i`m starting to think if we are to win this we will have to do it the hard way. who would of have thought torres would score a brace the game before he plays us, ycmiu

Which probably means that unless Drogba is injured , Torres will be on the bench on Wednesday.

Were you watching the same Pizarro as everybody else? He was average to say the least. He, Johnson and Savic should be consigned to the bench (at best) for the rest of the season in my view.

-------------------------------HART--------------------------------------------

----RICHARDS------------KOMPANY----------LESCOTT----------CLICHY----------

--------------------------DE JONG------BARRY----------------------------------

----BALOTELLI-------------------TOURE-------------------------SILVA----------

-----------------------------------AGUERO------------------------------------

On current form, I would have Balotelli on the left (you have him on the right) with Aguero on the right and Dzeko in the middle. Silva can be brought on as an impact sub, as he is simply not the David of 2011.

Let me throw some facts at you. Seeing as you like many probably didn't bother to go watch the match 4 times. I did :)

Hollywood balls: i.e the supposed wasteful balls Pizzaro was pinging all over the place
Pizzaro: 6 completed, 3 misplaced:
Yaya Toure: 5 completed, 7 misplaced
Silva: 2 completed, 3 misplaced
Kolarov: 1 completed, 2 misplaced
De Jong: O completed, 1 misplaced: 36/39

Possession By midfielders:
Yaya Toure: 85/97 (Full game)
Silva: 32/38(65 min)
Pizzaro: 51 of 58 (55 min)
De Jong; 36/39 ( 50 Mins)
Johnson: 10/12 (45 min)
Nasri: 9/10 (40 mins)

So in terms of who played well, Pizzaro was simply better than most on a day in which we played an average game for the most part. Pizzaro was simply the best link up player on the field. Simply put, SIlva, and Johnson just weren't involved enough. Sadly when SIlva was subbed was when he had finally begun to pick his game up.

De Jong was often credited with our improved play, but this actually is a fallacy. Our improved play was a function of SIlva, Kolarov and especially Aguero having a fantastically better 2nd halves than they did the first half.
Sure Johnson being uninvolved offensively and being replaced by Nigel who was more involved helped. But it was the least of the reasons why we improved. De Jong had a good tackle when he came in on the right, did a Panna move on the left corner to get out (that was sweet) and was quicker (on most occassions with his passing than usual) which was decent.

Funny enough, the exact same mistake Savic made against Spurs that led to thatthe Bale breakaway, De Jong made the exact mistake but luckily Capel did not put Van Winkle thru for what would have definitely been a goal. But no one will remember.

Pizzaro was NOT average, unless the argument goes: Everyone except 1 or 2 were poor, with Pizarro being one of the 2 (him and Yaya) that were average while every one else sucked in the first half. I say this because he and Yaya were simply the 2 best players in the first half. No one was close. In the Second, Aguero was the best player, then Kolarov, then Yaya, then Dzeko everyone else was pretty average in terms of contributions.

Oh, just before I go, let me dispel another fallacy about the game. The 'supposed' Pissaro was leaving gaps in the middle malarky. This is another bullshit claim. By and large Sporting attacked down the wings Capel and Insua on the left, and Perreiraha and Ismailov on the right. Centrally, they pretty much conceeded possession and let Yaya and Pizarro dominate midfield. Carrico and Stinjs sat deep and helped double Balo, SIlva and Aguero. Defensively Micah and Kola were always often caught out of position. Especially Micah, while Kola was often doubled and didn't get early help from Silva/Balo when they were wide left.

Anyway, the above gives you an insight into how much I have dissected the game. And I am telling you without an iota of doubt, that Pizzaro will start if that game is any indicator.

Because of De Jong

Are you crazy Pizarro had a terrible perfrormance that match

His performance was average rather than terrible but, despite the strange statistics produced from God knows where by Dax777, Pizarro will start on the bench, possibly alongside Tevez, against Chelsea on Wednesday.

Ge Jong had nothing to do wit Aguero running at 3 to 4 players. Attacking the goal and making better runs.

De Jong had nothing to do with Kolarov whipping more balls into the box as opposed to sky high. Or his dribbling moves actually becoming successful on the left.

It is silly to contend De Jong made players do individual acts like pass, dribble, cross or run at defenders better.

What most ascribed to De Jong, was in reality a function of a tactical decision on the part of Sporting. Being ahead 0-2 and 0-3 on aggregate, they simply fell back and defended in their own half, even deeper than they did in the first half, and Insua and Pereirha practically stopped trying to get forward. Something they did more often in the first. It seemed clear instructions to close ranks and keep the lead must have been given. Fortunately this meant we simply played in their half for most of the 2nd. I wouldn't ascribe this to De Jong's introduction. But feel free to.

-- Mon Mar 19, 2012 9:00 am --


The stats are from watching the game over a lot. If you want I can give you the instances for every one of the claims with time stamps on them. The pass completion percentage you can get from the City site. Frankly it is a delusional claim that Pizzaro was terrible. And while milder, to claim he was average will suggest others were better, while in fact, few were when he was on the field. Simply put he and Yaya had the best first halves among City players. No one was close. And he left 10 minutes into the second so we could add more offensive power.
So if being the 2nd best player at worst in the 1st half was the mark for being average, then sure! I guess Pizzaro was average. But simply put, you couldn't name 2 players with a better 1st 45 minutes.

-- Mon Mar 19, 2012 9:01 am --


Please explain with facts, not emotion. How did you come to the conclusion he had a terrible game.