How far will the fall be before evasive action is taken?

[Shaelumstash]

James Milner as left mid? Yaya Toure as an AM or CM?
Not every player that came to us as a specialist in one position ended up playing for us in that position.

Fans make it seem like it some complexed change. It isnt. Most footballers can play multiple positions with the utmost ease. It's fans who label that as such and buy into their own labels.

Watch the 1st 45 minutes vs Everton. Delph was pretty good at LM.

But even more annoying than the labelling, is the restrictive nature of the label. In a single game, we often change tactics and formation multiple times in a single game. Its not as simplistic as fans make it our to be.

Against Everton for example:
We started almost exactly how we started against Leicester. Delph left, Silva right and Sterling behind Aguero.
Later Sterling moved Left, Delph tucks in a bit, Yaya drops off, and Dihno pushes a little right and closer to Zab. Then Sterling goes right, Silva plays left Delph at LCM Yaya at DM and Dihno at RCM (but ahead oj Delph and Yaya). They finished the half out that way

The positional changes, are so ingrainedvinto how we play, that a simplistic Delph doesn't work at LM seems silly.

And by the way, Delph was quite good.

This is a good example of where your preference for watching on TV comes a cropper. We didn't start in a 4231 against Everton. We started with a 433. Yaya was the deepest lying player, and Fernandinho and Delph played in front of him.

Delph wasn't playing left wing in the first half, he was playing where Lampard used to play for Chelsea, left of centre in a three man midfield. Huge difference. Lampard was one of the best midfielders in Europe in that role at Chelsea, but I've never seen him play left wing in my life.

Delph played left wing against Leicester and was poor. Just as he was poor in that role against Arsenal and Swansea. You say top players should be able to play in every position. It's a lovely idea, but it's just not reality at the top level.

You can get away with Fernando as a holding player in a 3 man midfield. Ask him to play as a box to box player in a 2 and he's an embarrassment.

Navas is an up and down right winger, ask him to play any other role and he hasn't got a clue.

Aguero is one of the best number 9's in ghe world. I've seen him play on the left of a 3 for Argentina a few times and he wasn't very good.

Some players can play multiple positions with ease, others can't because they are specialists. It doesn't make them bad players, it's just a different skill set.

 

[supercity88]

Good post. The problem is not that our players cannot defend, the problem is they cannot play in the tactical system Pellegrini wants, and that Pellegrini refuses to adapt and set up a system which our players can execute. His insistence borders on stupidity for me, especially given that the Seville game, and the Rag away game, actually showed how it can be done.
I hope the club management will have an emergency plan in place in case we are in danger of dropping out of top 4. If we loose to Spurs we will be in danger IMHO.

I don't think he has a system at the moment. The high press that we used to play, where everyone was hassling the opposition player when they were on the ball, that's gone. Now it's just one or two that do that and it's easy for the opposition to carve through our defence.

 

[BillyShears]

I don't disagree that individual mistakes have cost us and that no manager can legislate for those. But for their second goal, Zabaleta goes to ground well inside their half, which costs him precious seconds when he's trying to get back. Why is he where someone like Silva or Toure should be? Otamendi goes to ground about 25-30 yards out leaving his partner exposed. That should have been coached out of him as we know he's prone to that.

That's a strange question (why was Zaba where he was). We were chasing a goal so you'd expect our full backs to be pushed high up the pitch. The issue was firstly, Zaba should never have tried to win that ball unless he was prepared to go all in ie. either win the ball or drop the man in the process. Unless I'm mistaken Fernandinho was also then guilty of a similar challenge which once Kante was past left our defence exposed to Mahrez's run. Then you've got the third stupid challenge, Otamendi's.

Now throughout that entire sequence there is nothing 'tactical' that Pellegrini should've done to counter that because ultimately there was nothing to be done. If Zaba, Fernandinho, or Otamendi deal with Kante's run the goal doesn't happen and IMO the whole complexion of the rest of the 2nd half is different.

For the third goal, we've no one on the post(s). Stick Sterling or Aguero there, if you're not leaving them upfield. Then if someone does make a mistake, you've got a fall-back. There's no evidence of any planning or organisation there at all.

I keep reading this idea that there's no planning or organisation but really that's just a lazy characterisation because we conceded soft goals and didn't win. I don't believe for one second that a manager like Pellegrini with the career he has had is as reductive in the way he prepares his teams as is characterised far too regularly on Bluemoon.

