Discuss Pellegrini (Pt 3)

[BobKowalski]

You mean have I amended my views based on Pellers embracing the dark side namely pragmatism in the last 2 Pl matches? Well of course I have. If I posit a theory based on what I am seeing and then see a change in what I am seeing I am more than happy to change my view. It does beg the question why it took him so long or what possessed him in the Bayern match but better late than never. Equally it doesn't change the fact that Ferran and Txiki are determined to implement a City style of play and that our default position will be what we have seen most of the season especially as a blind man can see that our squad is structured on this basis. That Pellers has now shifted his stance to accommodate a more conservative, ie sensible, formation for big away matches is one I agree with.

Its called discussion, debate and discourse. Views are formulated and then reviewed and/or revised based on further events. Its a fairly adult concept and one you seem to struggle with. Name calling you have down pat so its not all bad news.

Where you honestly surprised that Pellegrini is prepared to be more pragmatic when he thinks it is warranted?

No. I was more surprised that he wasn't pragmatic earlier. Or to be accurate against Bayern. That's when I started speculating if there was something deeper than just Pellers getting it totally wrong ie that he was working under a remit to develop a discernible style of play and not tinker too much on a match by match basis or even during the match as until the West Ham match his in game management had been poor.

At West Ham he made positive changes, stiffened the midfield and got control of the match and we then hit them on the counter. It was by far his best match and I said so in the post match thread. His line up against Chelsea was also a positive step and I had no issue there. I may have preferred Milner to Navas as sub but thats about it.

Obviously my speculation as evidenced by the last two PL matches was wide of the mark. Funnily enough I was attempting to explain Pellers selection policy other than just brand him an idiot and was partly based on Ferran's comments about establishing a City style or philosophy. It made sense to me that if you are trying to bed in a City style you don't change it from match to match and take any short term reverses as part of the leaning process.

Anyway its all a bit moot as pragmatism has made an appearance and I can't fault Pellers for that. However to be contrary I do like the idea of a City philosophy and would be sympathetic to any manager charged with making it happen. Overseeing that and keeping the team on course for a title push would be a tough gig.

Where I lack sympathy is over our defensive frailties which have been apparent since pre season. Irrespective of whether we are implementing a new style or not it is unacceptable to have almost every match where a punt forward catches you out. Nor is it acceptable to concede the quality of chances that we are doing. Both Chelsea's goals were into an empty net with the first from 1 yard out. We will not win the title when our defence is reduced to a quivering wreck at the sight of a hopeful punt upfield.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

You mean have I amended my views based on Pellers embracing the dark side namely pragmatism in the last 2 Pl matches? Well of course I have. If I posit a theory based on what I am seeing and then see a change in what I am seeing I am more than happy to change my view. It does beg the question why it took him so long or what possessed him in the Bayern match but better late than never. Equally it doesn't change the fact that Ferran and Txiki are determined to implement a City style of play and that our default position will be what we have seen most of the season especially as a blind man can see that our squad is structured on this basis. That Pellers has now shifted his stance to accommodate a more conservative, ie sensible, formation for big away matches is one I agree with.

Its called discussion, debate and discourse. Views are formulated and then reviewed and/or revised based on further events. Its a fairly adult concept and one you seem to struggle with. Name calling you have down pat so its not all bad news.

Where you honestly surprised that Pellegrini is prepared to be more pragmatic when he thinks it is warranted?

No. I was more surprised that he wasn't pragmatic earlier. Or to be accurate against Bayern. That's when I started speculating if there was something deeper than just Pellers getting it totally wrong ie that he was working under a remit to develop a discernible style of play and not tinker too much on a match by match basis or even during the match as until the West Ham match his in game management had been poor.

At West Ham he made positive changes, stiffened the midfield and got control of the match and we then hit them on the counter. It was by far his best match and I said so in the post match thread. His line up against Chelsea was also a positive step and I had no issue there. I may have preferred Milner to Navas as sub but thats about it.

