Are we dining at the top table or not?

[SWP's back]

And if ManU switch to 433 which Van Gaal has played most of his career then 3 is fine as it is for Chelsea or the Dog and Duck but so fucking what. We play with 2 strikers. We played with 2 strikers under Mancini and we play with 2 under Pellers so to compete at the top level we need 4 given 1 is always injured or playing golf in Argentina. All this post rationalisation as if it's some master plan or a means to buy a world class striker in 2016 or whenever is bollocks.

If we planned to switch formation and play with 1 striker and reduce down to 3 then fine but we didn't plan it nor practised it. Instead on transfer dead line day we sold one striker that we knew wanted to go months ago and are now down to 3. Consequently some are questioning this decision and/or the timing or the gamble that 'we will be okay'. And we might well be who knows but it is legitimate grounds for debate at least until our next match when Stefan grabs a hat trick and we go back to talking about something else.

You're missing the point. Four frontline strikers was and is extremely unusual. How many other clubs have that many?

I'm missing the point? Christ on a bike. We do. We have 4 top line strikers. It is a deliberate policy on our part as we play most games with 2 top line strikers. The squad is structured to have 4 top line strikers. Pellers wants 4 top line strikers. Txiki wants 4 top line strikes which is why he fucking made sure we had 4.

If we want to change to playing 1 top line striker and having 3 in the squad then fine. Do it. Plan for it. Practise it. It's what Ferran and Txiki preach. The reason why this sale and the timing of it looks odd is because it is contrary to what they preach.

I think you'll find we don't have four top line strikers at all and if we wanted four. We would have four.

 

[SWP's back]

I was aiming it at those who thinks he never gets it wrong and calls out anyone who thinks he has made a mistake not replacing Alf,i'm sick of being called a flapper because i am not a happy clapper.I recall a discussion with the names of players who he brought to Barca that didn't quite work out,no-one gets it right all of the time
My opinion is we are weaker because we did not bring in cover for Alf,a loan,anything
We know sergio could break down at any moment and yaya is away jan/feb
It's an opinion,i'm not the one having a go at anyone who has the opposite one and neither do i want mine to be the right one come may
I am happy with what txiki has achieved since he came to us but not on this one

Out of interest, considering our wage structure, CL squad regs etc., who would you have brought in to replace Negredo?

Luckily thats not my job
I see a few people are putting their faith in the young nigerian boy,maybe looking along those lines we could have promoted lopes? maybe pellers can get some use out of john and sinclair but it's not great to have to do either of those things
Pellers was very firm answering the negredo question,he said we do not want to sell him,he wanted 4 strikers and now doesn't have them

And him saying that added about £8m to his sale price.

I wouldn't take everything a manager ever says as gospel. I hear Ferguson wouldn't sell Madrid a virus after all.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

All assumptions based on there definitely being nobody available in the world who would have been a decent 4th choice striker and doesn't come into the categories that you describe. Obviously there is nobody like that in the world and you definitely know. Just like you know a world wide scouting network would be of little use. Not worth discussing with you any further because you're a fantasist especially if you think your previous post was anything other than fucking drivel.

You're entitled to your view that the club have dropped a bollock. However JMW makes a perfectly valid point. We needed a forward who basically was happy not to play in the CL, but have CL quality, and be available at a price which wasn't prohibitive with regards FFP. It really isn't such a surprise that in that circumstance the club have chosen not to buy anyone and pin their hopes at least until January on us not suffering a horrendous injury crisis.

This is even before you take into consideration the idea which is perfectly legitimate, that the club in fact always intended to sell Negredo and never had any intention of replacing him this summer. Again something which is a perfectly acceptable point of view - not least because it's what has actually happened.

