City v Everton post match

[OB1]

I don't disagree at all. I'm sure Pep will work on crossing and more of a goal threat from other players. But I think he'll also realise we don't have the same players as Bayern.

Aguero is decent in the air, but he's no Lewondowski.
Muller is also good in the air and Vidal has an excellent record of goals from midfield.

I'm not saying we can't or shouldn't work on crossing, and the second ball is certainly something to work on.

It will be much harder in the Prem. Defenders are more physical and many teams are reliant on their defensive discipline. Germany all teams will try and play. Arguably technically better teams but all but a few PL sides are stuffed with international players.

We will no doubt be work img on crosses but against parked buses like Saturday, for my money it will only yield 2 or 3 clear cut chances. Saturday we scored from a cross and Iheanacho had a very good chance too.

I'm not for oncbsecond suggesting you're like this but many fans expect us to score from every attack, complete every cross. It will never be possible.
As you say, if we improve, that can only help, especially the second ball.
But I doubt against the better bus parked sides we'd create much more than we did Saturday. Especially at 0-0.

I personally think we were very unlucky Saturday and we were arguably as good as we've been all season.
Frustrations will creep in after games like Saturday.

Some fans like you and I will chat about the good and the bad of the game. Sadly, as we've seen, some fans will just look to moan and criticise.

Honestly some of the people sat round me shout and scream the most ludicrous bollocks I've ever heard.

Everton may prove to be one of the best defence's we face this season but, without expecting perfection, we could have created more chances. On several occasions, we made the wrong decision and some of those were opportunities to play simple balls out wide and then put in a cross. We also failed to execute the final ball sufficiently well at other times. That's not me saying we did a bad job but we have to be looking to do even better.

I don't want to labour the crossing angle but I am not convinced it will be harder to profit from crosses in the Premier League; however, I don't watch enough German football to be sure. I do know that Pep was quite dismissive of talk of the Premier League being something special in terms of difficulty. He was talking, IIRC, about intensity but his comments, and I am speculating here, suggested to me that he thinks we / our media try to create myths about the Premier League. His view seemed to be that the biggest difficulty compared to other major leagues is the number of games to be played.

I am pleased to say that the people that sit in my immediate vicinity me are a sensible bunch of time served Blues.

 

[Dax777]

It was in the Daily Mail today, David Silva created 7 chances on Saturday, more than any other player in the league.

We created more than enough chances to win the game.

@Dax777 the more I read your posts the more convinced I am that you've never attended a top class match in person. You appear blinded to the difference between watching a game on NBC and sitting in the stands and observing what's going on off the ball. In fact, you've alluded in the past that what's going on off camera isn't overly important. Bananas.

Everton put up one of the best defensive displays I've seen on Saturday. They regularly had 9 or 10 players in the box. It's pretty difficult to find space in that situation, yet we still created nearly 20 chances. Not bad, considering.

Again, let's not rehash old disagreements. Like I have stated already, what's going on off camera does not negate what is viewable within the camera. Claiming movements I can't see cannot dispute failures to move, that I saw.

So whether we disagree on what type of viewing is better ( which we do) this is irrelevant in this particular argument. As I am referencing things I saw.

 

[OB1]

can't speak for other comments, but mine isn't influenced by any media leanings. Frankly, it couldn't be seeing as I'm not in England to read the media clippings.

I simply pointed out what I saw. Funny enough, a lot of those who's comments have been mostly positive also point out the very Sam issues I have. We just reached different conclusion. OB1 and Schfc6 both strongly disagree with my conclusion yet point out the very same facts. A lacking movement in the box ( or as I put it, around the final 3rd). Schfc6 purports this has some to do with our weaknesses at full back, Ob1 suggests, I think, it's not in the nature of some of our players, specifically Silva, Dihno, Gundogan to naturally take these dangerous positions or make these dangerous runs. These points are in line with my claims and conclusion that we didn't play well.

That Everton backed off and allowed us space on the in defense and the center of the park, also invariably reduces the amount of praise I ascribe to our domination in those parts of the field.

Thus, my 'negative conclusion' if it can be termed that, comes from adding up the following: We were good where Everton did not compete, and often unable to penetrate in areas in which they did. That plus flunking not 1 but 2 penalties leaves me hard pressed to conclude that was a good game.

We were dominant possession wise, but good doesn't seem to fit for me. I could be wrong

Er, don't think I have commented on any of your posts on this thread until now.

I also don't think I have specifically commented on the team's movement. On that matter, I know there was one moment in the first half where I agreed with an Etihad neighbour that complained about the forwards being too static but I did not see it as a big problem over the whole game.

 

[Shaelumstash]

Again, let's not rehash old disagreements. Like I have stated already, what's going on off camera does not negate what is viewable within the camera. Claiming movements I can't see cannot dispute failures to move, that I saw.

