Discuss Pellegrini (Pt 2)

[BobKowalski]

And applies to 99.9% of posts on here. My opinion and the points I raised are not set in stone. Make a counter argument.

There are inherent vulnerabilities in any way of playing. Your other point, about Pellegrini's "in game management" is something which could be levelled at many of the history's great managers. You obviously prefer a different style of management, but it doesn't make Pellegrini's something which is going to stop us winning the league.

Well obviously. However there is a sliding scale of vulnerability and for me it is prudent to minimise any vulnerability your team may have whilst not sacrificing too much attacking threat. Its all about balance and currently we do not have the balance right. Any time the opposition plays a ball forward it seems to slice open our defence with a man running through. I am sure historically many great managers may have applied a different approach to the current crop of great managers but so what? The current crop of great managers are very proactive in their in game management and that is the environment Pellers is working in and the managers he is competing against and in my opinion its a major deficiency.

 

[OB1]

Just watched some of the after match stuff on BT sport and Warnock made a point that I liked about Pellegrini being happy to play 10 against 10. His point being that MP basically sacrificed Milner to nullify Baines, who was the best supply line in the league last season. Surely that couldn't be a bit of tactical pragmatism from our gung-ho manager!

 

[BobKowalski]

I was an early proponent of the empty midfield wont work argument. But I've dropped it based on the games I've since seen.

It's certainly a big change from mancini's City. We have 2 out and out forwards for the moment (no Tevez who plays much of the time in midfield), and Navas, an out and out winger.

The fear is that City's possession game, and Silva will be lost against teams that are strong in midfield, and I noticed that a lot of people adopted this argument after the Bayern game.

Yesterday there was no Navas, but Milner came in and played very wide.

Yet against an Everton team who played 5 in midfield we bossed the game. In fact if you look at our recent Premiership games we have dominated possession. There's a stat in the Oberver Sport this morning that has City 2nd in pass completion rate marginally behind Swansea, and ahead of Arsenal, Chelsea etc

We're creating a lot of chances. I feel we're creating more than last season, and taking more chances. But we're making a few individual errors at the back, down largely to injuries and lack of continuity

I'm enjoying watching City play at the moment. Negredo is a star who reminds me of Uwe Rosler only better. Hunger, talent and swagger.

It's going to be a good season.

Could not agree more on Negrado. Love the guy. Silva was immense. He was the extra man in midfield as there seemed to be two of him on the pitch. Milner wasn't far behind and it made a big difference just as it did on Wednesday when they came on.

I have no idea if we are creating more chances but we are taking them so that will do for me. And yes I thoroughly enjoyed yesterday as well.

 

[BobKowalski]

Just watched some of the after match stuff on BT sport and Warnock made a point that I liked about Pellegrini being happy to play 10 against 10. His point being that MP basically sacrificed Milner to nullify Baines, who was the best supply line in the league last season. Surely that couldn't be a bit of tactical pragmatism from our gung-ho manager!

Probably. I made the point a while back that whilst our formation/set up is fairly set in stone there was room for emphasis on a more defensive mind set and using Milner for Navas was the most obvious - just as England do when using Milner instead of Walcott.

That said I was impressed by Milner's attacking threat as anything else and seeing Silva and Milner working so well together and with Lescott back in defence it was almost like having old friends back. Kind of gave me a warm glow of familiarity.

 

[simon23]

Surely an ideal scenario would be a manager who can adopt various tactics and formations to suit the opposition?

I thought this was what we were getting with MP.

So far I havent really seen this and his reluctance/inability to react to what was plainly obvious during the Bayern game worried me slightly. Im not too bothered about the result vs munich but more by the manner (lack of tactical changes) by which we lost the game.

MP seems very rigid in his tactics so far and whereas we have played some great football at times there have been other games where we simply needed to change formation/personnel and results could have ben different (or at least performances improved).

All I want to see form him is that he has got the ability to look at a team either before a game and adapt (therefore in particular playing stronger teams ...ie top few in the prem...spurs, liverpool arsenal et al and then in the champs league that he can make the changes needed...or even during the course of a game.......it was plain to see during the hull game, bayern games we were being dominated in midfield...so why didnt he change things???? we got away with it with hull, we got hammered by bayern until he made the change (albeit far too late)

I am certainly not one of those calling for his head and Im a long way off that but I am concerned that we will have a trophyless season especially as the league looks a lot closer this season and utd certainly are weaker (and lets face it they are usually the main ones to beat).......if we play to our potential we should storm the league but at present we are playing well below that....

Is there interference from above I wonder? I hope not!

 

[Marvin]

Surely an ideal scenario would be a manager who can adopt various tactics and formations to suit the opposition?

I thought this was what we were getting with MP.

So far I havent really seen this and his reluctance/inability to react to what was plainly obvious during the Bayern game worried me slightly. Im not too bothered about the result vs munich but more by the manner (lack of tactical changes) by which we lost the game.

MP seems very rigid in his tactics so far and whereas we have played some great football at times there have been other games where we simply needed to change formation/personnel and results could have ben different (or at least performances improved).