I have no issue with people thinking it is fine that we have lost a striker and not replaced him, I don't happen to agree but I understand that there are different opinions on it. What I do mind is this implication that there isn't a debate to be had because the people running the club ie Txiki can never be questioned and if you do question him then you must be a "flapper" or as someone bizarrely tried to suggest earlier someone who "had a nervous breakdown about Mancini being sacked", "think the Spaniards are clowns" and "haven't got a clue." I also take exception to it being a reasonable defence of every decision Txiki makes to say, "well who would you have bought." That is just a bullshit argument quite frankly particularly when it is backed up with the imaginary thoughts of Txiki, the notion that a world wide scouting network is of no use and that an update thread on here would be of any value when trying to source a replacement for Negredo or anyone else for that matter. And I say all that as someone who wanted Mancini sacked, would personally prefer us to play one up front (ironically as that would make the 3 striker situation a non issue) and has a great deal of faith in the Spaniards but just think they have made a mistake on this one and think they would have made an even bigger mistake over Nastasic given half the chance.

again, twisted.

 

[Lancet Fluke]

I have no issue with people thinking it is fine that we have lost a striker and not replaced him, I don't happen to agree but I understand that there are different opinions on it. What I do mind is this implication that there isn't a debate to be had because the people running the club ie Txiki can never be questioned and if you do question him then you must be a "flapper" or as someone bizarrely tried to suggest earlier someone who "had a nervous breakdown about Mancini being sacked", "think the Spaniards are clowns" and "haven't got a clue."

To be honest you do sound like a bit of a flapper. I'm not having a go at you either just being honest about my opinion. Of course Begiristain can be questioned, him, Ferran, Khaldoon, they'll all make mistakes from time to time.

However right now the point is clear, we have a CL squad and financial restriction for the summer. On that basis if we missed out on Falcao and decided not to sign anyone else I don't think it automatically warrants a forum full of flapping with people making the asinine comments they have about Txiki (again not aimed at you). Someone in a thread in the transfer forum called him a prat. I've read him and Ferran are Spanish chancers. Seems a little excessive considering the job they've done in the last 12 months at the club in cleaning up other people's shit and moving the club forward.

Anyway I think we're going round in circles mate. I'm happy to agree to disagree. We're both Blues and we just want what's best for the club!

Define flapper or explain at least why you think I am flapping? Strikes me that expressing any concern over anything City equals flapping or panicking to people like you. Mind you I'd always rather be described as a flapper than a happy clapper. As I said, personally I prefer us to play one up front so I am certainly not panicking, I'm just old fashioned and think that if the manager decides to change his formation then it should be because he has decided that it is the correct decision tactically. Anyway, hopefully this kid will get his work permit and he is up to the challenge.

 

[BillyShears]

Define flapper or explain at least why you think I am flapping?

Someone who focuses solely on the negative and immediately starts drawing long term conclusions from a recently reached decision or occurrence would be my best definition of flapping on Bluemoon.

Some examples would include after early season dropped points last season "Pellegrini will never win the league playing 442", or after MdM early matches for us "we'll never win the league with him at centre half - what a complete fuck up by Txiki not signing another centre half last summer", or "Yaya can't play in a two man midfield" early last season. All those things were proven to be totally incorrect and perfect examples of flapping.

There's plenty of "happy clappers" about and to be honest I can't abide them either. Come live in the middle, it's a pretty good place to be! :)

 

[BobKowalski]

Define flapper or explain at least why you think I am flapping?

Someone who focuses solely on the negative and immediately starts drawing long term conclusions from a recently reached decision or occurrence would be my best definition of flapping on Bluemoon.

Some examples would include after early season dropped points last season "Pellegrini will never win the league playing 442", or after MdM early matches for us "we'll never win the league with him at centre half - what a complete fuck up by Txiki not signing another centre half last summer", or "Yaya can't play in a two man midfield" early last season. All those things were proven to be totally incorrect and perfect examples of flapping.

There's plenty of "happy clappers" about and to be honest I can't abide them either. Come live in the middle, it's a pretty good place to be! :)

Well this is rich "immediately starts drawing long term conclusions from a recently reached decision" as this is what everyone has done to a larger or lesser degree. For example we sold Negrado without immediate replacing him (a) because we intend promoting a 17 y/o without a work permit, b) intend to change formation to a (insert formation of choice) or (c) decided that Pellers didn't really mean he wanted 4 strikers when he said he wanted 4 strikers or (d) we never intended to replace Negrado because we -er- didn't so ergo it was always the plan.

