It is true that in important matches such as the semifinals or the Champions League final last season, Erling Haaland seemed to disappear on the field and his role as the pillar of the team at that time was immediately replaced by other Manchester City players who had freer opportunities to score goals. I don't think it's a problem as long as the team can use every player available and actually I'm quite annoyed because Pep Guardiola very rarely changes his players in the second half. So when they should have had the opportunity to score goals through supersub players, they still relied on the players who were there from the early minutes.
It's not a problem at all because before Haaland came to City they had won the Premier League by more points than last season and despite Liverpool being only one point behind, their title looked undeniable. Haaland is an option (very cool option) but I think he is much less important than the KDB, so I'm looking forward to a more competitive season this time around.
Kevin de Bruyne has a great understanding with Haaland. This attacking player plays brilliantly for the team. However, in his absence, Haaland will face some problems, which will weaken the team's attack.
Yes, anyway if Bruyne and Haaland can play together then surely that would be even better. But yes, at least with Bruyne injury at this moment, at least it can also be used as another great plan when Bruyne is unable to play in important matches later. So, if later Pep gets used to being without Bruyne then of course, this will make Manchester City no longer have excessive dependence on Bruyne in the midfield.
Because it's clear, that this season the competition will certainly be more difficult, and Manchester City should be able to play without relying on one player. Because to still have a chance to go further in the Champions League is a difficult job, and they must be able to play as a team more compactly.