I think you said earlier that Kompany's return is not going to be the end of our problems. That's correct because if there's a shambles in front of him, or his full back is nowhere to be seen, then he's far more liable to make a mistake because he's got too many things to think about. I remember after we played and beat Chelsea a few seasons ago, that Gary Cahill said something like "You expect to face an all out attack on your back line around 3 times in a game. In this one there must have been 20 or more times that we were being overwhelmed. We've never faced pressure like that before" Can't remember if it was RM or MP who was the manager at the time but it showed a level of team play, planning and organisation that we've rarely seen the last two seasons.

Keeps coming back to the same thing for me (and it has been this way since Autumn of 2013), Pellegrini's system demands a lot of it's defenders because it allows for the idea that defenders will have to deal regularly with one on one situations. This means that individual error are exposed in a way in which they wouldn't be under other more pragmatic managers.

 

[Marvin]

That's a strange question (why was Zaba where he was). We were chasing a goal so you'd expect our full backs to be pushed high up the pitch. The issue was firstly, Zaba should never have tried to win that ball unless he was prepared to go all in ie. either win the ball or drop the man in the process. Unless I'm mistaken Fernandinho was also then guilty of a similar challenge which once Kante was past left our defence exposed to Mahrez's run. Then you've got the third stupid challenge, Otamendi's.

Now throughout that entire sequence there is nothing 'tactical' that Pellegrini should've done to counter that because ultimately there was nothing to be done. If Zaba, Fernandinho, or Otamendi deal with Kante's run the goal doesn't happen and IMO the whole complexion of the rest of the 2nd half is different.



I keep reading this idea that there's no planning or organisation but really that's just a lazy characterisation because we conceded soft goals and didn't win. I don't believe for one second that a manager like Pellegrini with the career he has had is as reductive in the way he prepares his teams as is characterised far too regularly on Bluemoon.



Keeps coming back to the same thing for me (and it has been this way since Autumn of 2013), Pellegrini's system demands a lot of it's defenders because it allows for the idea that defenders will have to deal regularly with one on one situations. This means that individual error are exposed in a way in which they wouldn't be under other more pragmatic managers.

Playing a system which exposes slow players like Demichelis is suicidal.

We have played some great football under Pellegrini, and he is proud of his team's reputation, but when we have injuries the coach should give his team the best opportunity to get a result with the players at his disposal and he is not doing that. He is exposing their weaknesses.

 

[BillyShears]

Playing a system which exposes slow players like Demichelis is suicidal.

We have played some great football under Pellegrini, and he is proud of his team's reputation, but when we have injuries the coach should give his team the best opportunity to get a result with the players at his disposal and he is not doing that. He is exposing their weaknesses.

I didn't agree with the team selection against Leicester, not by a long stretch. However we didn't concede three goals because Kolarov or Demichelis are slow, or because Zaba is getting on. We didn't concede because Pellegrini exposed their weaknesses. We conceded because individual players made stupid mistakes.

Yes it can be argued that we should've played Clichy instead of Kola or Sagna instead of a Zaba, but that doesn't negate the fact that Leicester scored from two set pieces and a counter attacking goal that we had ample opportunity to deal with but didn't and couldn't.

It's a familiar refrain under Pellegrini, that whenever we concede a goal it's because he has made some overarching tactical or selection mistake, when in reality more often than not, one of our defenders has done something brain dead which you'd be hard pushed to see on a Sunday league pitch.

 

[Phil1]

The reason people keep reading that there's poor planning every week is because during any 90 minute performance it's as plain as the nose on their face that it happens.
Throw ins aren't managed, if they are and we still do what we do then he should be sacked today. Free kicks are rarely thought out, players stand around and look like they're making it up as they go along. Corners are beyond a joke. Goal kicks are carbon copies with either a punt out of play by the half way line or a long one through the middle where a 5foot Aguero is expected to win it in the air against a 6foot CB.

As for their second goal - just fucking foul him on the half way line. Take a yellow card if need be but stop the player before he's in his stride and bearing down on you. As soon as he was away from Zaba I was screaming for somebody to take him out, instead it was a half hearted attempt by Fernandinho then it was too late.

 

[flb]

I didn't agree with the team selection against Leicester, not by a long stretch. However we didn't concede three goals because Kolarov or Demichelis are slow, or because Zaba is getting on. We didn't concede because Pellegrini exposed their weaknesses. We conceded because individual players made stupid mistakes.

Yes it can be argued that we should've played Clichy instead of Kola or Sagna instead of a Zaba, but that doesn't negate the fact that Leicester scored from two set pieces and a counter attacking goal that we had ample opportunity to deal with but didn't and couldn't.