Obviously my speculation as evidenced by the last two PL matches was wide of the mark. Funnily enough I was attempting to explain Pellers selection policy other than just brand him an idiot and was partly based on Ferran's comments about establishing a City style or philosophy. It made sense to me that if you are trying to bed in a City style you don't change it from match to match and take any short term reverses as part of the leaning process.

Anyway its all a bit moot as pragmatism has made an appearance and I can't fault Pellers for that. However to be contrary I do like the idea of a City philosophy and would be sympathetic to any manager charged with making it happen. Overseeing that and keeping the team on course for a title push would be a tough gig.

Where I lack sympathy is over our defensive frailties which have been apparent since pre season. Irrespective of whether we are implementing a new style or not it is unacceptable to have almost every match where a punt forward catches you out. Nor is it acceptable to concede the quality of chances that we are doing. Both Chelsea's goals were into an empty net with the first from 1 yard out. We will not win the title when our defence is reduced to a quivering wreck at the sight of a hopeful punt upfield.

What you seem unable to comprehend, and I told you this last week, is that having a City "style of play" is not the same as having a city formation. The concept of a manager being forced to play in one single formation is, and was last week when you touted it, a ridiculous concept to anyone with more than a passing interest in the sport of football.

And with regard to your comments about our defensive errors, its hardly an insight worthy of Rinus Michels to declare that we need to cut them out.

 

[sir baconface]

On the other hand, I appreciate that MP was eager not to be drawn into a confrontation with Mourinho and he was quite right to avoid a handshake after that display of cheap triumphalism when ' The Classless One' went into the crowd behind the City bench.

I can't blame MP for his answers in the presser but , though his English is surprisingly good for a guy who's never worked over here till now, he's not fluent as mourinho is. when he was asked about his refusal to shake hands, he didn't have the words to point out exactly why he'd refused.this allowed the media to paint him as a sensitive guy who'd been upset because they'd had previous in Spain.Mourinho was allowed to come up smelling of roses by Sly Sports and Talkshite whereas it's Manuel Pellegrini who is a man of principle who chose to distance himself from Mourinho's lowdown antics.

The only reason you refuse to shake hands with someone is because you think they are a ****.

There's no need to be draw into an explanation, which only throws meat to the press hounds. I believe this was the reason rather than any lack of English.

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

I see the Cabal are wanking each other off tonight....

How nice

 

[sir baconface]

More hearsay and speculation.

Neither heresy nor speculation anymore mate. The papers were full of how much Mancini was loathed after he was sacked. Only a fool would currently try and argue that there was no problem between him and the players last season.

I make my judgements based on what I see on the pitch. I was reliably informed Jo Harts form would improve now Manicni has left on this forum. How is that working out?

Well, all I can say is that whilst Joe's form has continued to be poor, players like Nasri and Kolarov are playing out of their skins, Yaya, Aguero and Silva are showing form they've not shown since 2011, and generally we look for the first time in well over a year like a team going in the right direction and pulling in the same direction.

Sergio Aguero said there was no problem, I am happy with that.

As I say above, whether you choose to accept the facts or not, the facts are Mancini's relationship with his squad of players killed his chances of keeping his job last summer. Not our forwards not scoring which you said was the "only" problem we had last season.

1. Since when has the press been the yardstick for unadulterated comment on City?
2. Opinion, not facts.

You are a good poster, BS, but isn't it time to put your obsessive dislike for Mancini aside?

-- Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:26 pm --

Mancini's gone. Sacked. Moved on. Never coming back. Live with it. Accept it. Then let it go. You will feel better for it.

Can we look forward to you following your own advice?

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I see the Cabal are wanking each other off tonight....

How nice

Quick, bob, one's turned up at last...say something sarky and pithy, maybe about how amused you are.

Chuck in 'holistic' maybe. Always worth a giggle ;-)

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

I see the Cabal are wanking each other off tonight....

How nice

Quick, bob, one's turned up at last...say something sarky and pithy, maybe about how amused you are.

Chuck in 'holistic' maybe. Always worth a giggle ;-)

Evening pal....:-)

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

I assume his preferred CB partnership is Kompany and Nastasic and I think these two have only managed two full games this season

Well, let’s see if he starts playing Kompany and Demichelis before assuming too much.

