Burnley (3rd rd FA Cup) Post Match thread

City were ok first half a lot better than i had been led to believe plenty of balls into the danger area and the build up play was fluid and creative Gundogan had two on target shots that were blocked by headers,apparently that doesnt count as shots on target
Barnes still had a lot to do after Stones mis kicked ,but he did it well and his shot was thunderous,very well struck
As for complaining that they wanted to delay the kick until it suited Burnley well thats not really what a free kicks for, for a start,and it wasnt that quickly taken anyway,ridiculous
 
47D096F600000578-0-image-m-130_1515265441704.jpg


Loved this moment in the touch line

“Keep your fucking mouth shut Dyche”
 
BLUEMATT23 said:
Yes maybe but he just doesn' instill any confidence in me what so ever. If Ederson copped an injury we could really struggle.
For me he's to small to be a good keeper.
Click to expand...
If that was to happen, like many times this season where we have had injuries and the flappers have come out, Pep has found a way round it. Mangala and Delph have both come in and done a job under Pep's watch. I would hope that if it was to happen that Pep would reign in the high defensive line.
 
Season ticket east stand 101.
Yesterday the section was rammed with families.
Great atmosphere and a joy to watch young blues be so enthusiastic towards the team.
The backing Sergio gets from those youngster is unbelievable.
Never heard nothing like it.
To the 2 young sister,possibly twins in the front of 102 well done to your teams backing throughout the match.
Made a great game even better.
 
bennyboy said:
Season ticket east stand 101.
Yesterday the section was rammed with families.
Great atmosphere and a joy to watch young blues be so enthusiastic towards the team.
The backing Sergio gets from those youngster is unbelievable.
Never heard nothing like it.
To the 2 young sister,possibly twins in the front of 102 well done to your teams backing throughout the match.
Made a great game even better.
Click to expand...

it was a good change from the usual miserable people that go to league games ;). affordable ticket prices and more young/people who want to be there get to go.
 
somethingelse said:
City were ok first half a lot better than i had been led to believe plenty of balls into the danger area and the build up play was fluid and creative Gundogan had two on target shots that were blocked by headers,apparently that doesnt count as shots on target
Barnes still had a lot to do after Stones mis kicked ,but he did it well and his shot was thunderous,very well struck
As for complaining that they wanted to delay the kick until it suited Burnley well thats not really what a free kicks for, for a start,and it wasnt that quickly taken anyway,ridiculous
Click to expand...
+1
City were very good in the first half - Burnley were lucky to have last minute blocks of shots (which would have at least been on goal or have scored) and/or crosses.

Stones made an error (it happens) and Burnley scored - by blasting it towards goal at range - these wild shots occasionally go in (no dribbling forward for a better shot - just blast it).

On the other hand, Burnley had some excellent opportunities which they failed to put away - notably one from a corner. This happens - hard to absolutely cut these chances out.

At half time, City were down 0-1 largely due to misfortune in Burnley''s half. On the other hand, had luck been entirely with Burnley, City might well have been down 0-3.
========
2nd half - astute play by Gundogan and Aguero for our 1st and 2nd goals (I'm not a rules expert, but what the fuck was Burnley's complaint over our first goal where one of their players was intentionally less than 10 yards away - illegally - and we take the kick before he's back in position - if you're going to cheat, don't complain when you're caught out).

Sane misses some chances and then puts in a well-played goal to break his scoring drought.

Sane once again torches Burnley's right-back to assist B. Silva for the 4th.
========
Take aways - Danilo is a squad player, able to fill in as needed or give a rest to a better player. His first touch is way too often terrible - *boink* - leading to a missed scoring opportunity or a turn over or some other problem. For sure, an asset to our side - but not anywhere near the caliber of player we need as a regular starter.

KDB is the best central/attacking mid on the planet bar none - he made several effortless killer passes out of nowhere when he came on. No player can match that.

Sane has massive potential - he continues to beat whoever covers him easily on the wing and frequently makes good crosses. A little more consistency in crossing/shooting brings him up to a potential Ballon D'or winner.
 
Last edited:
Since you ask - yes, Burnley fans are enjoying the season and do appreciate the way the team plays. Most of them anyway - there are one or two who don't see any reason why all teams, regardless of who is playing for them, shouldn't play the same way as Man City do. Our fans, even the absentee ones who weren't around in fourth division days, recognise that we're way above where we expected to be, and are enjoying the ride. When we get more established in the Premier, and for that matter when our five injured internationals + Tarkowski are back, then I dare say the performances might be more to your liking too. Brady is an especially big miss on the creative side.