In essence then we have negative flapping (bad) and positive flapping (good) although both draw long term conclusions and we then look for evidence to support our flapping of choice or flaccing. Interestingly one is not necessarily dependent on the other. We may have intended to use Nacho irrespective of selling Negrado but if we do use him after selling Negrado it looks like a plan when in fact it is entirely unrelated post hoc ergo propter hoc as it were.

I have just watched the 1-6 on BT Sports 2 so I am now in very good mood. I thought you might like to know that.

 

[BillyShears]

Define flapper or explain at least why you think I am flapping?

Someone who focuses solely on the negative and immediately starts drawing long term conclusions from a recently reached decision or occurrence would be my best definition of flapping on Bluemoon.

Some examples would include after early season dropped points last season "Pellegrini will never win the league playing 442", or after MdM early matches for us "we'll never win the league with him at centre half - what a complete fuck up by Txiki not signing another centre half last summer", or "Yaya can't play in a two man midfield" early last season. All those things were proven to be totally incorrect and perfect examples of flapping.

There's plenty of "happy clappers" about and to be honest I can't abide them either. Come live in the middle, it's a pretty good place to be! :)

Well this is rich "immediately starts drawing long term conclusions from a recently reached decision" as this is what everyone has done to a larger or lesser degree. For example we sold Negrado without immediate replacing him (a) because we intend promoting a 17 y/o without a work permit, b) intend to change formation to a (insert formation of choice) or (c) decided that Pellers didn't really mean he wanted 4 strikers when he said he wanted 4 strikers or (d) we never intended to replace Negrado because we -er- didn't so ergo it was always the plan.

In essence then we have negative flapping (bad) and positive flapping (good) although both draw long term conclusions and we then look for evidence to support our flapping of choice or flaccing. Interestingly one is not necessarily dependent on the other. We may have intended to use Nacho irrespective of selling Negrado but if we do use him after selling Negrado it looks like a plan when in fact it is entirely unrelated post hoc ergo propter hoc as it were.

I have just watched the 1-6 on BT Sports 2 so I am now in very good mood. I thought you might like to know that.

Now i'm convinced you like the sound of your own voice more than you do anything else! But please carry on as I've already shown you in simple enough terms why your flapping was clouding your judgment.

Here - I'll even repost the exchange so you can see clearly what a silly flapper you are.

You seem rather emotional about the whole thing. I'm fairly confident that a squad of world class players and a world class manager can alternate between playing with two out and out forwards and one out and out forward without totally flummoxing themselves.

Emotional? Because I advocate planning and structuring a squad to play a certain way and practising to play that way? Well yes I guess I am 'emotional'. Equally I may just be reacting to the quality of your argument which basically is 'you are fairly confident' we can muddle through. Well thanks for that insight. Would have been fucking lost without it.

With respect, I'm fairly confident that I didn't advocate "muddling through". I advocated that a group of world class players and a world class manager could fairly easily alternate between playing with 2 forwards and 1 forward without needing the much vaunted Louis Van Gaal 3 month bedding in period.

I'm also fairly certain that not just City, but most top clubs in the world and most top managers in the world, no matter how wedded to their preferred system, do train for the eventuality that they will have to play a different system. We did at various times last season play with 1 forward, even if it was for the last 30 minutes of matches. This will have been done with some training behind it because it was as effective as when we played with two forwards.

So I appreciate that your emotional, but once you calm down I'm sure you'll see what I'm saying makes perfect sense and there's nothing i particular to worry about.

 

[Ray78]

Yes we are.

 

[Sir peace frog]

Yes.

chips for tea ?

 

[OB1]

Dear me, it's not flapping to question how wise a move was that runs contrary to how the club have indicated that they want to operate.

Pellegrini has stated often enough that he wants two top class players for each position and now, in respect of strikers, that is not the case. Moreover, what has happened does not appear to be part of the plans. If we wanted to go down to three strikers and make more use of midfield players as the number 10, why didn't we keep Zuculini?

We didn't ship Negredo out because it gave us a problem with Champions League squad selection, so that red herring needs to go straight in the bin. It might be a mitigating factor but not part of some clever master plan. And it didn't have to be a striker that we left out of that squad.

I have no doubt that a calculated risk has been taken or that we would be unlucky not to cope with our squad. However, that does not change my view that a potentially avoidable risk has been taken and that the squad took a step backwards because something did not go to plan.