It's not Pellers..It's not even the team..

It's easy to manage City when you have Hart in nets, Zabaleta at right back, Kompany in central defence, Yaya in his pomp, Silva and Aguero.

Just smile at everyone, and "go out and play".

It gets difficult when you have injuries. But it's obviously a major error to play in defence a 35 year old, and in midfield a player who may well retire at the end of the season because these are choices. They are not decisions forced on the manager.
 
He's only a safe pair of hands if he keeps us in the top 4 (actually top 3 really). Lose on Sunday and the reality is that we aren't fighting for a title, we are fighting for our top 4 status.

We are indeed, if all our players are fit and raring to go he can squeeze us a title against worse teams, players start to age and get caught with injuries we look a shambles, he under performs but like ya ya he will be stood on the pitch come the weekend

Nice bloke though
 
The feelig is that we're having a pretty poor season after a lot of talk about regaining the title making real progress in Europe and those first five games when we looked in a different league to the rest of the PL. Is it Pellers? Is it the team? Is it the injuries? Is it a bit of everything? Or a bit of everything and a bit more besides? I haven't a clue, but I was interested to come across the following in Balague's Pep Guardiola: Another Way of Winning. It describes the things which had convinced Pep that a parting of the ways with the club were in his and its best interests. Some of what he describes may seem eerily similar to City not only this season, but also in 2012-13:-

"Pep recognised the symptoms: not competing well has nothing to do with playing well or badly, it is about looking after the little details. Barcelona forgot that they needed to be Barcelona in every minute of the match; yet often they weren't effective enough when it was required, conceding sloppy goals because of lack of concentration, making the transition between attack and defence too slowly, or simply starting games a little too relaxed and then reacting too late. Such attitudes and errors, to name just a few, cost points and titles. Barcelona also failed to change their style even when the conditions (pitch, weather) were against them. Is flexibility in terms of a team's primary style a sign of weakness or of strength? Isn't adapting a virtue?"

I think we see all these features in City's play recently. A rugby pundit put it rather differently before last Saturday's match with Scotland by saying that under Stuart Lancaster England was packed with 99 percenters (players and staff who give 99% of their all, not intentionally, but that the one percent extra makes the difference between being also-rans and world champions. With the links with Pep dating back well before the new season, but reaching fever pitch lately, is this not the problem with City; the manager and players have slipped into 99%ism.
 
Bony
Nasri De Bruyne Navas

Is a front 4 better than most teams can put out and they are all fucked.
 
Injuries are hugely detrimental but I think a good manager doesn't ask every player to play the same way. You have to start accounting for a drop in quality when your stars are injured. You need to change how you might play not carry on gung-ho. Example: Since we lost Kompany and Mangala, we have the tools for a devastating counter attack game but we have never played this way once. Instead we rely on a slow and aged cb and expect him to play a high line and be as good at it as kompany or as physical as mangala.
He continues to play Yaya like he is in the form of two years ago and he isn't even 50% of that player.
Injuries are a big factor but so is Manuel.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.