Discuss Pellegrini (Pt 4)

[OB1]

None away. In fact we regressed at Sunderland.

Can you elaborate on how Sunderland was a regression ? Unless I'm mistaken we had more of the ball, more shots on and off target, and generally dominated them. They scored from the only real opportunity they created, which was actually only an opportunity because the ref didn't blow for a blatant foul on Milner. I'm not even taking into account the woeful challenge on Garcia which should've been a red card.

I'm finding it hard to see how it was a regressive performance.

I assume because in previous away games we scored goals and took the lead on two occasions whereas at Sunderland we barely created a worthwhile chance let alone score. Hence regression.

But we conceded less goals than the two previous away games and the one goal conceded should not have stood = progression.

It's easy to be selective!

 

[blueinsa]

None away. In fact we regressed at Sunderland.

Can you elaborate on how Sunderland was a regression ? Unless I'm mistaken we had more of the ball, more shots on and off target, and generally dominated them. They scored from the only real opportunity they created, which was actually only an opportunity because the ref didn't blow for a blatant foul on Milner. I'm not even taking into account the woeful challenge on Garcia which should've been a red card.

I'm finding it hard to see how it was a regressive performance.

I assume because in previous away games we scored goals and took the lead on two occasions whereas at Sunderland we barely created a worthwhile chance let alone score. Hence regression.

By that logic we regress if we only win 5-0 in our next game?

With the greatest respect, ridiculous.

Sunderland was one of those days when fuck all goes your way. I will agree it was his poorest day as manager and i didn't agree with his selection policy but shit ref and bad luck aside, we didn't deserve to lose and 99 times out of 100 we piss the game.

 

[Cobwebcat]

Pelle would help himself and the team by not playing Garcia so much away from home.

 

[adrianr]

Can you elaborate on how Sunderland was a regression ? Unless I'm mistaken we had more of the ball, more shots on and off target, and generally dominated them. They scored from the only real opportunity they created, which was actually only an opportunity because the ref didn't blow for a blatant foul on Milner. I'm not even taking into account the woeful challenge on Garcia which should've been a red card.

I'm finding it hard to see how it was a regressive performance.

I assume because in previous away games we scored goals and took the lead on two occasions whereas at Sunderland we barely created a worthwhile chance let alone score. Hence regression.

By that logic we regress if we only win 5-0 in our next game?

With the greatest respect, ridiculous.

Sunderland was one of those days when fuck all goes your way. I will agree it was his poorest day as manager and i didn't agree with his selection policy but shit ref and bad luck aside, we didn't deserve to lose and 99 times out of 100 we piss the game.

On the contrary, at the Stadium of Light I'm fairly sure Sunderland could field a paraplegic 11 and we'd still be done out of a result.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Yep - I've seen improvement at home.
None away. In fact we regressed at Sunderland.

I'd disagree with that. They should have been down to 10 men and their goal was as the result of a foul. But even leaving that aside, we absolutely dominated that game after the goal. The BBC report talks about us being thwarted by a well-organised defence and exerting incessant pressure. The number of times bodies blocked goal-bound shots was into double figures.

Colin, your improvement was my confirmation of no improvement. As the Duke of Wellington once said: "They came on in the same old way and we defeated them in the same old way."

We really need to mix things up more. This was my problem with Mancini and it has not been addressed by Pellegrini away from home either.
- Better corners and set piece delivery from the flanks is required. Clearing the first man would be a start.
- More shots required from the edge of the box and further out.
- Run at the opposition more. Drive into the penalty area.
Continual play across the front of the opposition does not a parked bas move.

I saw against Spurs the way forward away from home: The brutal quick counter attack. we did it for half a season (2011-12 till Christmas) under Mancini then withdrew into our shells till the last 7 games. Against Spurs it was back with a vengence. We need to do this away from home. as the primary mode of attack. It they attack us we need to be absolutely brutal on the counter attack. It is the way Utd have won away from home in the Prem for the last 4 or 5 seasons - often when under the cosh. We need to learn the lesson.

 

[BobKowalski]

Can you elaborate on how Sunderland was a regression ? Unless I'm mistaken we had more of the ball, more shots on and off target, and generally dominated them. They scored from the only real opportunity they created, which was actually only an opportunity because the ref didn't blow for a blatant foul on Milner. I'm not even taking into account the woeful challenge on Garcia which should've been a red card.

I'm finding it hard to see how it was a regressive performance.

I assume because in previous away games we scored goals and took the lead on two occasions whereas at Sunderland we barely created a worthwhile chance let alone score. Hence regression.

