Manuel Pellegrini

[eversince 76]

To me we totally controlled the match, but we didn't kill it off by scoring a second. I fully understood when Pellegrini brought on Dzeko (known as a supersub) and Nasri (more creativity with the space enhanching) . He went for the throat. Unfortunately Rooney's run that led to Di Maria bringing a crucial save out of Joe Hart, our defending midfielders and the back line held back way too much. And we suddenly couldn't get hold of the ball. As if nerves crept in. We lost control and it was Pellegrini again who noticed it, brought on Fernandinho to balance and defend the 1-0.

I'd say, well done Pellegrini. And I'm sure if we would have had at least one penalty or scored a 2nd out of a lot of chances, the subs might havebeen different in personal and meaning. But you can't blame Pellegrini and his subs for us to hang on n a way we still created two great chances during that period).

Overall we were much better than them. Even as the sending-off didn't do us any favours.

 

[BillyShears]

They were terrible substitutions to be fair. Why take Milner off??

Who would you have taken off then?

Made sense to use all the sub as it was an intense game. I'd have gone like for like. Maybe the coach thought Milner had run his legs off. I don't know, but I doubt it had anything to do with the shift in the balance of play. It's a mindset, nothing to do with the ability of the 11

The general consensus amongst those who see the subs as being poor seems to be that Jovetic should've gone and we should've brought on Fernandinho or Nasri.

I think a lot of people were looking for City to "kill" the game even though United had 10 men, and a week previously Chelsea had tried to "kill" the game too early and ended up inviting so much pressure they got a man sent off and conceded a goal.

 

[hgblue]

They were terrible substitutions to be fair. Why take Milner off??

Who would you have taken off then?

Made sense to use all the sub as it was an intense game. I'd have gone like for like. Maybe the coach thought Milner had run his legs off. I don't know, but I doubt it had anything to do with the shift in the balance of play. It's a mindset, nothing to do with the ability of the 11

The general consensus amongst those who see the subs as being poor seems to be that Jovetic should've gone and we should've brought on Fernandinho or Nasri.

I think a lot of people were looking for City to "kill" the game even though United had 10 men, and a week previously Chelsea had tried to "kill" the game too early and ended up inviting so much pressure they got a man sent off and conceded a goal.

You're dead right Fernandinho for Jovetic, and push Yaya further forward. Not a negative substitution imo.

 

[supercity88]

Don't really buy the protecting Milner argument. Fittest player in the squad and 20 minutes isnt going to make much of a difference. I'm not even sure he'll start against Moscow.

But he could have picked up a knock or something we don't know about so I'm not going to get too bothered about that. Nasri the wrong replacement though IMO.

I think it's a difference in mindset between the manager and most of us fans. Particularly the more cynical ones. Milner works tirelessly, he is physically fitter than most yes, but that doesn't mean he doesn't get nackered from running all game. We will see him against Moscow in my opinion, I think Pellegrini has recognised just how crucial he is to our performances at the moment and I truly believe it was a choice to save his legs and also give Nasri some game time in order to get up to match fitness. We look at it as replacing a tireless worker with someone who can go missing in games (though I would say that criticism is a bit generic and Nasri has improved a lot under Pellegrini). Pellegrini sees it as replacing Milner with someone who can keep the ball, create chances and who will run all day (because that has been his instruction). Pellegrini has so much faith in his system and the messages he gives his players that I fully believe he felt we would score another and see the game off if we kept some attacking players on the pitch. Often you can sit back and that can be your own downfall.

Fortunately this argument over whether the subs were right or wrong is largely irrelevant thanks to the win. It would have been a real talking point had we failed to win.

 

[BillyShears]

You're dead right Fernandinho for Jovetic, and push Yaya further forward. Not a negative substitution imo.

No I guess if you push Yaya further forward it's less negative. But it's still not a substitution I would expect from a team playing at home against 10 men.

I do think also that Nasri needed minutes especially with Silva's injury. It's a factor that we can just never really know the details of. Just how fit/unfit players are and how many minutes they require, or how many minutes they can play before they need a rest. Pellegrini is very respectful of his medical team in terms of letting them guide him with regards player fitness. It's certainly worked wonders with Kun.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Nasri should have come into the Jovetic pocket, rather than Milner leaving the field.