Last season we were heavily dependent on Vinny, and this gives support to your view. BUT, after a display against United which, rightly had us all drooling, he and Nastasic conspired with Joe Hart to commit such a basic series of blunders which cost us the match. I do not think that injuries, even to such key personnel are the complete answer to our problems.

Do you think the system is to blame for basic blunders? As I keep saying, the system overall means we are allowing fewer shots at goal than any other team. Blunders like the ones that led to the final goals against Villa and Chelsea had nothing to do with a poor system or poor management: they were player error.

the left side CB has not been a problem, but the right side, with both Vinnie and Dimichaelis out, has. Pellegrini's answer has been Javi Garcia, not a CB at all, but a DM. This to my mind was a grave mistake

Because that was to blame for which defeats?

and is coupled with his decision to "rotate" the fullbacks at times.

Really not sure how much the rotation of the fullbacks has cost us; although there is a case for saying that Clichy has been picked too much.
The full backs in Pellegrini’s system have to do an awful lot of work and rotating them is part of good husbandry of the playing resources. Also, you have the Catch-22 situation that if you do not give everyone their turn, they can’t get used to playing the new system for real.

Both Kompany and Dimichaelis are right sided players and it seems Pellegrini prefers a right left combination as many managers do. This appears to be the reason he has played Garcia in the absence of both Kompany and Dimichaelis. Regarding the blunders, it is true that the players are the ones on the pitch and they make the mistakes, but I don't think that in these cases it absolves Pellegrini of responsibility. I say "these cases" because our defenders - all of them - are making the same mistakes depressingly regularly. Anything in the air beyond our backline seems to cause problems. Players seem uncertain as to whether they should keep the line and play for offside or drop back and play the ball. The result is some do one thing and some do the other. Against Everton Lescott played for offside while Vinnie hung back and played Lukaku onside. Against Moscow Garcia went for the header, Nastasic kept the line but Zabaleta hung back but didn't come across to cover, so Tosic was onside, Nastasic out of the game and City went one down. Against Villa Vinnie kept the line, Nastasic hung back, so that when Vinnie didn't win the ball Weimann was onside and clear. Joe made it easier for him by his rash charge. These are organisational problems. City were not picked apart by imaginative attacking play: they were done by the same kind of pass. And on Sunday we saw the back line paralysd by uncertainty of how to deal with a cross played over them. The only response for much of the game was to appeal for offside! On Sunday this included a player who is no stranger to Pellegrini's methods - but the others seem to be as uncertain as ever. If Pellegrini is being let down by the players, he's being let down by some bloody good ones and it's because they don't have a clue as to what he wants them to do. It's as bad as playing three at the back last season. I don't think Pellegrini is doing enough on the training ground, and fans are masking real problems by droning on about how it'll be all right when these idiot players stop making blunders. They won't stop until the manager really gets it through to them. As to your point about Garcia and defeats, I do not believe that a defeat can be down to one single player and I certainly wouldn't blame Garcia for any defeat. He was asked to play out of position and did his best. He's one of a back four, but a back four which doesn't function as a unit and so he's as much a contributor to the confusion - but no more so - as the other three. At Cardiff, for instance, all five contributed to the debacle. But Pellegrini is as well.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I see the Cabal are wanking each other off tonight....

How nice

Quick, bob, one's turned up at last...say something sarky and pithy, maybe about how amused you are.

Chuck in 'holistic' maybe. Always worth a giggle ;-)

Evening pal....:-)

Welcome aboard fella. Like old times on here ;-)

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

Quick, bob, one's turned up at last...say something sarky and pithy, maybe about how amused you are.

Chuck in 'holistic' maybe. Always worth a giggle ;-)

Evening pal....:-)

Welcome aboard fella. Like old times on here ;-)

you know something mate,I have tried hard to steer clear of this thread in recent weeks.Just dipping in and out here and there.
I am still undecided about Pellegrini I am not going to lie but I was very impressed with how we set up on Sunday.
I am more confident than ever that in 4-5 weeks the table will look a whole lot different especially with the next few weeks fixtures coming up.