Bentheblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2005
- Messages
- 1,764
I agree with this but I think Mignolet's save with his foot was from our new striker, John Stones.
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.
I agree with this but I think Mignolet's save with his foot was from our new striker, John Stones.
Zubrman
Well-Known Member
I agree with this but I think Mignolet's save with his foot was from our new striker, John Stones.
Aye. Twas.
oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
They certainly had more possession in our half than we did in theirs and created far better chances.By the way it was Stones and as I said previously up until we scored (which was against the run of play) it then became us,us and us.I doubt they had more possession, they broke well on us but generally we got good numbers back to restrict them, they got through once when Salah put that tame shot in. They edged it in terms of opportunities in the opening half hour but didn't create anything of note. In fact if not for a good reaction stop from Mignolet with his feet to keep DeBruyne out we'd have been two to the good before the sending off.
oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
WOW so I was approx 5 minutes out of my original timing !!Don't agree. Liverpool were the better team for about the first 15 minutes. The next 10 minutes we edged it, but neither side, before the goal, had created much more than the odd shot from outside the box. If you want to say that the goal was against the balance of the opening 25 minutes taken as a whole, I would grudgingly agree. But if you said it was against the run of play at the time, I wouldn't. I thought the goal was coming, because we had started snapping at them, turning over possession and making them make mistakes - KDB in particular was brilliant in this period.
We then pretty much bossed the period between the goal and the sending off. Saleh gVe us problems but we dealt with them and he was pretty much the only one that did.
oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
I take it you never saw the match day thread on here ?? All I read about and rightly so was how shit we were in that first 20 minutes,how we couldn`t get the ball of the Dippers,how crap our midfield was.Don't agree Oakie and you can bang that drum all you like. They maybe has Salah's chances and Can's free kick, but
i don't think they were on top as much as you think. You sure you had ANY glasses on ;-)
Nice to see that I wasn`t alone in my thinking.Only the die hard Blues could make such comments that we wern`t second best in that opening spell.
Unfuckingbelievablejeff !!
squirtyflower
Well-Known Member
The match day thread is no barometer of the goings on at the actual game, too many rags posting in there who all fuck off when we go a goal up.I take it you never saw the match day thread on here ?? All I read about and rightly so was how shit we were in that first 20 minutes,how we couldn`t get the ball of the Dippers,how crap our midfield was.
Nice to see that I wasn`t alone in my thinking.Only the die hard Blues could make such comments that we wern`t second best in that opening spell.
Unfuckingbelievablejeff !!
oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
Can`t argue over that comment mate,but the world and his wife could see that for the first 20 minutes we were "all at sea" and second best.I think some people just see a red mist and don`t like the truth that City can be shit some times.However as I`ve repeated before, we were the only team likely to win after we scored that first goal.The match day thread is no barometer of the goings on at the actual game, too many rags posting in there who all fuck off when we go a goal up.
They certainly had more possession in our half than we did in theirs and created far better chances.By the way it was Stones and as I said previously up until we scored (which was against the run of play) it then became us,us and us.
They created one chance. They had other opportunities to create chances but didn't owing to us getting bodies back to restrict options. What was Stones mate?
oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
Really ? You need to take those sky blue specs off mate.Horse crap
oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
Stones was the one who shot and Mingolet saved with his feet, not KDB.They created one chance. They had other opportunities to create chances but didn't owing to us getting bodies back to restrict options. What was Stones mate?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.