Discussion: Manuel Pellegrini 2015/16

[Mr Ed (The Stables)]

Please, can a someone (with a positive mindset) explain these points to me? I am not being sarcastic, I am just baffled by what I saw today, surely Pelle isn't that naive, what am I missing?

1. Navas for Bony when Nacho is on bench. turned us toothless with no one to aim at up front.
2. Yaya for Delph. Yaya was doing ok, maybe good. Why bring on a defensive midfielder for an attacking one when we need a goal? Why Delph when both Fernas are on?
3. Bring on Delph was a sure way to give villa crowd and players a purpose, why do it when we are behind?
4. 3 Defensive midfielders and no striker for large part of the match?
5. Sterling for Nacho? When we have 3 defensive midfielders on the pitch and we need a goal?
6. Why play defensively against the bottom team?

Seems we suffer the either extreme of of 442 or 460 with Pelle.

In that second half there was a period we went 4-4-2 with no strikers on the pitch now that is baffling.

 

[Champions2012!]

And if we had lost after taking him off

Yeah lets defend a 0-0 against bottom of the league shite

 

[blueinsa]

Roberto Di Matteo won the CL, so he's an Elite manager? Now who's talking bollocks.

You are....still.

Hate him by all means and want him sacked but just stop talking bollocks.

Fuck it, go on, name me 20 better managers?

 

[grim up north]

Yeah lets defend a 0-0 against bottom of the league shite

Didn't see us defending

 

[meeesh]

The Pelligrini supporters will call that a good point,the non supporters will be justified again,as for those who can't make their minds up will soon be in the latter category,pretty fucking woeful that,lose a striker and not to replace with a forward is stupid,not tactical,fucking stupid

We got away with it so many times in games last season,so the cocky Chilean thinks we can do it all the time,pathetic coaching really,no matter how blinkered you may be towards him.it will cost him his job in the summer,title or no title imo

 

[Champions2012!]

Didn't see us defending

No strikers and 3 DMs, does that sound like an attack minded setup to you??

 

[Mancini Manus Domini]

Honestly, not a fan of some of the decisions, but the decision to bring on Navas was the right one as he was our best player and should easily have won us the game with his excellent play. If De Bruyne or Sterling take any of their chances then we win comfortably. Bringing on Delph before Kelechi was my only real complaint as it was never going to get us a goal. We should have won that game and it's the players who are the reason we didn't. Glad he dragged off Yaya, hopefully he's finally sick of him and won't continue to bend over backwards to accommodate him, as it's clearly not worth it. I won't hold my breath though...

I don't have a problem Navas playing, I think he played well when he came on. I have a problem with Pellegrini thinking Sterling is a better option up front than Iheanacho. Even if he wants to try Sterling up there I'd give him until the 70th minute at the very most, especially when he wastes two glorious chances; you know it's not his day. Bringing on Iheanacho with 6 minutes to go is poor from Pellegrini.

 

[Neville Kneville]

I would have got Kelechi on earlier but I can see why he didn't, as Kelechi wasn't great in his last game.

No complaints about this lineup otherwise. The players were a bit lethargic which happens sometimes after Champs Lg games. But there were easily enough chances to win. Not Pellegrini's fault they weren't scored.

Glad we have a break to get others fit. DeBruyne still looks tired compared to earlier & a yard less sharp.

 

[BillyShears]

My issue with him is over the lack of trust towards youth players and today was yet another example of this. I think it's one of the pillars of his job and is his responsibility to secure the future of this football club, and his reluctance to play them is made ever the more frustrating when it was a winnable game.

Kelechi could have done no harm to had an hour here. He could always have switched it around in the second half if things weren't working.

Again my question is simple. You're on the bench as a striker. You see a lone striker go off injured. The manager picks a winger and changes to a bizarre and unprepared 4-6-0 type system instead of picking you.

Think he's happy there? Think he might have a thought about the other clubs just as successful as us who play their young players?

We've lost Lopes, fine. Not overly pleased but no issues. We've almost certainly lost Denayer which is a massive concern because he's one of the best young defenders in Europe. Already lost Rekik who was promising enough to get a run. Now Barker went from our bench to the endless loan cycle that our players end up in until we force them out the club in search of first team football, ruining their development over the longer term.

This patently is not good enough and it's yet another example of Pellegrini's refusal to invest in our club and instead mark his own card

I fully agree it was a bizarre decision today. But I don't agree with your wider narrative about Pellegrini and young players because I think most of the ones you're talking about aren't good enough right now. It's the same complaint Neville Neville had the other day and I don't agree with him either. The club know better than us, and even if they fuck it up occasionally and lose a talented player, in the greater scheme of things it shouldn't be something to wind people up as much as it does.

Today Pellegrini made a bad call but we didn't lose and on another day we win even without bringing Kelechi on due to the chances created.

 

[grim up north]

No strikers and 3 DMs, does that sound like an attack minded setup to you??

Who was doing all the attacking