They were shocking subs in every sense of the word.

Van Persie, Di Maria, a succession of late corners, all a result of taking Milner off and exposing the left hand flank.

If anything, Milner is at his most dangerous in the closing minutes. Lost count the amount of times he has provided a late cross for a goal or got one himself.

Dzeko, although you can be wise after the event and suggest his role was to defend corners, provided zero..

If Dzeko's introduction was to defend set pieces, then you have to ask why Pellegrini felt so panic-stricken to address an issue which did not even exist at that present time, a ten-man United team still penned in on the edge of their 18-yard box.

 

[kippaxblue76]

Nasri should have come into the Jovetic pocket, rather than Milner leaving the field.

They were shocking subs in every sense of the word.

Van Persie, Di Maria, a succession of late corners, all a result of taking Milner off and exposing the left hand flank.

If anything, Milner is at his most dangerous in the closing minutes. Lost count the amount of times he has provided a late cross for a goal or got one himself.

Dzeko, although you can be wise after the event and suggest his role was to defend corners, provided zero..

If Dzeko's introduction was to defend set pieces, then you have to ask why Pellegrini felt so panic-stricken to address an issue which did not even exist at that present time, a ten-man United team still penned in on the edge of their 18-yard box.

This is exactly how I saw it, then maybe a straight swap Dzeko for Aguero just to kill time at the death. The game changed as soon as Milner went off.

 

[chris85mcfc]

Nasri should have come into the Jovetic pocket, rather than Milner leaving the field.
They were shocking subs in every sense of the word.

Van Persie, Di Maria, a succession of late corners, all a result of taking Milner off and exposing the left hand flank.

If anything, Milner is at his most dangerous in the closing minutes. Lost count the amount of times he has provided a late cross for a goal or got one himself.

Dzeko, although you can be wise after the event and suggest his role was to defend corners, provided zero..

If Dzeko's introduction was to defend set pieces, then you have to ask why Pellegrini felt so panic-stricken to address an issue which did not even exist at that present time, a ten-man United team still penned in on the edge of their 18-yard box.

Exactly my thoughts, and what I said as I saw Nasri getting stripped

Then IF he wanted to bring Milner off (to save his legs as some have tried to portray) then bring Fernandinho on and push Nasri onto the left

Those subs would not have made us more negative, we would have kept the ball a lot better therefore creating more openings

People hanging onto the fact that we didn't concede as a 'job well done', those substitutions could have cost us

 

[BillyShears]

Just out of curiosity - does anyone remember any time in our recent history where a substitution was as contentious as the ones on derby day?

I really can't. Especially not after we'd won a match. Amazes me in a way people are still quite so bothered by it so many days later.

 

[BillyShears]

Nasri should have come into the Jovetic pocket, rather than Milner leaving the field.

They were shocking subs in every sense of the word.

Van Persie, Di Maria, a succession of late corners, all a result of taking Milner off and exposing the left hand flank.

If anything, Milner is at his most dangerous in the closing minutes. Lost count the amount of times he has provided a late cross for a goal or got one himself.

Dzeko, although you can be wise after the event and suggest his role was to defend corners, provided zero..

If Dzeko's introduction was to defend set pieces, then you have to ask why Pellegrini felt so panic-stricken to address an issue which did not even exist at that present time, a ten-man United team still penned in on the edge of their 18-yard box.

Obvious wum'ing there my friend. :)

 

[chris85mcfc]

Just out of curiosity - does anyone remember any time in our recent history where a substitution was as contentious as the ones on derby day?

I really can't. Especially not after we'd won a match. Amazes me in a way people are still quite so bothered by it so many days later.

But that's almost like suggesting that we can only question something when we don't have a favourable result

It is retrospectively, but IF Di Maria had finished his chance or Fellaini had stuck that header in at the end, im not so sure people would be so quick to defend the substitutions he made, which on paper look like they changed the game

 

[moomba]

Just out of curiosity - does anyone remember any time in our recent history where a substitution was as contentious as the ones on derby day?

