Mr Mancini. You are a liar.

[AlthamBlue]

NO!!! It's not boring, it's tactical, no team in the top 4 goes out gungho against each other or they end up getting spanked like Arsenal do each year.
.

I'm not Italian. It's boring.

Well if we win the 3 Championships and numerous domestic cups Arsene Wenger's Arsenal has done, then I think we'll all be rather happy don't you? They also achieve Champions League football every year without fail.

Can you remind me what Arsenal have won in the last 5 years?

 

[cynghordy]

Very good article in the Times last Saturday about Mancini - an original and a winner. So its Forza Mancini for me.

 

[K.Reeves right foot]

What the OP seems to have completely missed is yes in years gone by we threw everything at them and won some 3-1, 4-1 or whatever. But we also finished 9th or 14th or whatever in those seasons. Gung ho football will only get you so far in the modern game.

The mistake you make there is that I never advocated gung-ho football. You use the polar oppposite to justify sterile football. There is more than sterile V gung-ho, there is the solid defence with solid yet attacking midfield with dangerous front line where the team attack as a unit and defend as a unit. Chelsea are often described as boring, they are not, they are solid yet have flair in the right places. We have the players to do this yet use sterile tactics instead.

Even United in the 90s played 4-4-2 with attacking wingers in the big games, and that's one of the reasons they under achieved in Europe because against a more tactically astute manager you will get exposed.

I would say that even though they underachieved, there were times Taggart took risks and won away at Juventus in semi [thuink it was Juve] playing an attacking formation when everyone said Utd would get picked off, sometimes as a manahgfer you have to be bold, take a chance, Mancini has never taken a chance since he got here, not last season [it cost us] and not this seeason and I think the fear is that we will underachieve again due to this fear of being bold and trusting your players to take a risk in a controlled way.

We should take it as a compliment the way United were set up against us, the same way as if they were playing Barcelona or Chelsea or Real Madrid. They came to contain and play on the break, they changed their system because they were showing US too much respect!

Wrong. Remember the Scum had several players out injured - mainly their attacking flair players Giggs, Valencia and Shrek. Nani was half fit with an ankle problem. Several other players had or were recovering from viruses [apparently enduced form Taggarts spit]...so they were severely weakened, we had a very strong side out yet they controlled the game better and under the circumstances, playing away to a team 4th was maybe a point gained, we were at home, full strength [bar 1] and ended up clinging on for the draw. That's dissapointing to say the least.
We have played that system for most of the season,
I'm sure you weren't complaining with the performances and results against Chelsea
I was happy with a win but alarmed at how we played, but we got away with it due to 1 killer strike. That NEVER looked like materialising against a far weaker Scum on wed.

We have played that system for most of the season, I'm sure you weren't complaining with the performances and results against Chelsea and Liverpool, but we were set up in much the same way, it's just we can up against a team that pretty much "parked the bus".
The derby wasn't a great spectacle, it was a very tight, cagey game. Both teams wanted to play on the break and cancelled each other out because neither wanted to attack and leave themselves vulnerable.

Since when did attacking leave you vulnerable? How nieve! OK then, what have football teams been doing for the last 100 years?! How do teams win titles, cups? By attacking whilst retaining a solid base which is what we have! This thing about not attacking for fear of being vulnerable is nonesense when you have the defence we do and the solid midfield we do, its that mind set which holds us back. I actually trust our defence and any of 2 defensive midfielders to be able to cope with opposition attacks, leaving 3-4 players free to attack. Sadly, people like you don't, and more importantly neither does mancini. Maybe it's you who needs to question why, with our defence and a midfield 2 containing DeJong and Barry/Yay/Milner can't allow 3-4 players to attack freely with the 6 defensive players as an insurance if we loose the ball.


It's like watching two defensive boxers, it often makes for a boring fight. But as much as I love him, fighting like Ricky Hatton will only get you so far. Flloyd Mayweather Jnr has often been criticised for being too defensive and boring, will be remembered as one of the greatest of all time


Hate boxing but what I do know, the best boxers have that ONE knock out punch which floors the opponent. We didn't even have a tickle under the chin.
.

