Mancini you are gutless

Palerider said:
My thinking on this is quite clear. Every year we are told that to be sure of avoiding relegation then 40 pts is the target. That means that if you draw every game you are actually in danger of getting relegated ( 38 pts ). ie drawing games is relegation form. In each match there are 3 pts on offer except for the draw where only two are offered, one for each side. If you assume that City are one of the better sides in the country and at home at least a fair match for United then in theory if we tried to actually beat United over 3 matches we would have won one, lost one and drawn one. That would give us 4pts over 3 games as opposed to 3pts over 3 games for 3 draws. I know that all sounds convoluted if anyone is still reading but playing for a draw is bordering on stupidity. You could draw 9 matches on the trot but get exactly the same number of points from 3 wins and 6 losses. 9 games unbeaten sounds better but it is'nt. You simply have to play to win. Nothing else makes any sense.
Click to expand...

Based on that,then the Rags once again wont win the PL then !!
 
Time will tell if United can win the League but unbeaten or not they are behind Chelsea. Last year Spurs got beat 10 times and won 21 we got beat only 7 and won 18. My point is that avoiding defeat is overrated it's winning that matters. The 3 pts for a win dictates that.
 
oakiecokie said:
Palerider said:
My thinking on this is quite clear. Every year we are told that to be sure of avoiding relegation then 40 pts is the target. That means that if you draw every game you are actually in danger of getting relegated ( 38 pts ). ie drawing games is relegation form. In each match there are 3 pts on offer except for the draw where only two are offered, one for each side. If you assume that City are one of the better sides in the country and at home at least a fair match for United then in theory if we tried to actually beat United over 3 matches we would have won one, lost one and drawn one. That would give us 4pts over 3 games as opposed to 3pts over 3 games for 3 draws. I know that all sounds convoluted if anyone is still reading but playing for a draw is bordering on stupidity. You could draw 9 matches on the trot but get exactly the same number of points from 3 wins and 6 losses. 9 games unbeaten sounds better but it is'nt. You simply have to play to win. Nothing else makes any sense.
Click to expand...

Based on that,then the Rags once again wont win the PL then !!
Click to expand...
Someone tell Hughes
 
Fuck me did I slip into a coma and miss United beating us 15-0?!! Cos the reaction on here you'd think thats what happened. Get a fucking grip.
 
Palerider said:
My thinking on this is quite clear. Every year we are told that to be sure of avoiding relegation then 40 pts is the target. That means that if you draw every game you are actually in danger of getting relegated ( 38 pts ). ie drawing games is relegation form. In each match there are 3 pts on offer except for the draw where only two are offered, one for each side. If you assume that City are one of the better sides in the country and at home at least a fair match for United then in theory if we tried to actually beat United over 3 matches we would have won one, lost one and drawn one. That would give us 4pts over 3 games as opposed to 3pts over 3 games for 3 draws. I know that all sounds convoluted if anyone is still reading but playing for a draw is bordering on stupidity. You could draw 9 matches on the trot but get exactly the same number of points from 3 wins and 6 losses. 9 games unbeaten sounds better but it is'nt. You simply have to play to win. Nothing else makes any sense.
Click to expand...

That's true of 'ordinary' league games.

But when you are likely to finish within 6 points of another team, the maths changes considerably.

Put it this way; if we start the day level with Utd, and lose 3-0 to them, we have to find three extra points from the other league fixtures, and make up a goal difference of 6, just to get back level with them.

If we draw, we only have to better their goal difference by one.

Sure, the reward for winning is just as big, but there's no way to go for the win without increasing the risk of leaving yourself a mountain to climb.

That's why the top four matches are usually disappointing and cagey.

It's also why we used to win more of them; we could afford to go for it, it didn't matter if we lost. Not to mention, Utd are taking them far more seriously now. That was as defensive a Utd performance as you will ever see. Same with us. It bears no relation to the way whatsoever to how we played at WBA.

Having said that, sometimes, you have no choice but to go all out to win, because a draw will do you no good. We aren't in that situation; we are three points behind with 26 to play. Utd have still to play Arsenal and Chelsea, so the teams above us will drop points.
 
Calm down...

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion/blogs/mirror-football-blog/Manchester-City-s-Roberto-Mancini-is-boring-but-right-with-dull-Manchester-derby-tactics-against-United-article626521.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion ... 26521.html</a>

As I wrote in the other thread. Mancini couldn't risk losing the derby as it could affect the entire season. A lost could have a negative domino effect on upcoming fixtures, as experienced in the run of draws after the derby lost last season. A draw was a good result.
 
Chick Counterfly said:
Palerider said:
My thinking on this is quite clear. Every year we are told that to be sure of avoiding relegation then 40 pts is the target. That means that if you draw every game you are actually in danger of getting relegated ( 38 pts ). ie drawing games is relegation form. In each match there are 3 pts on offer except for the draw where only two are offered, one for each side. If you assume that City are one of the better sides in the country and at home at least a fair match for United then in theory if we tried to actually beat United over 3 matches we would have won one, lost one and drawn one. That would give us 4pts over 3 games as opposed to 3pts over 3 games for 3 draws. I know that all sounds convoluted if anyone is still reading but playing for a draw is bordering on stupidity. You could draw 9 matches on the trot but get exactly the same number of points from 3 wins and 6 losses. 9 games unbeaten sounds better but it is'nt. You simply have to play to win. Nothing else makes any sense.
Click to expand...

That's true of 'ordinary' league games.

But when you are likely to finish within 6 points of another team, the maths changes considerably.

Put it this way; if we start the day level with Utd, and lose 3-0 to them, we have to find three extra points from the other league fixtures, and make up a goal difference of 6, just to get back level with them.

If we draw, we only have to better their goal difference by one.

Sure, the reward for winning is just as big, but there's no way to go for the win without increasing the risk of leaving yourself a mountain to climb.

That's why the top four matches are usually disappointing and cagey.

It's also why we used to win more of them; we could afford to go for it, it didn't matter if we lost. Not to mention, Utd are taking them far more seriously now. That was as defensive a Utd performance as you will ever see. Same with us. It bears no relation to the way whatsoever to how we played at WBA.

Having said that, sometimes, you have no choice but to go all out to win, because a draw will do you no good. We aren't in that situation; we are three points behind with 26 to play. Utd have still to play Arsenal and Chelsea, so the teams above us will drop points.
Click to expand...
Post of the thread mate and I had never thought of it that way
 
gelly said:
Calm down...

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion/blogs/mirror-football-blog/Manchester-City-s-Roberto-Mancini-is-boring-but-right-with-dull-Manchester-derby-tactics-against-United-article626521.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion ... 26521.html</a>

As I wrote in the other thread. Mancini couldn't risk losing the derby as it could affect the entire season. A lost could have a negative domino effect on upcoming fixtures, as experienced in the run of draws after the derby lost last season. A draw was a good result.
Click to expand...

He could've 'risked' winning it though.

United had lots of injuries, players out and daren't lose because they'd have fallen too far behind Chelsea - we should have gone for the kill.I was very frustrated with our lack of ambition.Mancini's tactics were nothing short of embarrassing in my eyes.We had the chance to make a statement and all we did was look a bit scared.Rant over.

Anyway, nice to meet you all. :)
 
havnt read this entire thread, but..................


if city win 4-0 on sat and create 10 really good chances what does this thread mean???


hysteria isnt the word
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.