There's a common factor universally found among football fans who say that performances are more important than results. They're winning. Teams at the bottom of the league don't have fans who say that results don't matter because they're enjoying the football. Those fans stop going when the football is poor - I have seen your lot in division three, and the gates weren't half what they are now, and whether it's because the results weren't so good or the football wasn't so good doesn't really matter - the two are interlinked. You can say that performances are all-important because you're getting the results anyway, but I bet if (unlikely!) you lose the next three or four games because your players somehow stop scoring these unstoppable goals, then some of you at least would be complaining. Pretty football that doesn't work isn't actually all that pretty.

Burnley's directors have, between them, over time, net, contributed about £10m to the club. They are rich men by normal standards - the former chairman was said to be worth £20m - but they're not in your Sheikh's league. I don't know how much he and Emirates have paid to Man City, but it's a billion or two I should think. It makes a difference to the quality of players you can get. Why don't we have anyone who can do what de Bruyne does? Clue - it's not because we don't want someone like him. Why does our reserve centre forward (Barnes) play a different style from your reserve centre forward (Aguero) does? We all know that one. Why don't Burnley get a reserve centre forward who can do what Aguero does? We all know that one too.

Assuming one of the rich moneybags clubs has to win the league, I suppose Man City are a less bad option than some. Many of your supporters on this thread - probably the longer-serving ones - do at least acknowledge that money , or lack of it, is a significant part of the difference between Man City and Burnley. Remember that until Sheikh Whatsisname turned up, Man City had won the league twice; same as Burnley. Now, you're two ahead. Also since the Sheikh arrived, you've managed to improve on Burnley's record in the European Cup / Champions League, having reached a semi-final where our best was a quarter-final. Well done, you're a bigger club. But that doesn't make us Accrington Stanley. That's the sort of remark Liverpool fans are proud of themselves for making, because it makes them feel that winning the league doesn't matter, they think they're superior because they're Liverpool. I don't like Liverpool fans. Don't copy them.
 
dsr-burnley said:
Since you ask - yes, Burnley fans are enjoying the season and do appreciate the way the team plays. Most of them anyway - there are one or two who don't see any reason why all teams, regardless of who is playing for them, shouldn't play the same way as Man City do. Our fans, even the absentee ones who weren't around in fourth division days, recognise that we're way above where we expected to be, and are enjoying the ride. When we get more established in the Premier, and for that matter when our five injured internationals + Tarkowski are back, then I dare say the performances might be more to your liking too. Brady is an especially big miss on the creative side.

There's a common factor universally found among football fans who say that performances are more important than results. They're winning. Teams at the bottom of the league don't have fans who say that results don't matter because they're enjoying the football. Those fans stop going when the football is poor - I have seen your lot in division three, and the gates weren't half what they are now, and whether it's because the results weren't so good or the football wasn't so good doesn't really matter - the two are interlinked. You can say that performances are all-important because you're getting the results anyway, but I bet if (unlikely!) you lose the next three or four games because your players somehow stop scoring these unstoppable goals, then some of you at least would be complaining. Pretty football that doesn't work isn't actually all that pretty.

Burnley's directors have, between them, over time, net, contributed about £10m to the club. They are rich men by normal standards - the former chairman was said to be worth £20m - but they're not in your Sheikh's league. I don't know how much he and Emirates have paid to Man City, but it's a billion or two I should think. It makes a difference to the quality of players you can get. Why don't we have anyone who can do what de Bruyne does? Clue - it's not because we don't want someone like him. Why does our reserve centre forward (Barnes) play a different style from your reserve centre forward (Aguero) does? We all know that one. Why don't Burnley get a reserve centre forward who can do what Aguero does? We all know that one too.

Assuming one of the rich moneybags clubs has to win the league, I suppose Man City are a less bad option than some. Many of your supporters on this thread - probably the longer-serving ones - do at least acknowledge that money , or lack of it, is a significant part of the difference between Man City and Burnley. Remember that until Sheikh Whatsisname turned up, Man City had won the league twice; same as Burnley. Now, you're two ahead. Also since the Sheikh arrived, you've managed to improve on Burnley's record in the European Cup / Champions League, having reached a semi-final where our best was a quarter-final. Well done, you're a bigger club. But that doesn't make us Accrington Stanley. That's the sort of remark Liverpool fans are proud of themselves for making, because it makes them feel that winning the league doesn't matter, they think they're superior because they're Liverpool. I don't like Liverpool fans. Don't copy them.
Click to expand...
Meh - this is the Bluemoon forum - you're going to read all sorts of pro-City anti-opponent threads here. Complaining about some of the more anti-Burnley threads will get you nowhere.