 

[schfc6]

What the OP seems to have completely missed is yes in years gone by we threw everything at them and won some 3-1, 4-1 or whatever. But we also finished 9th or 14th or whatever in those seasons. Gung ho football will only get you so far in the modern game.

The mistake you make there is that I never advocated gung-ho football. You use the polar oppposite to justify sterile football. There is more than sterile V gung-ho, there is the solid defence with solid yet attacking midfield with dangerous front line where the team attack as a unit and defend as a unit. Chelsea are often described as boring, they are not, they are solid yet have flair in the right places. We have the players to do this yet use sterile tactics instead.

Even United in the 90s played 4-4-2 with attacking wingers in the big games, and that's one of the reasons they under achieved in Europe because against a more tactically astute manager you will get exposed.

I would say that even though they underachieved, there were times Taggart took risks and won away at Juventus in semi [thuink it was Juve] playing an attacking formation when everyone said Utd would get picked off, sometimes as a manahgfer you have to be bold, take a chance, Mancini has never taken a chance since he got here, not last season [it cost us] and not this seeason and I think the fear is that we will underachieve again due to this fear of being bold and trusting your players to take a risk in a controlled way.

We should take it as a compliment the way United were set up against us, the same way as if they were playing Barcelona or Chelsea or Real Madrid. They came to contain and play on the break, they changed their system because they were showing US too much respect!

Wrong. Remember the Scum had several players out injured - mainly their attacking flair players Giggs, Valencia and Shrek. Nani was half fit with an ankle problem. Several other players had or were recovering from viruses [apparently enduced form Taggarts spit]...so they were severely weakened, we had a very strong side out yet they controlled the game better and under the circumstances, playing away to a team 4th was maybe a point gained, we were at home, full strength [bar 1] and ended up clinging on for the draw. That's dissapointing to say the least.
We have played that system for most of the season, I'm sure you weren't complaining with the performances and results against Chelsea
I was happy with a win but alarmed at how we played, but we got away with it due to 1 killer strike. That NEVER looked like materialising against a far weaker Scum on wed.

We have played that system for most of the season, I'm sure you weren't complaining with the performances and results against Chelsea and Liverpool, but we were set up in much the same way, it's just we can up against a team that pretty much "parked the bus".
The derby wasn't a great spectacle, it was a very tight, cagey game. Both teams wanted to play on the break and cancelled each other out because neither wanted to attack and leave themselves vulnerable.

Since when did attacking leave you vulnerable? How nieve! OK then, what have football teams been doing for the last 100 years?! How do teams win titles, cups? By attacking whilst retaining a solid base which is what we have! This thing about not attacking for fear of being vulnerable is nonesense when you have the defence we do and the solid midfield we do, its that mind set which holds us back. I actually trust our defence and any of 2 defensive midfielders to be able to cope with opposition attacks, leaving 3-4 players free to attack. Sadly, people like you don't, and more importantly neither does mancini. Maybe it's you who needs to question why, with our defence and a midfield 2 containing DeJong and Barry/Yay/Milner can't allow 3-4 players to attack freely with the 6 defensive players as an insurance if we loose the ball.


It's like watching two defensive boxers, it often makes for a boring fight. But as much as I love him, fighting like Ricky Hatton will only get you so far. Flloyd Mayweather Jnr has often been criticised for being too defensive and boring, will be remembered as one of the greatest of all time


Hate boxing but what I do know, the best boxers have that ONE knock out punch which floors the opponent. We didn't even have a tickle under the chin.
.

The derby wasn't a great spectacle, it was a very tight, cagey game. Both teams wanted to play on the break and cancelled each other out because neither wanted to attack and leave themselves vulnerable.

"Since when did attacking leave you vulnerable? How nieve! OK then, what have football teams been doing for the last 100 years?! How do teams win titles, cups? By attacking! This thing about not attacking for fear of being vulnerable is nonesense when you have the defence we do and the solid midfield we do, its that mind set which holds us back. I actually trust our defence and any of 2 defensive midfielders to be able to cope with opposition attacks, leaving 3-4 players free to attack. Sadly, people like you don't, and more importantly neither does mancini. Maybe it's you who needs to question why, with our defence and a midfield containing DeJong and Barry can't allow 3-4 players to attack freely with the 6 defensive players as an insurance if we loose the ball."