So whether we disagree on what type of viewing is better ( which we do) this is irrelevant in this particular argument. As I am referencing things I saw.

Yes, but what you perhaps you didn't see was how limited the space was. Off camera. There was so little space for our forwards to move in to, that the fact we created nearly 20 chances and on another day could have easily scored 5 is quite some accomplishment.

 

[schfc6]

Everton may prove to be one of the best defence's we face this season but, without expecting perfection, we could have created more chances. On several occasions, we made the wrong decision and some of those were opportunities to play simple balls out wide and then put in a cross. We also failed to execute the final ball sufficiently well at other times. That's not me saying we did a bad job but we have to be looking to do even better.

I don't want to labour the crossing angle but I am not convinced it will be harder to profit from crosses in the Premier League; however, I don't watch enough German football to be sure. I do know that Pep was quite dismissive of talk of the Premier League being something special in terms of difficulty. He was talking, IIRC, about intensity but his comments, and I am speculating here, suggested to me that he thinks we / our media try to create myths about the Premier League. His view seemed to be that the biggest difficulty compared to other major leagues is the number of games to be played.

I am pleased to say that the people that sit in my immediate vicinity me are a sensible bunch of time served Blues.

Can we swap seats? There's two in particular near me that shout all sorts of shit.
Their number one gripe being "fucking about with it at the back". Or shouting shooooot during the first half when from our block it's hard to tell if we're 25 or 40 years out.

 

[Dax777]

Er, don't think I have commented on any of your posts on this thread until now.

I also don't think I have specifically commented on the team's movement. On that matter, I know there was one moment in the first half where I agreed with an Etihad neighbour that complained about the forwards being too static but I did not see it as a big problem over the whole game.

No you did not comment on my post. I was simply referencing comments from you and Schfc6 ( 2 folks I believed viewed the game positively yet touched on the very same claims I also highlighted in concluding I didn't think it was a good game.)

Even in your last post before responding to me, you stated:

"Everton may prove to be one ofthe best defence's we face this season but, without expecting perfection, we could have created more chances."

This too was my opinion, and the basis for which I concluded we were sluggish. Schfc6 disagrees, and I see his point. But mine isn't meant to convince others of my rightness, but rather to simply point out it isn't a ridiculous claim to say I didn't think we played well. As the reasons why I feel this way is even being highlighted by those who conclude otherwise.

 

[Rolee]

No you did not comment on my post. I was simply referencing comments from you and Schfc6 ( 2 folks I believed viewed the game positively yet touched on the very same claims I also highlighted in concluding I didn't think it was a good game.)

Even in your last post before responding to me, you stated:

"Everton may prove to be one ofthe best defence's we face this season but, without expecting perfection, we could have created more chances."

This too was my opinion, and the basis for which I concluded we were sluggish. Schfc6 disagrees, and I see his point. But mine isn't meant to convince others of my rightness, but rather to simply point out it isn't a ridiculous claim to say I didn't think we played well. As the reasons why I feel this way is even being highlighted by those who conclude otherwise.

Even if we were sluggish on occasion that doesn't mean we didn't play well.

How you can come away from watching that game concluding we didn't play well is just bizarre.

 

[OB1]

Can we swap seats? There's two in particular near me that shout all sorts of shit.
Their number one gripe being "fucking about with it at the back". Or shouting shooooot during the first half when from our block it's hard to tell if we're 25 or 40 years out.

Nooo. Took me years to get a seat with such a good view; had this one since they seated the Kippax (obviously relocated to equivalent position in East stand).

 

[Dax777]

Even if we were sluggish on occasion that doesn't mean we didn't play well.

How you can come away from watching that game concluding we didn't play well is just bizarre.

True perhaps my conclusion should have been "we could have played better." Since that's what my claims really pointed out. I thought we too often failed to move decisively in the final 3rd, thus while I think we were unfortunate to not have won. I think we could have done a lot better in that area. Which perhaps is not to say we didn't play well.

 

[OB1]

No you did not comment on my post. I was simply referencing comments from you and Schfc6 ( 2 folks I believed viewed the game positively yet touched on the very same claims I also highlighted in concluding I didn't think it was a good game.)

Even in your last post before responding to me, you stated:

"Everton may prove to be one ofthe best defence's we face this season but, without expecting perfection, we could have created more chances."

This too was my opinion, and the basis for which I concluded we were sluggish. Schfc6 disagrees, and I see his point. But mine isn't meant to convince others of my rightness, but rather to simply point out it isn't a ridiculous claim to say I didn't think we played well. As the reasons why I feel this way is even being highlighted by those who conclude otherwise.

