Liverpool - post match thread.

[FanchesterCity]

It never ceases to amaze me the number of blue mooners who seemingly have far more football knowledge and tactical nous than Pep Guardiola one of the most decorated and proven football managers of recent history.

Strange as it might sound, I have a feeling that given the chance to actually manage our great team, they would be about as successful as Gary Neville was when actually having to put their money where their mouth is and who seemingly talked a very good game.

We're all great from our armchairs, with the benefit of hindsight. Some on here need to know their place and trust our manager to get the job done. Unbelievably, some of our fans are even trumpeting the merits of Tony f'kin Pulis. Jesus wept, just what is wrong with some of our fans.

Last night wasn't vintage City but to try and even suggest that Liverpool deserved that win, then words fail me. They played like I'd expect Sunderland to come to our place.

He was born into football as a player, he was 100 rungs up the ladder already by the time he retired as a player. That is the case with countless manager - Koeman, Gullt, Dalglish, Mancini, and so many others... the average Joe in the street is unlikely to ever hope to manage the clubs they have, but it doesn't make them less knowledgeable. It's one of the huge myths of 'great managers' that somehow they are Gods. It's complete bollocks, Ex-players who often did a very good job at a very good club. But they aren't geniuses. They just aren't. Oh, and they all get sacked too. Guardiiola will eventually.
Nobody can deny what he's achieved, but he didn't start at the bottom rung. That's the point. Just because he's Pep doesn't mean he knows more. It doesn't mean a guy in the stands can't see something Pep can't. Some people have been watching this game for 60 years and seen it all come and go - they aren't idiots.

 

[FanchesterCity]

If that is the truth, I don't think everyone who has drawn that conclusion stumbled on it by luck. I've thought for some considerable time that the players have been a bigger problem than the manager(s). I'm still not certain though where to rank them as a collective against the rest of the league: I think that in terms of technical ability our best 17 is probably still at least on par with the best but physically and, most importantly, mentally they come up short too often and that is why they struggle for consistency. What I am sure of is that we had an opportunity to take a squad that was definitely the best and widen the gap to the rest and ended up doing just the reverse. However, rather than seek to incriminate whoever over that, I just want the club to learn from its experiences and get the squad into the shape Pep needs.

We have a good team, and some very good players - but 5-6 are no more than 'good', not great. The big boys in Europe don't fear us (and why should they?). We simply aren't as good as many fans think we are. I don't think we've improved since Mancini. That's not a pro Mancini comment, merely that we've been stagnant or 3 years waiting for Pep and whilst we've spent heavily, it's not been wisely.

 

[inbetween]

You can argue this which ever way you want quite frankly. At times our attacking hasn't been good enough, at times our attacking play has been fine but the finishing hasn't and at times the defending has been embarrassingly bad, at other times it has been ok but usually when the rest of the team work hard enough to not leave the defence exposed. Last night was as much about giving away an easy goal as it was about toothless attacking play. That's the worry, things aren't really consistently right anywhere on the pitch at the moment.

Definitely but no matter how we defend we need to score to win games, last night if we had defended brilliantly we still would of drawn 0-0 because even if we had played another half we never looked like scoring. We didn't have a single shot on target in the first half but we forget we have £200M worth of talent up front, it just isn't good enough. Other than that though Liverpool barely had a chance and never controlled us which suggests to me we must of defended well enough to deserve a point but you can't get a point without scoring.

Should we be happy we only conceded 1 to Liverpool who have scored the most of anyone in the league, I think so? We shouldn't be happy though that we aren't scoring against their defence which along with us is the worst in the top 6. The only reason Liverpool are 3rd and we aren't is they score more than we do and when you consider and compare the spend and talent it is ridiculous.

 

[Blue Mooner]

If you can steer the game into a game that best suits your strengths, you are controlling it. If defending for your lives is your best strength, then so be it. If hoping for a counter to snatch a 'lucky' goal (terrible phrase), then so be it. We have to stop thinking that opposition teams need to bow down at our feel and surrender to us. They might not have the same skill, but they have fight and determination and play to their strengths (as any sensible team would).
Nobody cares if City win or lose, or 'should have won' - except City fans. Everybody else just cares about the points.
We deserve to be where we are (5th by the end of the day most likely) and looking over our shoulders. We are to blame, not other teams. We are the ones failing to deal with situations on the pitch, not them. They don't need to change, we do.

But we're not talking about teams playing to their strengths we're debating whether it can be argued that you are controlling a game simply by defending without having the ball. I don't believe you can ever argue you controlled a game without having control of the football. You can certainly win games by employing this tactic agreed but you can't argue that you 'controlled' the game.

We clearly controlled the game yesterday, that was proven by every single measure and Klopp and Milner accepted as such, but we lost. Sh*t like that happens in football but it's not a reason to dismantle the team.

 

[citytilllidie]

Didn't expect anything more from that game. I have little confidence in this team. Out of the top 6, we are currently comfortably the 6th best and that includes Arsenal!

 

[sir baconface]

Miller is a money grabbing twat and gets less grief than any other player who has done what he did.
Fuck milner and I hope he never wins fuck all again...Hope he gets the same reception from us when we play the dippers as they give Sterling.

Spot on.

Yer, this Miller guy is the cause of all our problems. Great post. Definitely worthy of mod endorsement, dat.

 

[FanchesterCity]

He owes us respect were you at anfield last season?

LOL, he owes us respect?
He's a grown man. It's a business transaction - we PAID him to play for us. He owes us nowt. 'Respect'? what a load of bollocks, he's gone - he can do what he likes. He can stick two fingers up at us for I care - it's irrelevant to us.

 

[argyle]

We where shit, no doubt but goal aside, Liverpool did fuck all and had even less of the ball and even less time spent in our half.

Im not arguing we dominated or where better but lets not put us down and at the same time laud the Liverpool performance because it was equally crap.

Wasn't a lauding of Liverpool as agreed they did nothing after the goal and the worst thing is they didn't need to.

 

[super_city_si]

Looking back you know what the worst thing was? We were boring. Never thought I'd associate Pep and boring but it was.

 

[FanchesterCity]

But we're not talking about teams playing to their strengths we're debating whether it can be argued that you are controlling a game simply by defending without having the ball. I don't believe you can ever argue you controlled a game without having control of the football. You can certainly win games by employing this tactic agreed but you can't argue that you 'controlled' the game.

We clearly controlled the game yesterday, that was proven by every single measure and Klopp and Milner accepted as such, but we lost. Sh*t like that happens in football but it's not a reason to dismantle the team.

We'll have to disagree on that one. I don't see having the ball as 'control'. I see having the right tactics to achieve the desired outcome as 'control'. By definition, we can't have 'controlled' the game because we didn't steer the game how we wanted ( a win ). We just had the ball a lot!