Have you ever watched a world cup final?
Teams in history that win things do so with a great defence.
Then you build, you have no patients, what is your problem? Do yourself a favour watch the WBA game where Mancini fielded almost his strongest starting Xi and tell me it was dull!
If you don't like the road to honours, prefer your old stuck in your ways lovable/laughable old City go follow someone else, but please, why would you be trying to destabilise the good ship MCFC, can you not see that true City fans do not want the likes of you and your negativity around?

 

[K.Reeves right foot]

The derby wasn't a great spectacle, it was a very tight, cagey game. Both teams wanted to play on the break and cancelled each other out because neither wanted to attack and leave themselves vulnerable.

"Since when did attacking leave you vulnerable? How nieve! OK then, what have football teams been doing for the last 100 years?! How do teams win titles, cups? By attacking! This thing about not attacking for fear of being vulnerable is nonesense when you have the defence we do and the solid midfield we do, its that mind set which holds us back. I actually trust our defence and any of 2 defensive midfielders to be able to cope with opposition attacks, leaving 3-4 players free to attack. Sadly, people like you don't, and more importantly neither does mancini. Maybe it's you who needs to question why, with our defence and a midfield containing DeJong and Barry can't allow 3-4 players to attack freely with the 6 defensive players as an insurance if we loose the ball."

Have you ever watched a world cup final?
Teams in history that win things do so with a great defence.
Then you build, you have no patients, what is your problem? Do yourself a favour watch the WBA game where Mancini fielded almost his strongest starting Xi and tell me it was dull!
If you don't like the road to honours, prefer your old stuck in your ways lovable/laughable old City go follow someone else, but please, why would you be trying to destabilise the good ship MCFC, can you not see that true City fans do not want the likes of you and your negativity around?

Sorry my friend I ain't going anywhere. Been here since 1976 and still here throuigh the years of dross, dross and more dross. Don't try to patronise me with that superior attitude.
Every sentence you write just falls down on itself, you defeat your own argument every time.
The point aboput loveable/laughable City. It's your mentality which keeps this going. If you read my post you wioll see that I expect more now. I don't want that tag as I trust we have the players to win and win with more style. You may be happy with a point against an average team but i'mnot anymore. Once I was, when we had crap players but now I expect more, my expectations are higher. I don't expect titles just yet but I expect more balls from a manager who tells us we are a club in need of a winning mentality. Substitutin Ade with a minute left was exactly what you want us not to be, it was laughable.
'True Man City fans' sadly you reduce this discussion to a playground competition as to who is the best fan....has your dad got a bigger cock than mine aswell??? Pathetic tactics, if you can't have am intelligent discussion then I suggest you go and play with your skipping rope in the playground my friend. I merely have been constructive in my views.

 

[schfc6]

The derby wasn't a great spectacle, it was a very tight, cagey game. Both teams wanted to play on the break and cancelled each other out because neither wanted to attack and leave themselves vulnerable.

"Since when did attacking leave you vulnerable? How nieve! OK then, what have football teams been doing for the last 100 years?! How do teams win titles, cups? By attacking! This thing about not attacking for fear of being vulnerable is nonesense when you have the defence we do and the solid midfield we do, its that mind set which holds us back. I actually trust our defence and any of 2 defensive midfielders to be able to cope with opposition attacks, leaving 3-4 players free to attack. Sadly, people like you don't, and more importantly neither does mancini. Maybe it's you who needs to question why, with our defence and a midfield containing DeJong and Barry can't allow 3-4 players to attack freely with the 6 defensive players as an insurance if we loose the ball."