I didn't think we were sluggish and I did think we played well but, and this is rather inevitable if you don't win, we had room for improvement. What we should not lose sight of though is that we are judging the team against a very high standard and that most teams can only dream of delivering as much quality and dominance in a game as City did on Saturday.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

I never read the reports in the papers until Monday - I reflect on what I've seen on matchday (what's left of it) and then test my conclusions against the papers. This has been a waste of time ever since I can remember because the reporters usually haven't watched the match (in this case Sterling was felled for the first penalty!) or have viewed it from the standpoint of another team, often the rags. But the Independent's report takes the biscuit. The game apparently is a part of Guardiola's introduction to, and education in, the PL. I didn't realise that this league is of such quality that it is the only league in which you can dominate possession, attack, attack and attack and then find yourself trailing to a counter of breathtaking quality. Neither, the Independent suggests, did Pep Guardiola. City had blown themselves out by half time and Ronald Koeman went on to teach his pupil the harshest of lessons about the PL. From what Koeman said after the match I suspect this assertion was as big a surprise to him as to Pep. There will, we are sombrely assured by the paper, be many more days like Saturday for Pep and City this season. Whether that means missing two penalties in one match and still not losing, I don't know... But City, it appears, have appointed a manager of the most dangerous inexperience and naivety!

 

[prestonibbo_mcfc]

I never read the reports in the papers until Monday - I reflect on what I've seen on matchday (what's left of it) and then test my conclusions against the papers. This has been a waste of time ever since I can remember because the reporters usually haven't watched the match (in this case Sterling was felled for the first penalty!) or have viewed it from the standpoint of another team, often the rags. But the Independent's report takes the biscuit. The game apparently is a part of Guardiola's introduction to, and education in, the PL. I didn't realise that this league is of such quality that it is the only league in which you can dominate possession, attack, attack and attack and then find yourself trailing to a counter of breathtaking quality. Neither, the Independent suggests, did Pep Guardiola. City had blown themselves out by half time and Ronald Koeman went on to teach his pupil the harshest of lessons about the PL. From what Koeman said after the match I suspect this assertion was as big a surprise to him as to Pep. There will, we are sombrely assured by the paper, be many more days like Saturday for Pep and City this season. Whether that means missing two penalties in one match and still not losing, I don't know... But City, it appears, have appointed a manager of the most dangerous inexperience and naivety!

Shit. Not again ;-)

 

[Zin 'messiah' Zimmer]

I don't want to re-litigate this point, as we'll have to agree to disagree on it. That said, not seeing the whole field does not necessarily negate my point.

As a claim of not being able to see the whole field is only relevant in regards to what I did not see. For that which I can see, not seeing the whole field is not a defense.

I saw instances of stagnation by individual players who's movement to certain areas would have changed the complexity of certain exchanges. On 2 occasions Sane on the ball with Gundogan and Silva not moving to create space or passing lanes in the final third. These 2 instances couldn't be explained away by a claim of not seeing the field. Similarly I noted earlier 3 instances in which teammates failed to pick up DeBryune run down the middle.

These instances in the game that I saw ( again, negating the ' you didn't see the whole field claim') is what my notion of us being sluggish in the final third is based on.

Also of note, when Nolito was introduced against the very same staunch defense, his movements was a nuisance. His goal itself was an example of that movement and Nuisance that was lacking pre introduction. The way he curled from the left side of the field to the center of the 18 caused defenders to lose him in the melee. It was this kind of movement that was often lacking.

So, yes while the pass and control of the game was good, the final area movement ans passing was below par. Some of it was due to good team defense on Everton's part, but also below par movement on ours.

On many occasions, Sterling and Sane best their individual defenders like a rag, this kind of action naturally causes a rift in any defensive structure. But only in out players are moving incisevely. For good portions of the game I could see they weren't. And thus I can't see how what I saw 'in specific instances" can be refuted by claims of not seeing the whole field.

Let me simplify this mate, and in no way is this meant to be patronising, however, if one of my students wrote a two thousand word essay as a retort to a non issue, I wouldn't simply rip it up, burn it etc, I'd ask for feedback, you've done that and fair play but again your own ego is driving your point here... Off the ball movement has everything to do with how a first passage of play develops, it's a non issue in terms of 'attempting' and what you've viewed..... Let's put it this way, it's a forum for debate, I think you get a hard time by some for coming across as aloof and matter of fact, I personally enjoy your analysis, however, on this occasion the very fact your weren't there, for the reason above, has frustrated you and you now are infact 'Roy walkers' lovechild!!!

 

[mancity1]

True perhaps my conclusion should have been "we could have played better." Since that's what my claims really pointed out. I thought we too often failed to move decisively in the final 3rd, thus while I think we were unfortunate to not have won. I think we could have done a lot better in that area. Which perhaps is not to say we didn't play well.

