Rewind 12 months and Raheem Sterling was one of the shining lights of a failed England World Cup campaign, solidifying his growing reputation after an excellent season with Liverpool.
But now he has become something of a pantomime villain to Liverpool and most other football fans for attempting to force a move elsewhere. Which, in his own words, 'has nothing to do with money'. Hmm.
But does he deserve to berated so vehemently? After all, Liverpool aren't the heavyweight of football that they once were. Neither are Man City, but they are a team with ambition (money) and two more Premier League titles than Liverpool.
So, wanting to move away while he is yet to peak his prime ability is entirely justifiable, but it is the manner at which he has forced these precedings that has riled Liverpool fans. Liverpool are the club that has spring-boarded his career; not many other clubs would give him so much game time at such a young age. So Liverpool fans' anger is also justifiable, but £50m for a 20-year-old is not bad business at all, so should they sell up?
The general consensus from Liverpool fans is to cash in on a player that doesn't want to be there any more. Today (Wednesday) he has also refused to go on their pre-season tour and phoned in sick. So selling him appears a lot simpler than keeping him.
And that epitomses modern football: a club the size of Liverpool being held to ransom by a 20-year-old. The saga appears to be coming to a close with City ready to offer a third bid near Liverpool's £50m valuation and with Liverpool signing Roberto Firminho, a very adept replacement.
So, the whole saga has been mostly due to Sterling's petulance, from unauthorised interviews to openly stating he isn't a big fan of the manager that has helped his career so much. But it also shows his ambition to move to a club which is in far better shape than Liverpool, But the way he has forced a deal may worry City fans that this may happen to them if Barca or Real Madrid come knocking in a few years.
