Discussion: Manuel Pellegrini 2015/16

[PragueBlue]

To be honest its not even a case of saying Maffeo is better than Sagna or Kelechi better than Bony. Most fans are realistic enough to accept we cannot expect to chuck a load of kids in at Stoke away or Pool at home.

What were saying is if for example Sagna or Bony is tired then surely a lad like Maffeo or Kelechi are good enough to play against Hull and not be detrimental to the team winning. In addition it may also give players the respite to put in better performances against the likes of Stoke.

Similarly when we have been cruising in games these lads should have been utilised more. Given an opportunity to impress and at least fans/manager alike would be able to judge these players better and for the young players it improves his development.

I wouldn't disagree with any of that generally. I can see why he would have played Bony to give him some game time after his injury but agree that Sagna has looked tired after a good start to the season and could have been rested against Hull. Perhaps Pellegrini thought that with an already weakened defence, putting Maffeo in wouldn't have been the right time for him or the team. The one time I felt annoyed recently was in a game we were winning comfortably (don't remember which one) and with not long left he brought on Demichelis to play in midfield which I thought was a bit strange when that would have been the ideal time to blood a younger player. I guess he must have his reasons though even though I couldn't fathom why.

 

[manimanc]

I suppose so. I agree with almost all of that.

I've said it before (and I'll probably say it again) but perhaps I shouldn't post in anger. I tend to be prone to hyperbole.

Not my style to argue with fellow blues, so I'll hold my hands up and say my earlier post was a bit too 'hot from the blood' and apologies if I seemed a bit obstinate or nasty.

Still don't think I can warm to Pellegrini, but I'm not afraid to hold my hands up and admit when I'm wrong and I really can't argue with anything you said, there.

Onwards and upwards and let's hope for a win against Borussia!

And maybe my choice of language with you was immature. I wouldn't speak like that to you in a pub so I'll hold my hands up and apologise for that.
It's city mate, it draws the worst out of you half the time.

 

[franksinatra]

I wouldn't disagree with any of that generally. I can see why he would have played Bony to give him some game time after his injury but agree that Sagna has looked tired after a good start to the season and could have been rested against Hull. Perhaps Pellegrini thought that with an already weakened defence, putting Maffeo in wouldn't have been the right time for him or the team. The one time I felt annoyed recently was in a game we were winning comfortably (don't remember which one) and with not long left he brought on Demichelis to play in midfield which I thought was a bit strange when that would have been the ideal time to blood a younger player. I guess he must have his reasons though even though I couldn't fathom why.

The last paragraph in my opinion highlights, what I think, that he is completely risk averse with the kids.

As you say its unfathomable so even if the kids were good enough, in many peoples opinion, Pellers would see the drawbacks not the possible gains.

Decisions like you have highlighted,similar decisions last year and the treatment of denayer further strengthen this point.

 

[Len Rum]

There is a third way. I'm an "Until the seasons overer"

There is a fourth way , inner and if he wins trophies ( as a minimum the Prem) ,in till the end of his contract.

 

[PragueBlue]

The last paragraph in my opinion highlights, what I think, that he is completely risk averse with the kids.

As you say its unfathomable so even if the kids were good enough, in many peoples opinion, Pellers would see the drawbacks not the possible gains.

Decisions like you have highlighted,similar decisions last year and the treatment of denayer further strengthen this point.

I didn't disagree with the Denayer decision to be honest at the time. Kompany and Mangala started the season very well and once Otamendi had signed it seemed like Denayer wasn't going to get much game time, so loaning him out for experience appeared best for everybody. With the injuries we've had though, it would have been better to have kept Denayer in the squad and let Demichelis go as he would have got quite a bit of game time with us.

 

[Bill Walker]

To answer the OP...........yes, today

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

And maybe my choice of language with you was immature. I wouldn't speak like that to you in a pub so I'll hold my hands up and apologise for that.
It's city mate, it draws the worst out of you half the time.

Could you two get a room please.

 

[manimanc]

Could you two get a room please.

You can't beat a bit of a blue love in.

 

[meeesh]

I still feel the same 24 hours on,irrelevent of Liverpool losing although that has made life a little easier for another week or so

 

[Jason]

I wouldn't disagree with any of that generally. I can see why he would have played Bony to give him some game time after his injury but agree that Sagna has looked tired after a good start to the season and could have been rested against Hull. Perhaps Pellegrini thought that with an already weakened defence, putting Maffeo in wouldn't have been the right time for him or the team. The one time I felt annoyed recently was in a game we were winning comfortably (don't remember which one) and with not long left he brought on Demichelis to play in midfield which I thought was a bit strange when that would have been the ideal time to blood a younger player. I guess he must have his reasons though even though I couldn't fathom why.

That was the the Hull game when we were 3-0 up and also with Mangala booked so suspended for Stoke so if MD had got injured we would have been left with 1 cb (despite MD not playing so good against Stoke it could have been a lot worse without him)