Have you ever watched a world cup final?
Teams in history that win things do so with a great defence.
Then you build, you have no patients, what is your problem? Do yourself a favour watch the WBA game where Mancini fielded almost his strongest starting Xi and tell me it was dull!
If you don't like the road to honours, prefer your old stuck in your ways lovable/laughable old City go follow someone else, but please, why would you be trying to destabilise the good ship MCFC, can you not see that true City fans do not want the likes of you and your negativity around?

Sorry my friend I ain't going anywhere. Been here since 1976 and still here throuigh the years of dross, dross and more dross. Don't try to patronise me with that superior attitude.
Every sentence you write just falls down on itself, you defeat your own argument every time.
The point aboput loveable/laughable City. It's your mentality which keeps this going. If you read my post you wioll see that I expect more now. I don't want that tag as I trust we have the players to win and win with more style. You may be happy with a point against an average team but i'mnot anymore. Once I was, when we had crap players but now I expect more, my expectations are higher. I don't expect titles just yet but I expect more balls from a manager who tells us we are a club in need of a winning mentality. Substitutin Ade with a minute left was exactly what you want us not to be, it was laughable.
'True Man City fans' sadly you reduce this discussion to a playground competition as to who is the best fan....has your dad got a bigger cock than mine aswell??? Pathetic tactics, if you can't have am intelligent discussion then I suggest you go and play with your skipping rope in the playground my friend. I merely have been constructive in my views.

It's kind of hard to interpret what you are saying, are you saying you want instant success?
That doesn't happen, the road to success is rocky, we can't play well every week, as I say and you conveniently ignore did you watch the WBA game?
You are obviously blind to what it takes to establish success in any walk of life. Yes the derby was dull, nervy edgy affair, have you ever stopped to think that perhaps the greatest manager of all time wanted it to be a dull game? Perhaps the fact that United had no interest in winning made it very difficult for us to win, when on this occasion there was no magic from one of our players.
How can you not accept the opinion that perhaps you are jumping the gun a little when it comes to Mancini?
To be a success City as fans, players, manager, directors and owner all need to stick together.
You maybe familiar with the term 'siege mentality' we need that. Mourinho had the whole world believing that Chelsea were the best team ever, the whole world bought it. You and I can know that J Terry is crap and a prick and the Cashley Cole is a scourge on football, you find me a Chelsea fan that doesn't want their children..
Mancini is getting it together, the Derby is not the be all and end all, and anyone who thinks it is, is of the wrong mentality for success. I think Mancini is doing a very good job, obviously there are times of frustration ie Wednesday, but his signings are exciting surely that indicates that he intends to be exciting, you don't sign Balotelli and Silva if you want to be negative.
Give the guy a chance, he still hasn't played what most would consider his full strength side yet.

 

[K.Reeves right foot]

Sorry my friend I ain't going anywhere. Been here since 1976 and still here throuigh the years of dross, dross and more dross. Don't try to patronise me with that superior attitude.
Every sentence you write just falls down on itself, you defeat your own argument every time.
The point aboput loveable/laughable City. It's your mentality which keeps this going. If you read my post you wioll see that I expect more now. I don't want that tag as I trust we have the players to win and win with more style. You may be happy with a point against an average team but i'mnot anymore. Once I was, when we had crap players but now I expect more, my expectations are higher. I don't expect titles just yet but I expect more balls from a manager who tells us we are a club in need of a winning mentality. Substitutin Ade with a minute left was exactly what you want us not to be, it was laughable.
'True Man City fans' sadly you reduce this discussion to a playground competition as to who is the best fan....has your dad got a bigger cock than mine aswell??? Pathetic tactics, if you can't have am intelligent discussion then I suggest you go and play with your skipping rope in the playground my friend. I merely have been constructive in my views.