At any rate, Burnley did the best they could - totally outclassed (yes, partially because we can spend a lot more - but also because we finally got the best manager in world football which we wanted all along) - so dig in defensively, be difficult to score against, and hope to pinch one or two on a counter/error.

Good effort on Burnley's part.

And I suppose it's fine to bitch and moan about Burnley's lack of resources to buy the players which would make them the best team in the league (note - simply buying great players doesn't cut it - look at the Scum for example) - but don't bitch and moan here - you'll get zero sympathy.

Food for thought - Burnley is in the P/L - why? - because they spend a ton of money to get really good players. Clubs far removed from the P/L would kill for Burnley's resources to buy quality players. So stop bitching - here at least.

The best teams in world football are going to have the deepest pockets. What differentiates these teams is the quality of management they bring in coupled with the foresight to identify, procure and retain the most talented players.

Some clubs (Spurs, Arsenal, Liverpool, Scum) can do the first 2, but fail to retain their best talent in cases (Scum w/ Ronaldo and God only knows why De Gea isn't at Real).
 
Last edited:
dsr-burnley said:
Since you ask - yes, Burnley fans are enjoying the season and do appreciate the way the team plays. Most of them anyway - there are one or two who don't see any reason why all teams, regardless of who is playing for them, shouldn't play the same way as Man City do. Our fans, even the absentee ones who weren't around in fourth division days, recognise that we're way above where we expected to be, and are enjoying the ride. When we get more established in the Premier, and for that matter when our five injured internationals + Tarkowski are back, then I dare say the performances might be more to your liking too. Brady is an especially big miss on the creative side.

There's a common factor universally found among football fans who say that performances are more important than results. They're winning. Teams at the bottom of the league don't have fans who say that results don't matter because they're enjoying the football. Those fans stop going when the football is poor - I have seen your lot in division three, and the gates weren't half what they are now, and whether it's because the results weren't so good or the football wasn't so good doesn't really matter - the two are interlinked. You can say that performances are all-important because you're getting the results anyway, but I bet if (unlikely!) you lose the next three or four games because your players somehow stop scoring these unstoppable goals, then some of you at least would be complaining. Pretty football that doesn't work isn't actually all that pretty.

Burnley's directors have, between them, over time, net, contributed about £10m to the club. They are rich men by normal standards - the former chairman was said to be worth £20m - but they're not in your Sheikh's league. I don't know how much he and Emirates have paid to Man City, but it's a billion or two I should think. It makes a difference to the quality of players you can get. Why don't we have anyone who can do what de Bruyne does? Clue - it's not because we don't want someone like him. Why does our reserve centre forward (Barnes) play a different style from your reserve centre forward (Aguero) does? We all know that one. Why don't Burnley get a reserve centre forward who can do what Aguero does? We all know that one too.

Assuming one of the rich moneybags clubs has to win the league, I suppose Man City are a less bad option than some. Many of your supporters on this thread - probably the longer-serving ones - do at least acknowledge that money , or lack of it, is a significant part of the difference between Man City and Burnley. Remember that until Sheikh Whatsisname turned up, Man City had won the league twice; same as Burnley. Now, you're two ahead. Also since the Sheikh arrived, you've managed to improve on Burnley's record in the European Cup / Champions League, having reached a semi-final where our best was a quarter-final. Well done, you're a bigger club. But that doesn't make us Accrington Stanley. That's the sort of remark Liverpool fans are proud of themselves for making, because it makes them feel that winning the league doesn't matter, they think they're superior because they're Liverpool. I don't like Liverpool fans. Don't copy them.
Click to expand...

You make some valid points in your post but sadly let yourself down with your ‘sheik whatsiname’ and mentioning our 2nd Div attendances in 1998/99 which were an increase on our attendances in the Prem 1995/96. Any fan worth his salt would know attendances have increased across the board since.

Good luck to Burnley. The club appears from the outside well run and personally I think its great to see historically big Northern Clubs like yourself and Huddersfield play in the Prem.

Still coming on a City board and giving it the Sheik Whatsisname is just disrespectful.
 
Apologies to Sheik Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan - is it Sheik Mansour for short? - and to everyone else offended on his behalf. I don't have a good memory for names, I should have googled but I knew you would know who I meant.

