Too risky for title-chasing Manchester City?

Owen Hargreaves’ move across the Manchester divide just before deadline day last week was one of the most surprising deals of the transfer window. Hargreaves’ career at Manchester United had come to an expected end after last season. Three years of continuous injury problems had seen the former England midfielder likely to head off overseas, with the MLS a touted destination. But against all the odds, Hargreaves suddenly had the opportunity to play in England again and eventually chose to sign for title-chasing Manchester City. Whatever the reasoning behind Roberto Mancini’s decision, advertising himself on YouTube really did work for Hargreaves.

Hargreaves endured a nightmare spell with City’s close rivals United, injuries limiting him to a small number of appearances over a four-year period. There is no doubt that Hargreaves was an excellent midfielder, a tough tackling combative player that seemed the answer to England and United’s problems. But with Hargreaves unfortunately that is always only ever going to be half the story. The logical and expected step for Hargreaves after his departure from United was going to be going abroad, giving himself a chance to rebuild his fitness in a less physically demanding league. Despite strong interest from West Bromwich Albion (which would have still been a tough but possibly profitable move), Hargreaves signed for City. But what was Mancini’s thinking behind the decision to take a risk on the player?

Despite the injury problems it is hard to forget how effective a fully fit Hargreaves can be. At his injury-free peak there were few better in his position and the lure of a top form Hargreaves must have been there for Mancini. It would also seem that the Italian has only bought in Hargreaves as back up, with Nigel de Jong and Gareth Barry the favoured choices in the centre of the park. Whilst City’s wealth of talent may limit his chances, it may also give Hargreaves the time to fully regain his fitness.

At 30-years-old Hargreaves also brings experience into the City dressing room, a player that has both succeeded in the domestic and European game. Hargreaves has twice won the Champions League and with Mancini looking to impose his City side on the competition at their first attempt, Hargreaves’ experience could be vital (though his decision to omit him from the initial Champions League squad means Hargreaves’ chance on the European front may have to wait a while). On this occasion Mancini was also able to strengthen his squad with a free transfer, greatly limiting any financial risk for City.

But you can’t help but question Mancini’s thinking; in a season where his aim must be to chase United all the way for the title, why bring in a player United quickly got rid of only last season? If City really want to compete then it will require consistency in team selection and performance, where Hargreaves fits into Mancini’s long-term plans in questionable. For a player in dire need of game time, omitting him from the Champions League also means that Hargreaves may have to be risked in the Premier League.

If he can back up the promising signs showed on his catalogue of internet videos then City may have landed a bargain in Hargreaves but every time he steps onto the pitch in a City shirt that creeping element of doubt over his fitness will persist until Hargreaves can prove the doubters like myself wrong.

Do you think that Hargreaves is worth the risk for City? If you want to read more of my bite size, 140 character views and thoughts follow me on Twitter @jennyk5