HIS BRILLIANT NEW COLUMN

Sanchez is not a mercenary but if I wanted to be a better striker I wouldn’t join Jose

THERE is clearly one major reason why Alexis Sanchez is choosing Manchester United over Manchester City. Naturally, as a footballer he wants to maximise his earnings but as an attacking player, I’m still surprised he would opt for Jose Mourinho over Pep Guardiola.

Mourinho is clearly a phenomenal manager in terms of the trophies he has won. You can’t argue with two Champions Leagues, eight League titles, the Europa League, the UEFA Cup, four domestic cup wins in four countries and the League Cup four times.

I’m full of admiration for him. He’s had a harder route to the top, not being a star name. So when he was managing Porto and honing his ideas, he had to be realistic. But he won the Champions League and was then under pressure to prove himself at Chelsea in England. He did so immediately, winning the Premier League twice. He proved himself again at Inter Milan, winning Serie A and won the Champions League at a club which, though bigger in terms of history and resources than Porto, were limited when compared to Guardiola’s great Barcelona side, which they knocked out en route to the final.

But there is something of the underdog that has always stayed with Mourinho. As he’s become more experienced, I think he’s become less willing to take risks and more suspicious of flair players. When he joined Chelsea in 2004, he signed Didier Drogba and Arjen Robben when they were unproven and they went on to be two of the best in the world. He has backed established players such as Zlatan Ibrahimovic at Inter and helped Cristiano Ronaldo at Real Madrid.

But look at his second spell at Chelsea. First he got rid of Juan Mata, although he is reunited with him now. Then he allowed Romelu Lukaku — again back with him at United — and Kevin De Bruyne to leave and sent out Mohamed Salah and Juan Cuadradro on loan. De Bruyne and Salah are now tormenting him at Manchester City and Liverpool.

If he had rated De Bruyne, he would have sent him out on loan and insisted that the club keep him. With Salah, he wasn’t at the club when they sold him but in his time there, he didn’t do much to encourage the Egyptian. He didn’t rate Lukaku but then came round to making him the centrepiece of United’s attack. Even with more experienced players, such as Mata at Chelsea or Henrikh Mkhitaryan, there’s a sense that he’s innately suspicious of them

I wouldn’t blame Sanchez for taking what is said to be £400,000 a week. The talk of him being a mercenary is well off the mark. He’s just a footballer making his living at the market rate.

But on pure footballing grounds, United could never have been his first choice.

As an attacking player, he must know that he is going to be asked to temper his game, certainly compared to the season he had under Guardiola at Barcelona or his time under Arsene Wenger at Arsenal. Last season was desperately disappointing for United attacking-wise. They scored 54 goals, fewer than Bournemouth, and that was after they had spent £166million on Paul Pogba, Mkhitaryan and Eric Bailly. They came sixth in the Premier League, 24 points off champions Chelsea and seven points off fourth. Of course, they saved their season by winning the League Cup and Europa League. But it wasn’t as though they were playing world-class teams in the Europa League and they won the final by sitting back and conceding possession against Ajax. This season is better. But it’s hard not to be after they spent another £140m on Lukaku, Nemanja Matic and Victor Lindelof. With the resources they have, it’s almost impossible not to be in the top four. But they’re not exciting many people. Mourinho has great attacking players in Anthony Martial, Lukaku, Marcus Rashford, Mkhitaryan, Mata and potentially a great attacking midfielder in Pogba but they still play functional football.

They made hard work of a poor group in the Champions League, were beaten by Bristol City in the League Cup and are miles behind Manchester City in the Premier League. When they took on City at Old Trafford, it was embarrassing. The scoreline flattered United and their style of play, kicking the ball long more than 50 yards, was so unlike them.

My perception of United wasn’t helped by going from watching a thrilling game — Liverpool against City on Sunday — to United against Stoke on Monday. It was just such a comedown. Of course, United won 3-0, but the difference in style and quality was huge. In the first half, Stoke had five or six chances. United had two and went in 2-0 up. What the stats show is that United are really good at converting their chances but they don’t create as many as you would expect. Going into this weekend’s matches they were the thirdhighest goalscorers this season, which is OK, although they were 19 behind City.

But on other indicators of attacking play they rank lower. For shots, they’re sixth, not that far above Crystal Palace and Newcastle and on touches in the opponents’ box they are sixth, again just above Palace. That confirms what you can see at games: this is not a great attacking side or one looking to dominate. Of the big six clubs, they are the least impressive in attack but they use their limited possession better. It’s effective, but it’s not getting the best out of United’s attackers.

I believe football changed in 2008 when Guardiola took over at Barcelona. Since then everybody realised that to be the best you have to play expansive, attacking football. He changed the blueprint of football and also raised the expectations of fans and owners.

I’m not sure Mourinho is ready to embrace that type of football as Mauricio Pochettino does or Jurgen Klopp, with a different style, does.

Mourinho teams will still always score goals because he manages the best teams with the best players. His great riposte to Guardiola was the 2011-12 season in Spain, when his Real Madrid team beat Barcelona to the title, scoring a La Liga record 121 goals — and with a goal difference of 89. But Guardiola and Mourinho have gone to head-to-head in three seasons now, this one being the fourth. Assuming City finish above United this season, it will be 3-1 to Guardiola. And I think if he was in charge of United’s attacking players, they would do even better.

Once Mourinho gets into a club, the players start reflecting his character.

At the start of the season United were often hitting four goals a game, but those performances have dried up and they don’t cut loose in attack because there is a sense of expediency about Mourinho.

It doesn’t make him a bad manager. It’s just that teams under Klopp, Guardiola and Pochettino would score more goals. As a striker, if I wanted to improve my game and get to another level, I’d want to play for one of those managers and especially Guardiola.

Maybe if I was a defender, I might prefer Mourinho but at United Sanchez will eventually conform to what Mourinho

wants and that will restrict his performance. I don’t think a team like United should play that way.

Having secured Alexis Sanchez by outbidding Guardiola, Jose can’t now keep complaining about how City have more spending power. These clubs are in a financial league of their own, with Paris Saint-Germain, Barcelona and Real Madrid.

Jose will have Sanchez, Pogba, Lukaku, Matic — all his choices. Add in Mata, Rashford and Martial and he can’t complain he hasn’t got the attacking players to take on City. Maybe he will unleash something different next season. My guess is, he’ll conform to type.

If you want to get close to City, I think Klopp showed last week that you have to go for it. Mourinho has the players. But does he have the vision?