The third division gates were better than any of the previous 15 years, weren't they? Which actually supports my point that it was the results not the quality of the football that draws the crowds.
 
dsr-burnley said:
Since you ask - yes, Burnley fans are enjoying the season and do appreciate the way the team plays. Most of them anyway - there are one or two who don't see any reason why all teams, regardless of who is playing for them, shouldn't play the same way as Man City do. Our fans, even the absentee ones who weren't around in fourth division days, recognise that we're way above where we expected to be, and are enjoying the ride. When we get more established in the Premier, and for that matter when our five injured internationals + Tarkowski are back, then I dare say the performances might be more to your liking too. Brady is an especially big miss on the creative side.

There's a common factor universally found among football fans who say that performances are more important than results. They're winning. Teams at the bottom of the league don't have fans who say that results don't matter because they're enjoying the football. Those fans stop going when the football is poor - I have seen your lot in division three, and the gates weren't half what they are now, and whether it's because the results weren't so good or the football wasn't so good doesn't really matter - the two are interlinked. You can say that performances are all-important because you're getting the results anyway, but I bet if (unlikely!) you lose the next three or four games because your players somehow stop scoring these unstoppable goals, then some of you at least would be complaining. Pretty football that doesn't work isn't actually all that pretty.

Burnley's directors have, between them, over time, net, contributed about £10m to the club. They are rich men by normal standards - the former chairman was said to be worth £20m - but they're not in your Sheikh's league. I don't know how much he and Emirates have paid to Man City, but it's a billion or two I should think. It makes a difference to the quality of players you can get. Why don't we have anyone who can do what de Bruyne does? Clue - it's not because we don't want someone like him. Why does our reserve centre forward (Barnes) play a different style from your reserve centre forward (Aguero) does? We all know that one. Why don't Burnley get a reserve centre forward who can do what Aguero does? We all know that one too.

Assuming one of the rich moneybags clubs has to win the league, I suppose Man City are a less bad option than some. Many of your supporters on this thread - probably the longer-serving ones - do at least acknowledge that money , or lack of it, is a significant part of the difference between Man City and Burnley. Remember that until Sheikh Whatsisname turned up, Man City had won the league twice; same as Burnley. Now, you're two ahead. Also since the Sheikh arrived, you've managed to improve on Burnley's record in the European Cup / Champions League, having reached a semi-final where our best was a quarter-final. Well done, you're a bigger club. But that doesn't make us Accrington Stanley. That's the sort of remark Liverpool fans are proud of themselves for making, because it makes them feel that winning the league doesn't matter, they think they're superior because they're Liverpool. I don't like Liverpool fans. Don't copy them.
Click to expand...
do you have the same amount of match going home fans now as when you are playing the likes of Burton and Doncaster. Are Spurs building a new 60,000 seater stadium to attract new fans. Did you feel the same way when buying Chris Woods from Leeds with parachute money. The Stanley jibe was in response to where were you when you were shit and shit Man Utd.
 
I don't dispute that Guardiola is currently (and quite probably long-term, time will tell) the best manager in the league and that's why Man City are a vastly better side than others who have spent almost as much, especially Moaninho who is completely losing the plot. Guardiola makes players better (Sterling being an obvious example) There are 6 teams that could compete for the Premier table, if properly run (assuming we take Leicester as a one-in-a-lifetime freak) and it's the manager who makes most of the difference between those 6. Put it this way, if Mourinho was manager of Man City and Guardiola was manager of Man United, Man United would win the league.

But if Guardiola was manager of Burnley, where would Burnley be? No better than where we are now is my guess. We aren't in the Premier because we spent shedloads on good players - when Dyche took over, we had Charlie Austin who was scoring for fun, but had to sell him because of shortage of money; Dyche signed only four players his first summer, all free transfers. Tom Heaton from Bristol Rovers, David Jones from Wigan, Scott Arfield from Huddersfield. What Dyche did was take a mid-table side with a high scoring attack but an awful defence, lose the top goalscorer, and turn it into a promotion side. At Burnley he's rated the best manager in the league because of what he's done for us, just as Guardiola is rated by you the best manager in the league because of what he's done for you. Dyche's effect on Mee is equivalent to Guardiola's effect on Stones; Dyche's effect on Arfield is equivalent to Guardiola's effect on Sterling. At least from a Burnley perspective. You wouldn't necessarily agree!
 
I have to say, watching the West Ham v Shrewsbury match on TV made me appreciate how lucky we are at City.

Yep, we're lucky, but at long, long last we are well managed both on and off the field. Something we have not been since (at least) the days of Joe Mercer and Albert Alexander. Money only takes you so far. Good management takes you a lot further.

Enjoyed myself yesterday. Was a bit surprised though as (according to the planner) I bought the last seat in the block, but there were several empties. Can only think some folk bought tickets but couldn't be arsed to turn up. Their loss...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top