MO shows what we are lacking

[Neville Kneville]

I can't be arsed reading 9 pages of this but in short, OP- you're so wrong it's untrue.

Seconded.

So Villa, a side several years in the making, are a goal down after being completely outclassed by a superior football team 2 thirds of a season in the making & the manager throws on a 7 foot striker & lumps the ball at his head. Wow! Who would've ever thought he'd do that especially as half their goals come from headers? He signed Marlon Harewood last season, I wonder what mind blowing new tactic he had in mind for him? A sign of true football genius. Hughes would never have had the tactical nous to bring on a 7 foot striker & lump the ball at his head.

Just a shame they barely tested our keeper & our injury ravaged side scored again...

 

[Wheelsy]

The most negative man on the board strikes again. FFS we won 2-0 sans Robinho and Bellamy.

Can you please, please give Hughes an ounce of credit for once? Or are you too proud for that?

 

[Rösler's Dad]

The most negative man on the board strikes again. FFS we won 2-0 sans Robinho and Bellamy.

Can you please, please give Hughes an ounce of credit for once? Or are you too proud for that?

Got to agree, here. I was worried in the 2nd half, not because of MON's supposed tactical brilliance (lol!) but because a) we didn't convert any of our many 2nd half chances, partly down to Friedel. A a 1-0 lead is always fragile and b) de Jong was replaced by the headless chicken, Fernandes. Immediately, Villa had more of the ball.

I did notice, though, SWP's move to the left wing in the 2nd half to help Bridge; but that must have been SWP's personal choice, nothing to do with Hughes! ;0)

My mate, who is not a city or Villa fan, thought we were never in any serious danger at any time in the game, even the 2nd half was all huff and puff by Villa, with no threat at all. He was laughing at the end as we went down in the lift (I'm in a wheelchair now) that all the city fans were expressing great relief we'd not conceded, and were almost bemused we'd played so well; even in the 2nd half we created numerous chances. Of course, he's not had the privilege of seeing City seize defeat from the jaws of victory that I've had so many times in the last 40 years!

 

[kcmcfc]

Stupid post.

City and MH won, MO'N and Villa lost.

So whatever he did in the 2nd half clearly was not that spectacular.

If it was such a brilliant piece of management as you say, then the management from MH was even better to instantly change our game plan and tactics in order to defend the onslaught and win the game on the break.

Again, stupid post.

Don't know if you saw the game last night, but I , like every other City fan at COMS,e was very, very nervous in the second half. There were times when Villa were all over us.

We got a goal at the end as Villa pressed everybody forward. Great that we did.

But, the point stands whether you say it's stupid or not. O'Neil changed the game at half time and I've never known Hughes' to do anything similar.

Fernandes in for De Jong.

 

[Always Ali]

Great result against Villa.

At half time O'Neil made changes and Villa gave us a much sterner test as a result.

He analysed the situation correctly, put on a second striker and essentially stopped us playing the ball quickly across the backline. Martin O'Neil completely changed Villa's game plan at half time and made them massively more competitive as a result. On another night they might well have got something from the game.

Now, how many times this season have we seen City change the gameplan mid match? How many times have we seen a change in formation and tactics shift the balance of a game in our favour? I can't remember. We only ever have one plan and if it isn't working we simply do more of it.

Martin O'Neil last night did what a good manager should do. He made decisive and intelligent changes. Mark Hughes seems to lack the ability to do that. If the plan isn't working, he is comparitively clueless as to how to change it. We need a creative, intelligent manager. MH is not it.

mammulty in not very popular poster shock!!

 

[Shooter 83]

This has got to be a wind up.

 

[blue John]

I could not be assed reading all the pages but I think all game thay had 1 shot on target

 

[droylsdenblue]

He changed it because he was losing! and he still lost.

 

[mammutly]

Not a surprising reaction from bluemoon really. There are only a few posters who are prepared to stand apart and actaully judge an issue on its' merits. Most are more concerned with joining in and laughing with the mob.

I'll say what I think and argue my point with anyone. If if that makes me 'negative', 'unpopular' or worse, then fuck you. At least I'm not a sheep.

 

[stony]

Not a surprising reaction from bluemoon really. There are only a few posters who are prepared to stand apart and actaully judge an issue on its' merits. Most are more concerned with joining in and laughing with the mob.

I'll say what I think and argue my point with anyone. If if that makes me 'negative', 'unpopular' or worse, then fuck you. At least I'm not a sheep.

What fucking merit ? We outplayed them the first half and scored. MON changed it around and we lost arguably our most influential player for the second half and they fought back.
We defended well and scored another. Your point if you actually have one(apart from slagging Hughes) is complete bollocks.