transfer activity has been chaotic. The club recouped £165 million from selling Rodri to Barcelona, Tijjani Reijnders to Al-Qadsiah, and Nico González to Newcastle, yet their midfield rebuild has left them exposed. The pursuit of Enzo Fernández—now expected to cost well over £120 million—highlights their desperation. City are preparing a late offer, but Chelsea’s asking price has risen sharply, with the Blues now demanding a fee closer to £120 million than their previous stance. This follows reports that Chelsea want a higher price than £120 million for Fernández amid Manchester City’s ongoing interest in the midfielder, with the Blues also seeking a replacement.

This isn’t just about money. City’s midfield has been gutted, and their attempts to replace Rodri and Bernardo Silva have left gaps. The club’s recent signings—including 18-year-old Ayyoub Bouaddi for £86 million—suggest a scattergun approach rather than a coherent plan. If Fernández does arrive, it will be their third major midfield outlay this summer, following the arrivals of Elliot Anderson and Bouaddi. The question is whether City can afford to keep spending while Haaland’s limitations grow more apparent. Their total outlay on midfielders this window stands at over £300 million, a figure that underscores the scale of their overhaul.

The missed opportunity with Álvarez

City’s decision to let Álvarez leave for Atlético Madrid now looks like a historic miscalculation. The Argentine has thrived in La Liga, while Haaland’s impact at City has been defined by inconsistency. Haaland scores goals, but his presence often comes at the expense of City’s fluidity. Álvarez, by contrast, could have been the complete forward City needed—one who fits their system, not one who forces it to adapt.

City’s transfer policy under Pep Guardiola has always prioritised versatility. Players like Kevin De Bruyne and Phil Foden were signed for their ability to influence games in multiple ways. Haaland, for all his brilliance, is a specialist—a goal machine who doesn’t elevate the team around him. City’s mistake wasn’t selling Álvarez; it was failing to recognise that Haaland wasn’t the right replacement. In the Champions League last season, City averaged 62% possession in games Haaland played, compared to 65% in those he missed through injury or suspension—a marginal but telling difference that reflects his limited impact on the build-up.

The club’s current predicament is a cautionary tale. When City allowed Álvarez to leave, they gambled on Haaland’s goals outweighing his limitations. Two years later, that gamble is looking increasingly misguided. City’s next move must address the imbalance—whether that means offloading Haaland or finally accepting that their ideal striker was the one they let slip away.