I really can't. Especially not after we'd won a match. Amazes me in a way people are still quite so bothered by it so many days later.

De Jong on for a forward used to always get a lot of comment, until people realised it was usually an attacking move. Remember Lescott playing upfront, but can't remember if it was a sub or not.

The thing that stood out for me with this one is the obvious and instantaneous difference in the game immediately before and after the subs. MP has had his good days and bad days with subs but I can't think of a time where the game was turned on it's head like Sunday.

Also maybe because a draw would have left us 8 points behind in the league, hanging on the chimps league and out of the league cup. The consequences of not winning that game were pretty severe.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Nasri should have come into the Jovetic pocket, rather than Milner leaving the field.

They were shocking subs in every sense of the word.

Van Persie, Di Maria, a succession of late corners, all a result of taking Milner off and exposing the left hand flank.

If anything, Milner is at his most dangerous in the closing minutes. Lost count the amount of times he has provided a late cross for a goal or got one himself.

Dzeko, although you can be wise after the event and suggest his role was to defend corners, provided zero..

If Dzeko's introduction was to defend set pieces, then you have to ask why Pellegrini felt so panic-stricken to address an issue which did not even exist at that present time, a ten-man United team still penned in on the edge of their 18-yard box.

Obvious wum'ing there my friend. :)

Don't you fecking start ;)

I've buried the lead...Pellegrini attempted to combat a threat which barely existed at that present time, based on some of the arguments being made that the removal of Milner was indeed a correct one?

Which argues the question, what was it that changed on the field of play which enabled a ten-man outfit, who were in full-on damage-limitation mode, suddenly forget themselves and believe they could get something from the game?

And don't give me that United never-say-die bullshit narrative;)

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Nasri should have come into the Jovetic pocket, rather than Milner leaving the field.

They were shocking subs in every sense of the word.

Van Persie, Di Maria, a succession of late corners, all a result of taking Milner off and exposing the left hand flank.

If anything, Milner is at his most dangerous in the closing minutes. Lost count the amount of times he has provided a late cross for a goal or got one himself.

Dzeko, although you can be wise after the event and suggest his role was to defend corners, provided zero..

If Dzeko's introduction was to defend set pieces, then you have to ask why Pellegrini felt so panic-stricken to address an issue which did not even exist at that present time, a ten-man United team still penned in on the edge of their 18-yard box.

Obvious wum'ing there my friend. :)

He's spot on.

 

[BillyShears]

But that's almost like suggesting that we can only question something when we don't have a favourable result

It is retrospectively, but IF Di Maria had finished his chance or Fellaini had stuck that header in at the end, im not so sure people would be so quick to defend the substitutions he made, which on paper look like they changed the game

All ifs and buts though. If Navas scores with the chance that he hit the post with after the subs, then they take on a completely different complexion also.

Based on little things like that, for me it's not such a big deal. We won, we deserved to win, we move on.

 

[BillyShears]

Don't you fecking start ;)

You started it. I'm gonna have to start invoicing you for my time on the phone if you learn nothing from it! :)

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Just out of curiosity - does anyone remember any time in our recent history where a substitution was as contentious as the ones on derby day?

I really can't. Especially not after we'd won a match. Amazes me in a way people are still quite so bothered by it so many days later.

De Jong on for a forward used to always get a lot of comment, until people realised it was usually an attacking move. Remember Lescott playing upfront, but can't remember if it was a sub or not.

The thing that stood out for me with this one is the obvious and instantaneous difference in the game immediately before and after the subs. MP has had his good days and bad days with subs but I can't think of a time where the game was turned on it's head like Sunday.

Also maybe because a draw would have left us 8 points behind in the league, hanging on the chimps league and out of the league cup. The consequences of not winning that game were pretty severe.

It's a wider issue for me. In recent weeks, we have been looking for explanations as to why we have lost certain games or not performed for the full ninety minutes?

Manuel calls the shots in game time and his Milner decision on Sunday made me question his tactical acumen for the first time since Bayern Munich were allowed trampling rights at our place last season.