All I want to see form him is that he has got the ability to look at a team either before a game and adapt (therefore in particular playing stronger teams ...ie top few in the prem...spurs, liverpool arsenal et al and then in the champs league that he can make the changes needed...or even during the course of a game.......it was plain to see during the hull game, bayern games we were being dominated in midfield...so why didnt he change things???? we got away with it with hull, we got hammered by bayern until he made the change (albeit far too late)

I am certainly not one of those calling for his head and Im a long way off that but I am concerned that we will have a trophyless season especially as the league looks a lot closer this season and utd certainly are weaker (and lets face it they are usually the main ones to beat).......if we play to our potential we should storm the league but at present we are playing well below that....

Is there interference from above I wonder? I hope not!

If you have a new manager, with a new style of play, it makes sense to stick with it for the time being.

Changing tack very other game, and it would extend the settling in period indefinitely

 

[cookster]

Surely an ideal scenario would be a manager who can adopt various tactics and formations to suit the opposition?

I thought this was what we were getting with MP.

So far I havent really seen this and his reluctance/inability to react to what was plainly obvious during the Bayern game worried me slightly. Im not too bothered about the result vs munich but more by the manner (lack of tactical changes) by which we lost the game.

MP seems very rigid in his tactics so far and whereas we have played some great football at times there have been other games where we simply needed to change formation/personnel and results could have ben different (or at least performances improved).

All I want to see form him is that he has got the ability to look at a team either before a game and adapt (therefore in particular playing stronger teams ...ie top few in the prem...spurs, liverpool arsenal et al and then in the champs league that he can make the changes needed...or even during the course of a game.......it was plain to see during the hull game, bayern games we were being dominated in midfield...so why didnt he change things???? we got away with it with hull, we got hammered by bayern until he made the change (albeit far too late)

I am certainly not one of those calling for his head and Im a long way off that but I am concerned that we will have a trophyless season especially as the league looks a lot closer this season and utd certainly are weaker (and lets face it they are usually the main ones to beat).......if we play to our potential we should storm the league but at present we are playing well below that....

Is there interference from above I wonder? I hope not!

If you have a new manager, with a new style of play, it makes sense to stick with it for the time being.

Changing tack very other game, and it would extend the settling in period indefinitely

I think we're taking about subtle changes here not a complete overhaul. 70 minutes in against Bayern and he looked like a complete novice, let's hope it was as quoted "a bad day at the office"

 

[simon23]

Surely an ideal scenario would be a manager who can adopt various tactics and formations to suit the opposition?

I thought this was what we were getting with MP.

So far I havent really seen this and his reluctance/inability to react to what was plainly obvious during the Bayern game worried me slightly. Im not too bothered about the result vs munich but more by the manner (lack of tactical changes) by which we lost the game.

MP seems very rigid in his tactics so far and whereas we have played some great football at times there have been other games where we simply needed to change formation/personnel and results could have ben different (or at least performances improved).

All I want to see form him is that he has got the ability to look at a team either before a game and adapt (therefore in particular playing stronger teams ...ie top few in the prem...spurs, liverpool arsenal et al and then in the champs league that he can make the changes needed...or even during the course of a game.......it was plain to see during the hull game, bayern games we were being dominated in midfield...so why didnt he change things???? we got away with it with hull, we got hammered by bayern until he made the change (albeit far too late)

I am certainly not one of those calling for his head and Im a long way off that but I am concerned that we will have a trophyless season especially as the league looks a lot closer this season and utd certainly are weaker (and lets face it they are usually the main ones to beat).......if we play to our potential we should storm the league but at present we are playing well below that....

Is there interference from above I wonder? I hope not!

If you have a new manager, with a new style of play, it makes sense to stick with it for the time being.

Changing tack very other game, and it would extend the settling in period indefinitely

yeah thats a very very good point and one Id not considered...but surely for instance during the bayern game where we are getting overrun in midfield and in other games simply reverting to a formation that the players hve played before wouldnt be too much of a stretch for them?...especially at half time this could have been done where he has got 15 minutes to sort it out...and you woud hope that after 3-4 months in charge that they do work on alternate systems in training?????

 

[BobKowalski]

Surely an ideal scenario would be a manager who can adopt various tactics and formations to suit the opposition?

I thought this was what we were getting with MP.

....

Not really. Ferran has stated that they want a recognisable style of play and they do not want a manager changing formations/tactics from game to game and certainly not during the game. In that sense Pellers is their ideal manager and no doubt part of his brief is to create that style of play. How much interference there is I don't honestly know but I suspect its no more than 'here is the brief and you have to work within that brief'.

At least we won't have to go through all that moaning about 'the manager has no plan B' as the club policy is 'we have no interest in plan B'.

How this plays out is going to be intriguing to say the least.

 

[samharris]

I thought we did ok at home against an average PL team.

In what way average?? the prem has the best diversity of good teams in Europe,thats why the tv rights are astronomical..

If you want easy games then you need to head north of the border Wayne..

They are pretty average in terms of the premier league. It's unlikely they will be fighting relegation or challenging for a CL spot and will probably be midtable or thereabouts, therefore average.

It was a good win and yes you have to give the team and management credit but my reply was to someone who was going so far over the top with his praise it could have been written by a rag taking the piss.

Fuckinell Wayne..If Everton are average what the fook are Villa and Cardiff??