By that logic we regress if we only win 5-0 in our next game?

With the greatest respect, ridiculous.

Sunderland was one of those days when fuck all goes your way. I will agree it was his poorest day as manager and i didn't agree with his selection policy but shit ref and bad luck aside, we didn't deserve to lose and 99 times out of 100 we piss the game.

My you guys are sensitive today...something happen that I miss?

We played poorly at Sunderland, created little in the way of worthwhile chances and lost. At least that was the game I watched. We can pretend it was a 90 minute siege thwarted by bad refs and bad luck if it makes you feel better. Knock yourself out - I'm in a playful mood.

 

[dave_blue12]

A quick google search ascertains that the best defence generally does not win the PL

http://talksport.com/magazine/featu...y-attack-more-likely-win-title-defence-186879

Couldn't be arsed to find anything more up to date but the point stands

 

[hgblue]

Yep - I've seen improvement at home.
None away. In fact we regressed at Sunderland.

I'd disagree with that. They should have been down to 10 men and their goal was as the result of a foul. But even leaving that aside, we absolutely dominated that game after the goal. The BBC report talks about us being thwarted by a well-organised defence and exerting incessant pressure. The number of times bodies blocked goal-bound shots was into double figures.

Of course we did. It was like the bloody Alamo. We were far from our best because the creative players didn't take responsibility in the absence of Silva and Fernadino , but we still completely dominated that game. It was a freak result.

I thought Cardiff was the freak result? Or was it Villa? Now it's Sunderland. Stop changing the freak result, it's very confusing ;).

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Pelle would help himself and the team by not playing Garcia so much away from home.

Whilst i do not rate Garcia, particularly at centre half (where we will certainly never see him again), I understand why Pellegrini picks him as cover. He clearly wants "total football" from the team. He wants us to keep possession and get the ball forward quickly, so our matchwinners can open defences. One of the ways he has us doing this is quick, close, tight passing to players, even if they are under pressure.

He clearly picks players who can recieve the ball in these tight spaces and who can release accurately into these tight spaces. It's the reason why players like Milner, Lescott and Dzeko have gone down the pecking order. They can't do it, even though they have other strengths.

I'm not blindly defending this decision, because I think it's bitten him in the arse more often than not where Garcia is concerned. But I believe that is why he does it and I understand it.

 

[Deleted member 58678]

None away. In fact we regressed at Sunderland.

Can you elaborate on how Sunderland was a regression ? Unless I'm mistaken we had more of the ball, more shots on and off target, and generally dominated them. They scored from the only real opportunity they created, which was actually only an opportunity because the ref didn't blow for a blatant foul on Milner. I'm not even taking into account the woeful challenge on Garcia which should've been a red card.

I'm finding it hard to see how it was a regressive performance.

The first half at Sunderland was on a par with Stoke away for our worst performance of the season.

Apart from a Kolarov shot, another shot by someone(?) and the Kun header we didn't even get near their goal again in that half. We were slow out of the traps, our pressing was poor, we allowed their pressing to overawe us and it was 3 or 4 passes max and we'd get tackled or pass it to them, and Pellegrini's team selection was wrong - we had Nastasic, Kompany, Fernandinho and Silva out yet he brings in our two second choice fullbacks and plays two immobile and slow off the mark players as just a two in central midfield in Yaya and Garcia. We had no first choice players in our back six (GK, back 4, DM) and two of those were by choice. Kolarov was okay but Richards and Garcia did not justify their selection whatsoever, they were woeful and hadn't done anything in any other game to justify their selection. Needless to say we struggled to do anything and it was truly shocking to watch.

He realised that it needed changing (but i could have told you what our problems were going to be from when i saw MCFC's Twitter page with the team line-up one hour before kick off) and in the second half he put Milner in the middle of midfield and brought Navas on to create some different problems out wide. Immediately we had more work rate and determination and a bit more pace in centre-mid, and more ideas and pace out wide. We still didn't create one proper chance that you'd think "oh what a chance that was" or "what a save that was" or "how did he miss that"...it was better but it was just possession, cross to nobody, possession, shot blocked that shouldn't have been taken, possession, shot blocked, possession, shot wide, ball back, possession, cross to nobody, possession... we didn't draw Sunderland out of the last third - like we did United and Spurs - anywhere near enough, and this was with an improvement from the first half.

It was an all-round poor performance no matter what the stats might make people think about the game. Not as bad as Stoke on the whole but poor. Worse than both West Ham and Chelsea, so it was certainly a backwards step.