He can achieve even more great things at this club, no doubt, but even my amateur observations, albeit, cultivated as a member of Joe Public simply watching the game for 30 years, can't assume the manager is always in complete control of the situation.

 

[BillyShears]

He's spot on.

I've said somewhere previously that I'm on the fence in terms of the effect of the subs. From a footballing perspective United had no more joy down our left after Milner went off, which seems to be the implication many people are making as to why the subs were poor. Also in terms of what United actually created after the subs - there was Rooney's run through the middle of the park and then a series of set pieces. But nothing to cause Hart any real problems.

Dzeko and Nasri didn't have the effect the manager wanted and we started giving the ball away way too much. From there you can argue that the giving away of the ball was because Milner went off or because the subs were wrong - lots of people are doing that. I'm not sure I can draw that conclusion definitely and i've watched the game twice now.

 

[supercity88]

Nasri should have come into the Jovetic pocket, rather than Milner leaving the field.

They were shocking subs in every sense of the word.

Van Persie, Di Maria, a succession of late corners, all a result of taking Milner off and exposing the left hand flank.

If anything, Milner is at his most dangerous in the closing minutes. Lost count the amount of times he has provided a late cross for a goal or got one himself.

Dzeko, although you can be wise after the event and suggest his role was to defend corners, provided zero..

If Dzeko's introduction was to defend set pieces, then you have to ask why Pellegrini felt so panic-stricken to address an issue which did not even exist at that present time, a ten-man United team still penned in on the edge of their 18-yard box.

Obvious wum'ing there my friend. :)

Don't you fecking start ;)

I've buried the lead...Pellegrini attempted to combat a threat which barely existed at that present time, based on some of the arguments being made that the removal of Milner was indeed a correct one?

Which argues the question, what was it that changed on the field of play which enabled a ten-man outfit, who were in full-on damage-limitation mode, suddenly forget themselves and believe they could get something from the game?

And don't give me that United never-say-die bullshit narrative;)

I most definitely see where you are coming from. I wouldn't attribute any weight to that never say die bull, but 10 men, 1-0 down and nothing to lose. There was going to be a time we came under attack. What we needed was a system that aimed to keep the ball and tire the rags and pick them off. The Nasri for Jovetic sub would have made sense. The thing is, and we haven't shown it yet this season, Pellegrini believes the side he picks keep the ball well and could contain the rags. To be honest we did for the most part. It was sloppy play that allowed them their opportunities to score, and from the set pieces we defended well.

I see that perhaps he should have done things differently and that we got away with one, but we won the game and we move on. There are clearly still a lot of concerns about Pellegrini. This season he hasn't done much to instill confidence in us fans. Last season he was criticised for the Bayern game at home, poor away form and then the Chelsea loss at home was completely his fault despite no real options being available. He should never have picked Negredo when we were 6-0 up on West Ham going into the 2nd leg of the League Cup. He got it wrong at Anfield until Milner came on.

In the grand scheme of things these are all small issues that haven't made much of an impact. We won the league and league cup last season despite those "mistakes". We could pick a first 11 with a three man midfield and still lose. We could have made those substitutions you mention and still conceded. It's part of the game that things happen against the run of play etc.

For me the concern this season so far is the lack of balance the side has despite playing that way last season. I put it down to a couple of new players and being only a quarter of the way in. Whilst you can't rely on history repeating, I do expect our performances and results to improve from here on. What we had last season was results in our favour. I don't believe we will have too much of that where Chelsea are concerned. If they win at Anfield you have to wonder where they may drop points.

 

[BillyShears]

He can achieve even more great things at this club, no doubt, but even my amateur observations, albeit, cultivated as a member of Joe Public simply watching the game for 30 years, can't assume the manager is always in complete control of the situation.

I guess I fall on the side of the fence which has the school of thought that if you win the derby, after you've been on a poor run as were and after you've lost your most important midfield player to injury, then you give the manager the benefit of the doubt in terms of calls he makes.

For me for 70 minutes that was our most complete performance in terms of defensive solidity and attacking threat.