Which is criminal on the biggest stage, you'd have thought the team would have been working on a system in training all week yet Pep decides at the 11th hour to change things to accommodate a player that's been in poor form all season, it's gonna take me all summer and some to get over thisI keep thinking if that early chance from Ederson's long ball had fallen to Foden on the left instead of Sterling he'd have taken it in his stride and buried it. Sterling delayed whilst trying to get it on to his right as usual. Not blaming Sterling for the defeat, however why did Pep suddenly trust him after months of leaving him out? Foden offers as much as Sterling does on the left and more. Why change the entire balance of the team to accomodate him?! I bet you the players were as mystified as the rest of us.
exactly, its not like we started with team of kids, some those players have 3 league titles and played in world cups etc, gundo has played in a champions league final but i expect he was surprised to say the least st where he was told to play, he was wasted, all his best work is done in the final third. i just can't get my head round itYou post some fantastic stuff, but this is a complete and utter load of drivel I’m afraid.
You say no one is qualified to question Pep’s starting lineup, but then considered yourself qualified to analyse what went wrong and the reasons behind it? Seems a rather contradictory position to take.
I completely disagree that the players were overwhelmed by the “occasion”. We were playing an average Chelsea team who finished 4th in a league we won comfortably, in front of about 16k fans.
All of the players on that pitch have played against better teams in bigger stadiums in front of far more fans.
A far more likely reason passes were going astray is the number of players playing in unfamiliar roles.
Foden has barely played as a number 8. Gundogan has barely played as a 6. Sterling has barely played a useful footballer for months.
That team has not played a single minute together all season. That’s a far more plausible explanation for passes going astray and players looking out of sorts than being “overwhelmed” playing Chelsea in front of 16k fans.
This is a theory and a belief but it's being stated as though it's stone cold, incontrovertible fact. That you put our strongest eleven on the field, there's only one way they play and, of course, we win. There are numerous weaknesses in the theory, the most notable of which is that Pep shares everybody's view on what the best 11 is and there's some disturbing evidence that he doesn't. What everybody ignores is that this strongest eleven hasn't played together very often at all, and even in the CL QF and SF he seemed uncertain as to whether Cancelao or Zinchenko suited best or if Rodri should play in place of Ferna. Then there was the question of whether we should play a false 9 or not. His experiment with Torres as number 9 worked well at Newcastle but the final trial at Brighton was ruined by the worst referee in England. Then there was the problem of Chelsea's well organised lines of 4/5/6/7 and where Vity really needed the numbers. So selection was by no means as simple and straightforward as many think and the idea that there is one "strongest line up" for all occasions and that Pep overthinks borders on nonsense. The second weakness in the argument is that City played badly because they were playing in a formation they didn't understand and weren't familiar with. I reject this because what City did badly were the basics of control and passing. I think the evidence is clear that the occasion overwhelmed City, not the system. It is not the Pep way to throw players in without preparation, unable to say how they were to deal with something as obvious as a through ball. Our back four simply never played and this chaos was reflected up front where the final ball "didn't come", more often than not because there was no-one to receive it. No number 9 in the team and passing too cumbersome to get a false 9 in there with any support. Ferna came om eventually and made little or no difference and your assertion that had he started City would have been more relaxed and allowed the others to play really does require a leap of faith to believe. We conceded one goal and never looked like scoring one ourselves. We were beaten, we were well beaten and on Saturday night it was hard to see what would have changed that. But if you want to believe it was all because "Pep fucked up again" you cling to your illusions.
Think you may be right Bayern, Real and Barca will all strengthen, Juve and Atletico will be stronger along with Chelsea, that was probably our best chance of winning it,So it's Monday and I'm still as baffled and pissed off as I was on Saturday, I think this was our moment to win it, I don't think the stars will align as well as they did again as far as the Champs League goes and that might be our one and only final for a a while.
You deserved it I think we're just baffled and annoyed at how Pep overthought it and we choked no one deserved more than 5/10 performance, as you say that could quite easily have been 3 or 4-0You only dominated with possession definitely not with chances
Well this is the CL final thread after all, where we were total shite.Jeez.
Most teams implode after relegation or losing a play off match; we do it after winning a league and cup double and a CL final.
Typical City eh.
i'm in therapy as we speak, the shrink prescribed a fridge full of ice cold beer and a tray of salt and pepper wings outside in the sun, perfickWell, whoever's right and whoever's wrong. I think one thing is incontrovertible.
The fact that this post-match thread has run to more than four hundred pages — something which I don't remember seeing before — would seem to indicate that people are in need of some sort of therapy. Which would seem to indicate that some sort of trauma has happened.
In a competition that doesn't count.