For most including me its the result that matters.

We can play a good game and lose, a poor game and win but either way when we win we forgive what actually occurred during the 90 minutes to some degree and clock off another three points and when we don't we focus more on the negatives , the bad luck , the poor decisions made by us and officialdom etc.

As for Saturday we played a solid game ( 12 per cent of game time in Everton's half and 6 per cent in the final third ) but we couldn't score more than one goal and that came from one of our few decent crosses for the whole game.

I agree it wasn't a pearler for the neutral but in the end it was all about missing penalties.

Score 2 or more in a similar game and we win nearly every time.

I think that's 5 we have fluffed this season and that is a poor return.

 

[Saddleworth2]

I don't want to re-litigate this point, as we'll have to agree to disagree on it. That said, not seeing the whole field does not necessarily negate my point.

As a claim of not being able to see the whole field is only relevant in regards to what I did not see. For that which I can see, not seeing the whole field is not a defense.

I saw instances of stagnation by individual players who's movement to certain areas would have changed the complexity of certain exchanges. On 2 occasions Sane on the ball with Gundogan and Silva not moving to create space or passing lanes in the final third. These 2 instances couldn't be explained away by a claim of not seeing the field. Similarly I noted earlier 3 instances in which teammates failed to pick up DeBryune run down the middle.

These instances in the game that I saw ( again, negating the ' you didn't see the whole field claim') is what my notion of us being sluggish in the final third is based on.

Also of note, when Nolito was introduced against the very same staunch defense, his movements was a nuisance. His goal itself was an example of that movement and Nuisance that was lacking pre introduction. The way he curled from the left side of the field to the center of the 18 caused defenders to lose him in the melee. It was this kind of movement that was often lacking.

So, yes while the pass and control of the game was good, the final area movement ans passing was below par. Some of it was due to good team defense on Everton's part, but also below par movement on ours.

On many occasions, Sterling and Sane best their individual defenders like a rag, this kind of action naturally causes a rift in any defensive structure. But only in out players are moving incisevely. For good portions of the game I could see they weren't. And thus I can't see how what I saw 'in specific instances" can be refuted by claims of not seeing the whole field.

Bloody hell Dax, you sound like Craig Revel Horwood!

 

[IWasHere]

Against 11 men behind the ball, to create chances like we did, in the way that we did, was excellent... It showed that we will cope quite easily with the tactic in the future, as there won't be many teams as good as Koemans at defending there six yard box. Also, we won't have may days where the keeper makes world class save after save......

The poles in opinion stem from those able to see the whole pitch as they were there, the movement was excellent as we were invariably in positions 9/10 times to cause a threat (against a parked bus), to suggest otherwise is shortsighted, not because the minority are 'clueless' but the camera doesn't tell the whole story!!

 

[SWP's back]

Can we swap seats? There's two in particular near me that shout all sorts of shit.
Their number one gripe being "fucking about with it at the back". Or shouting shooooot during the first half when from our block it's hard to tell if we're 25 or 40 years out.

Oh you sit next to Bill. Send his daughter my love next game.

 

[SWP's back]

For any City fans still saying we were shite, Everton manager:

“That’s the problem for them on Wednesday – the individual qualities of Barcelona is so extremely high. But City can beat Barcelona. They will also have the ball and I think it is the best game you can watch between the philosophy of two teams and it is a really high standard of football. I’m really looking forward to seeing that game.

“The way they played [against Everton], the way they showed to the fans of City – it was a great performance but the result is not what they maybe deserved. But if they go on in this way, with this football and they keep everyone fit [it can be] perfect.”

 

[Zin 'messiah' Zimmer]

For any City fans still saying we were shite, Everton manager:

“That’s the problem for them on Wednesday – the individual qualities of Barcelona is so extremely high. But City can beat Barcelona. They will also have the ball and I think it is the best game you can watch between the philosophy of two teams and it is a really high standard of football. I’m really looking forward to seeing that game.

“The way they played [against Everton], the way they showed to the fans of City – it was a great performance but the result is not what they maybe deserved. But if they go on in this way, with this football and they keep everyone fit [it can be] perfect.”

Yeah but our movement is snide!!!

 

[schfc6]

For any City fans still saying we were shite, Everton manager:

“That’s the problem for them on Wednesday – the individual qualities of Barcelona is so extremely high. But City can beat Barcelona. They will also have the ball and I think it is the best game you can watch between the philosophy of two teams and it is a really high standard of football. I’m really looking forward to seeing that game.

“The way they played [against Everton], the way they showed to the fans of City – it was a great performance but the result is not what they maybe deserved. But if they go on in this way, with this football and they keep everyone fit [it can be] perfect.”

You sure he's not talking about 'Red Monday'?