Dribble
Well-Known Member
No worries, anytime mate. :-)
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Discussion: Manuel Pellegrini 2015/16
- Thread starter Danamy
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
it'd be close to a 100 posts for you to muster that many words. Haha!Thanks for the essay
grim up north
Well-Known Member
it'd be close to a 100 posts for you to muster that many words. Haha!
This is very true I'm just a lazy sarcy bastard
Youre a credit to all lazy sarcy bastards out there.This is very true I'm just a lazy sarcy bastard
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
Wahh wahh the nasty men are picking on me and being abusive and all I'm doing is giving my opinion......
Imagine that, slagging off the manager of Manchester City on a site for Manchester City fans and getting it in the neck.
Your fucking opinion stinks and trust me, I would have no issue in telling you that in person. No threats, just the way it is but something tells me you lot wouldn't say half the Fucking things about Pellergrini to other blues in a boozer than what you do on here.
You know, from behind the safety of the keyboard and all that.
Imagine that, slagging off the manager of Manchester City on a site for Manchester City fans and getting it in the neck.
Your fucking opinion stinks and trust me, I would have no issue in telling you that in person. No threats, just the way it is but something tells me you lot wouldn't say half the Fucking things about Pellergrini to other blues in a boozer than what you do on here.
You know, from behind the safety of the keyboard and all that.
nellyonthewing
Well-Known Member
TBH mate, whether you agree or disagree with someone's viewpoint I fully agree with The blue phantom that there's no need to abuse people just because you disagree with them.
I have one golden rule in life which I've allowed to evolve since joining this board many years ago. The first rule is don't say anything about a person you wouldn't say to their face, and the evolved one for Bluemoon is don't reply to anyone in a manner I wouldn't do if sat across a table from them. That's why I ignore the shit-house keyboard hardmen I occasionally have the misfortune to come across on the internet because trust me, in real life they're usually the first people who'd start dialing 999 at the first sign of someone getting pissed off with their rude and arrogant attitudes.
It's so easy to be rude and act tough on the internet from the relative safety of being behind one's keyboard and having miles of fibreoptic cables between the abuser and the abused innit, so if you find your self on the receiving end, just ignore them mate.
As for the flappers, even they have a right to flap don't they? Isn't that what a fans forum is for after all? :-)
Very true Dribble. Problem is you may probably find you are arguing with a spotty 11 year old whose sat in his bedroom on a semen stained chair venting at all and sundry & is threatening to maim you because you have a different view from them.
This Forum does have some sages and it has some loons.It has some people who take 'opinionated' to a new level. I now find its best to have a quick say then clear off. that's me logging off now...
According to MP, 'apparently' Kelechi isn't a striker as he plays behind the striker and that's why Navas was brought on.........
So that must mean KDB & Sterling are closer to being strikers than Kelechi then.
And on another note, if Kelechi isn't a striker who's bright idea was it to go into a season with just 2 strikers, one of which is injury prone and the other who was recovering from malaria
What MP actually said (when asked about Kelechi was:
“It could be another option, but I think that Jesus was important also to play for the right wing ...
Maybe if we scored the goal we are talking about it being the correct option, but after that you never know if Kelechi can change the game. But he’s not a striker. Normally he plays behind the striker.”
From this, it is clear MP's primary calculus was what Navas would bring to the game (tempo, width, workrate). And he was 100% right on that. He also agrees Kelechi was an option and then adds as an after-thought that he doesn't feel his best role was leading the line.
Funny thing is how many people here have been advocating playing Sterling upfront and labelling KDB as our most deadly finisher.
Never let consistency get in the way, right?
Dribble
Well-Known Member
What MP actually said (when asked about Kelechi was:
“It could be another option, but I think that Jesus was important also to play for the right wing ...
Maybe if we scored the goal we are talking about it being the correct option, but after that you never know if Kelechi can change the game. But he’s not a striker. Normally he plays behind the striker.”