The perfomance reminded me of our early season form before Dinho had a word with everyoneThis is a theory and a belief but it's being stated as though it's stone cold, incontrovertible fact. That you put our strongest eleven on the field, there's only one way they play and, of course, we win. There are numerous weaknesses in the theory, the most notable of which is that Pep shares everybody's view on what the best 11 is and there's some disturbing evidence that he doesn't. What everybody ignores is that this strongest eleven hasn't played together very often at all, and even in the CL QF and SF he seemed uncertain as to whether Cancelao or Zinchenko suited best or if Rodri should play in place of Ferna. Then there was the question of whether we should play a false 9 or not. His experiment with Torres as number 9 worked well at Newcastle but the final trial at Brighton was ruined by the worst referee in England. Then there was the problem of Chelsea's well organised lines of 4/5/6/7 and where Vity really needed the numbers. So selection was by no means as simple and straightforward as many think and the idea that there is one "strongest line up" for all occasions and that Pep overthinks borders on nonsense. The second weakness in the argument is that City played badly because they were playing in a formation they didn't understand and weren't familiar with. I reject this because what City did badly were the basics of control and passing. I think the evidence is clear that the occasion overwhelmed City, not the system. It is not the Pep way to throw players in without preparation, unable to say how they were to deal with something as obvious as a through ball. Our back four simply never played and this chaos was reflected up front where the final ball "didn't come", more often than not because there was no-one to receive it. No number 9 in the team and passing too cumbersome to get a false 9 in there with any support. Ferna came om eventually and made little or no difference and your assertion that had he started City would have been more relaxed and allowed the others to play really does require a leap of faith to believe. We conceded one goal and never looked like scoring one ourselves. We were beaten, we were well beaten and on Saturday night it was hard to see what would have changed that. But if you want to believe it was all because "Pep fucked up again" you cling to your illusions.
I don't buy the theory that we were not at our usual standard. When your back line has been exposed for 35 mins then cracks will appear. But we didn't give our back line the protection it needed against a pressing team like Chelsea.I just watched it agian in the cold light of day with no commentary and not behind the sofa. Stones and Zin had a horrendous first 15 minutes. There were misplaced passes all over the pitch especially early on. If you've still a recording have a look at exactly 40 mins and the goal less than 2 minutes later. We get away with it the first time, and it's almost identical to how we conceded the 2nd to the scum and not that different to Chelsea's goal in the semi.
The fact is not enough were at their usual standard and I'm not convinced neither Ferny or Rodri playing was really the cause.
Will we not strengthen also and be the better for the experienceThink you may be right Bayern, Real and Barca will all strengthen, Juve and Atletico will be stronger along with Chelsea, that was probably our best chance of winning it,
It might hurt two of the three. Even the most deluded Spud; fan or player, doesn't think they'll win it.Losing 3 premier league titles in 4 years must hurt those same English clubs ;)
I purposely, properly, addressed that in my post as that is not relevant to this thread about a single game.Well that’s our manager and he has delivered 3 of the last 4 league titles. Do you think he tinkered with the team last December?
That's only assuming they score all of theres and we missed all of ours. 1-0 was prabably about right.You deserved it I think we're just baffled and annoyed at how Pep overthought it and we choked no one deserved more than 5/10 performance, as you say that could quite easily have been 3 or 4-0
wish i had a pound for every time i have read about "sterlings first touch " he has got the first touch, of a blacksmith. !Chelsea were more hungry from the start and we looked mentally shocked that we couldn’t get going in our usual style of play,Sterling’s first touch for the chance eluded him otherwise it could have been 1-0 up.We needed to play our game and the occasion seemed to freeze the players and manager more so.Wonder if Khaldoon will have the final say on team selection in a future final or spends the evening before chatting to Pep on reasons for his selections..guess not but the selection seemed to drain the confidence from the team and we lost our shape regularly.
The experience of playing in a final will be good going forward,it does take time to familiarise players to become accustomed to playing their best game and Pep may well need to try a different approach if and when we get there again.
spot on , team selection, for me was wrong, but MOSTof the city team on the night. bottled it/Some very good points and pep did get it wrong but he is not the only reason we lost the final. Far too much blame is placed at his feet. He can’t influence the game once the players cross the line. If peps mistake were so obvious why did none of the players stand up and be counted? Why did they not win more 50/50 tackles. Chelsea looked fitter and hungrier. It was men against boys and the players shrunk into their shells. The chavs did to us what we did to PSG.
time will come. Maybe not with pep though I dont think he has plan 2 or 3You deserved it I think we're just baffled and annoyed at how Pep overthought it and we choked no one deserved more than 5/10 performance, as you say that could quite easily have been 3 or 4-0