You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
OB1
Well-Known Member
The entire football media is waxing lyrical about City at the moment.
I've seen / heard plenty of praise; it would be perverse not to recognise our current performances in any other way.
Young Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2011
- Messages
- 494
We have had the best start in Premier league history based on goal difference after 6 games but no mention in the media.
http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/prem...&saisonIdBis=2017&spieltag=6&eingrenzung=alle
http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/prem...&saisonIdBis=2017&spieltag=6&eingrenzung=alle
The blue phantom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2015
- Messages
- 8,098
We have had the best start in Premier league history based on goal difference after 6 games but no mention in the media.
http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/prem...&saisonIdBis=2017&spieltag=6&eingrenzung=alle
Come on though we are getting a lot of good press abt our style of play.
We have had the best start in Premier league history based on goal difference after 6 games but no mention in the media.
http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/prem...&saisonIdBis=2017&spieltag=6&eingrenzung=alle
we've had an awful lot of coverage about our goal scoring prowess at the moment, and also, best start based on goal diff after 6 games? it's not exactly going to raise the heart beat of the majority of football readers is it?
franksinatra
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 10,406
I've seen / heard plenty of praise; it would be perverse not to recognise our current performances in any other way.
And rightly so aswell, so why are City fans on this thread claiming otherwise? For some reason there is a desperation to believe praise and credit to the club is not given.
Last edited:
pavelsrnicek
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 2,912
We are quite rightly getting a lot of praise but I think some pundits keeping their powder dry until after the Chelsea match. We have started very well for the last 2 seasons but fallen away to finish fourth and third and our big game record has been poor.
If we lose to Chelsea the same questions will be asked, win and the story will be Jose v Pep for the title. If it does start looking like a head to head then the same pundits will point to united grinding out 1-0s as proof of title credentials, see Dan Murphy and Alan Pardew making this point already (Jose's the arch pragmatist whereas we're trying to win with style and swagger and flair).
If we lose to Chelsea the same questions will be asked, win and the story will be Jose v Pep for the title. If it does start looking like a head to head then the same pundits will point to united grinding out 1-0s as proof of title credentials, see Dan Murphy and Alan Pardew making this point already (Jose's the arch pragmatist whereas we're trying to win with style and swagger and flair).
franksinatra
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 10,406
We are quite rightly getting a lot of praise but I think some pundits keeping their powder dry until after the Chelsea match. We have started very well for the last 2 seasons but fallen away to finish fourth and third and our big game record has been poor.
If we lose to Chelsea the same questions will be asked, win and the story will be Jose v Pep for the title. If it does start looking like a head to head then the same pundits will point to united grinding out 1-0s as proof of title credentials, see Dan Murphy and Alan Pardew making this point already (Jose's the arch pragmatist whereas we're trying to win with style and swagger and flair).
To be honest Im not overly comfortable with the plaudits being thrown at us and all this City v United for the title, two horse race.
In the here and now we deserve the credit for the football were playing, and that should be rightly noted, but its far too early to suggest a club like Chelsea is not in the running for the league. The season is going to throw up a number of challenges and it will be the side with the consistency of performane which will win it. On a given day are we the best side? I would say yes but I think that was also the case last year when we fell sadly short. For example no team last year touched our first half performance at Old Trafford but a side like Chelsea, without shining so bright, proved more durable and resolute over the season.
Us doing well could prompt widescale change in the way we think about football in this country.
Right now we're seeing a lot of Jose Vs Pep talk, and critically for me the divide in punditry opinion (outside of obvious bias) seems to be old school dinosaurs vs progressive thinkers.
Most people who talk about our defence played or managed in football at their peaks prior to 2005 or so. Also known as the year football changed from an offside trap heavyset physical game to a less physical possesion orientated game.
Now whilst we're still obviously vulnerable from counter attacks, that's kinda the point. The idea with our play is that we completely restrict opponents by dominating possession and pinning them deep with pressing (another post 2005 development). So sure we're vulnerable, but we don't concede chances to expose that vulnerability.
Most pundits here are experts in the old two banks of four, kick the shit out of your opponent kind of play. Attrition is the name of the game. That's why they're so OK with the Mane incident. Because that's what they did on the regular (as they like to pretend anyway). And a lot of them did it to great success. That's why our play is alien to them. Because if what they did worked and what we're doing is different, then by default (in their eyes) it's wrong.
It's no coincidence that newer pundits don't tend to hark on about our defence quite as much. Because they tend to get it. Even though most are versed in the pre-2005 football they've been exposed enough to modern football to understand why we do what we do.
Mourinho emerged before modern possession football became a major thing. So he's largely schooled on the old school physical stuff (he's adapted well enough in fairness). So obviously it's easier for pundits to relate to him.
Fortunately journos are changing their tune a bit. They're less naive and a bit less arrogant. They know that if they stay stuck in the past they'll be left there. Too many people watch non-PL football to accept PL virtues as gospel. Especially when it's a journalist peddling the line. People tend to trust pundits more for some reason.
People need to see our football work here before they'll accept it, but people in general are wising to it. If we're successful the bandwagon jumpers will champion us a bit more, which is less than ideal but it's critical for progress. Anyone who cares about the national team will hope so anyway.
As a matter of principle, if a pundit criticises a team for zonal marking then I know he knows nothing about the modern game and I ignore them.
Right now we're seeing a lot of Jose Vs Pep talk, and critically for me the divide in punditry opinion (outside of obvious bias) seems to be old school dinosaurs vs progressive thinkers.
Most people who talk about our defence played or managed in football at their peaks prior to 2005 or so. Also known as the year football changed from an offside trap heavyset physical game to a less physical possesion orientated game.
Now whilst we're still obviously vulnerable from counter attacks, that's kinda the point. The idea with our play is that we completely restrict opponents by dominating possession and pinning them deep with pressing (another post 2005 development). So sure we're vulnerable, but we don't concede chances to expose that vulnerability.
Most pundits here are experts in the old two banks of four, kick the shit out of your opponent kind of play. Attrition is the name of the game. That's why they're so OK with the Mane incident. Because that's what they did on the regular (as they like to pretend anyway). And a lot of them did it to great success. That's why our play is alien to them. Because if what they did worked and what we're doing is different, then by default (in their eyes) it's wrong.
It's no coincidence that newer pundits don't tend to hark on about our defence quite as much. Because they tend to get it. Even though most are versed in the pre-2005 football they've been exposed enough to modern football to understand why we do what we do.
Mourinho emerged before modern possession football became a major thing. So he's largely schooled on the old school physical stuff (he's adapted well enough in fairness). So obviously it's easier for pundits to relate to him.
Fortunately journos are changing their tune a bit. They're less naive and a bit less arrogant. They know that if they stay stuck in the past they'll be left there. Too many people watch non-PL football to accept PL virtues as gospel. Especially when it's a journalist peddling the line. People tend to trust pundits more for some reason.
People need to see our football work here before they'll accept it, but people in general are wising to it. If we're successful the bandwagon jumpers will champion us a bit more, which is less than ideal but it's critical for progress. Anyone who cares about the national team will hope so anyway.
As a matter of principle, if a pundit criticises a team for zonal marking then I know he knows nothing about the modern game and I ignore them.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.