From this, it is clear MP's primary calculus was what Navas would bring to the game (tempo, width, workrate). And he was 100% right on that. He also agrees Kelechi was an option and then adds as an after-thought that he doesn't feel his best role was leading the line.
Funny thing is how many people here have been advocating playing Sterling upfront and labelling KDB as our most deadly finisher.
Never let consistency get in the way, right?
Maybe if we scored the goal we are talking about it being the correct option, but after that you never know if Kelechi can change the game. But he’s not a striker. Normally he plays behind the striker.”
Which just in case you missed it was the excerpt from the quote I used. For the avoidance of doubt I've also stated that I thought Navas should have started and that we should have gone with the same line-up and formation as we did against Sevilla and that in my humble opinion Kelechi is more of a striker than anyone else we had available.
From this, it is clear MP's primary calculus was what Navas would bring to the game (tempo, width, workrate). And he was 100% right on that.
Which is why I said we should have started with Navas in the first place.
As you were.........
Which just in case you missed it was the excerpt from the quote I used. For the avoidance of doubt I've also stated that I thought Navas should have started and that we should have gone with the same line-up and formation as we did against Sevilla and that in my humble opinion Kelechi is more of a striker than anyone else we had available.
Which is why I said we should have started with Navas in the first place.
As you were.........
You dont appear to have read my post. There is no need for bolded capitals twice as I already referred to MP's comment about Kelechi, which was the final thing he said. The first thing he said was we needed Navas on the right wing; i.e. that was his primary driver, not any lack of trust in Kelechi.
As for starting with Navas, that's a completely different discussion. My guess is MP was looking for the most potent attacking combination: (a) wanted to bring back KDB for obvious reasons; and (b) wanted to play a 3 man CM to allow Fernandinho to play a more offensive role which he did absolutely devastatingly in Sevilla. Since Villa would have had a problem with our playing 12 men, someone had to go to the bench. But unlike Sevilla, we started this game at a far slower tempo. Maybe fatigue (none of the sides who played away in Europe played well this weekend). So the obvious remedy to that was to bring on Navas when Bony exited - which is what he did.
Now you can disagree with his decisions, but merely stating that "Kelechi is a striker" is not very persuasive.
Dribble
Well-Known Member
In my first post I stated what Pellegrini said. In you initial response you quoted the full quote INCLUDING the excerpt I took out to express my surprise that:You dont appear to have read my post. There is no need for bolded capitals twice as I already referred to MP's comment about Kelechi, which was the final thing he said. The first thing he said was we needed Navas on the right wing; i.e. that was his primary driver, not any lack of trust in Kelechi.
As for starting with Navas, that's a completely different discussion. My guess is MP was looking for the most potent attacking combination: (a) wanted to bring back KDB for obvious reasons; and (b) wanted to play a 3 man CM to allow Fernandinho to play a more offensive role which he did absolutely devastatingly in Sevilla. Since Villa would have had a problem with our playing 12 men, someone had to go to the bench. But unlike Sevilla, we started this game at a far slower tempo. Maybe fatigue (none of the sides who played away in Europe played well this weekend). So the obvious remedy to that was to bring on Navas when Bony exited - which is what he did.
Now you can disagree with his decisions, but merely stating that "Kelechi is a striker" is not very persuasive.
1. MP doesn't consider Kelechi as a main striker.
2. MP considers Sterling and KDB as more competent striking options.
It's all about opinions, but in mine KDB should have been on the bench as we needed the industry and pace of Navas & Sterling. So if it was up to me Navas would have started and Kelechi would have come on for Bony had he got injured and KDB would have replaced Yaya when fatigue set in considering this was his 3rd game in 8 days. I also anticipated that Villa would be buoyed by having a new manager and being at home too notwithstanding the fact they had an axe to grind with Delph.
IMO, it was obvious Villa would be right up for this match irrespective of their league position, this is why I would have treated Villa away exactly the same as we treated SeVilla away. But That's just me and how I would have tackled the Villa match, the boss did it his way which is what he's paid to do and IMO he didn't get a great deal wrong aside from the changes as I've outline....... all in my humble opinion of course.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.