It's a familiar refrain under Pellegrini, that whenever we concede a goal it's because he has made some overarching tactical or selection mistake, when in reality more often than not, one of our defenders has done something brain dead which you'd be hard pushed to see on a Sunday league pitch.

Joe saved three one on ones against Leicester if i remember correctly plus the other chances in and around the box they squandered-we were all over the show Billy and that's the managers job to do something about it.

If it wasn't for Joe's brilliance this season we would be chasing a CL spot fella.Time after time average to good teams carve us wide open consistently this season-even before our injuries piled up.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I didn't agree with the team selection against Leicester, not by a long stretch. However we didn't concede three goals because Kolarov or Demichelis are slow, or because Zaba is getting on. We didn't concede because Pellegrini exposed their weaknesses. We conceded because individual players made stupid mistakes.

Yes it can be argued that we should've played Clichy instead of Kola or Sagna instead of a Zaba, but that doesn't negate the fact that Leicester scored from two set pieces and a counter attacking goal that we had ample opportunity to deal with but didn't and couldn't.

It's a familiar refrain under Pellegrini, that whenever we concede a goal it's because he has made some overarching tactical or selection mistake, when in reality more often than not, one of our defenders has done something brain dead which you'd be hard pushed to see on a Sunday league pitch.

I can accept, as I said, that players can make mistakes and that no manager can legislate for that 100%. But the more defenders are exposed, the more mistakes they'll make. And without any organisation in defence, without cover, the impact of those mistakes will be magnified. The manager's job is to ensure that risks are managed and I don't see MP doing that.

And when I look at our results, with just two wins against the current top 8 and only 3 points out of 21 against the top 6, I have to ask when we go from "individual players making stupid mistakes" to a recognisable pattern of managerial failings?

 

[City_Sean]

I didn't agree with the team selection against Leicester, not by a long stretch. However we didn't concede three goals because Kolarov or Demichelis are slow, or because Zaba is getting on. We didn't concede because Pellegrini exposed their weaknesses. We conceded because individual players made stupid mistakes.

Yes it can be argued that we should've played Clichy instead of Kola or Sagna instead of a Zaba, but that doesn't negate the fact that Leicester scored from two set pieces and a counter attacking goal that we had ample opportunity to deal with but didn't and couldn't.

It's a familiar refrain under Pellegrini, that whenever we concede a goal it's because he has made some overarching tactical or selection mistake, when in reality more often than not, one of our defenders has done something brain dead which you'd be hard pushed to see on a Sunday league pitch.

For all the moaning regarding the side, we lost the game because of slack marking from two set pieces. That can happen to any side, and what people forget is the first half we dominated. What let us down was our ridiculous cavalier approach after half time rather than keeping it right for 10-15 minutes.

 

[Father Paul]

That's a strange question (why was Zaba where he was). We were chasing a goal so you'd expect our full backs to be pushed high up the pitch. The issue was firstly, Zaba should never have tried to win that ball unless he was prepared to go all in ie. either win the ball or drop the man in the process. Unless I'm mistaken Fernandinho was also then guilty of a similar challenge which once Kante was past left our defence exposed to Mahrez's run. Then you've got the third stupid challenge, Otamendi's.

Now throughout that entire sequence there is nothing 'tactical' that Pellegrini should've done to counter that because ultimately there was nothing to be done. If Zaba, Fernandinho, or Otamendi deal with Kante's run the goal doesn't happen and IMO the whole complexion of the rest of the 2nd half is different.



I keep reading this idea that there's no planning or organisation but really that's just a lazy characterisation because we conceded soft goals and didn't win. I don't believe for one second that a manager like Pellegrini with the career he has had is as reductive in the way he prepares his teams as is characterised far too regularly on Bluemoon.



Keeps coming back to the same thing for me (and it has been this way since Autumn of 2013), Pellegrini's system demands a lot of it's defenders because it allows for the idea that defenders will have to deal regularly with one on one situations. This means that individual error are exposed in a way in which they wouldn't be under other more pragmatic managers.

The problem is that while the three goals were indeed soft and can't fairly be laid at the door of poor management one must consider the rest of the game.I still cannot bear to watch the game again but I reckon they should have scored at least 3 more goals and looked dangerous every time they crossed the half way line. On the contrary we caused them few problems and in general looked disorganised and unsure about what we were trying to do. That surely has to be at least partly the managers fault. I think Sunday could turn out to be one of Pelligrini's most defining games at City.