It's kind of hard to interpret what you are saying, are you saying you want instant success?
That doesn't happen, the road to success is rocky, we can't play well every week, as I say and you conveniently ignore did you watch the WBA game?
You are obviously blind to what it takes to establish success in any walk of life. Yes the derby was dull, nervy edgy affair, have you ever stopped to think that perhaps the greatest manager of all time wanted it to be a dull game? Perhaps the fact that United had no interest in winning made it very difficult for us to win, when on this occasion there was no magic from one of our players.
How can you not accept the opinion that perhaps you are jumping the gun a little when it comes to Mancini?
To be a success City as fans, players, manager, directors and owner all need to stick together.
You maybe familiar with the term 'siege mentality' we need that. Mourinho had the whole world believing that Chelsea were the best team ever, the whole world bought it. You and I can know that J Terry is crap and a prick and the Cashley Cole is a scourge on football, you find me a Chelsea fan that doesn't want their children..
Mancini is getting it together, the Derby is not the be all and end all, and anyone who thinks it is, is of the wrong mentality for success. I think Mancini is doing a very good job, obviously there are times of frustration ie Wednesday, but his signings are exciting surely that indicates that he intends to be exciting, you don't sign Balotelli and Silva if you want to be negative.
Give the guy a chance, he still hasn't played what most would consider his full strength side yet.

I stated clearly that I do not expect instant success. I am intelligent enough to realise that it takes time to build a side yet the method is sterile.
Yes I watched the WBA game but what is your point? We played well yes, but I have no complaints against that. That 1 game does not justify all the other sterile games and there have been many this season and last. One good performance doesn't negate many awful ones.
I am blind as to what it takes to establish success in any walk of life? really? mmmmm Don't think so my friend!!
The greatest manager wanted a draw? who? Mourinho? Paisley? Shankley? machin? How you know this?
If you think the scum played for a draw you are deluded. They were cautious as an away team can be, but they tried to attack, and did so many times and it was only the fact they are a poor side they couldn't break us down. Yes, they are a poor side believe me.
The argumnt about his strongest side is weak. NO side this weekend will have their strongest side guaranteed. Never happens. All sides have injuries, suspensions etc. So you think that we have to have a definite 11 players to play well with our squad of players? So 1 or 2 omissions and it all goes to pot? Then we are in trouble as we'll invariably not have our strongets side out for the rest of the season.
John Terry crap? No he isn't! He's a damn good centre half. Maybe slowing down now, but I agree he is a prick of the highest order. Cashley Cole is a world class full back, and a prick but I fail to see what point you are making there...

 

[Mancio]

The derby wasn't a great spectacle, it was a very tight, cagey game. Both teams wanted to play on the break and cancelled each other out because neither wanted to attack and leave themselves vulnerable.

"Since when did attacking leave you vulnerable? How nieve! OK then, what have football teams been doing for the last 100 years?! How do teams win titles, cups? By attacking! This thing about not attacking for fear of being vulnerable is nonesense when you have the defence we do and the solid midfield we do, its that mind set which holds us back. I actually trust our defence and any of 2 defensive midfielders to be able to cope with opposition attacks, leaving 3-4 players free to attack. Sadly, people like you don't, and more importantly neither does mancini. Maybe it's you who needs to question why, with our defence and a midfield containing DeJong and Barry can't allow 3-4 players to attack freely with the 6 defensive players as an insurance if we loose the ball."

Have you ever watched a world cup final?
Teams in history that win things do so with a great defence.
Then you build, you have no patients, what is your problem? Do yourself a favour watch the WBA game where Mancini fielded almost his strongest starting Xi and tell me it was dull!
If you don't like the road to honours, prefer your old stuck in your ways lovable/laughable old City go follow someone else, but please, why would you be trying to destabilise the good ship MCFC, can you not see that true City fans do not want the likes of you and your negativity around?

Sorry my friend I ain't going anywhere. Been here since 1976 and still here throuigh the years of dross, dross and more dross. Don't try to patronise me with that superior attitude.
Every sentence you write just falls down on itself, you defeat your own argument every time.
The point aboput loveable/laughable City. It's your mentality which keeps this going. If you read my post you VOMIT.

this

 

[Shaelumstash]

What the OP seems to have completely missed is yes in years gone by we threw everything at them and won some 3-1, 4-1 or whatever. But we also finished 9th or 14th or whatever in those seasons. Gung ho football will only get you so far in the modern game.

The mistake you make there is that I never advocated gung-ho football. You use the polar oppposite to justify sterile football. There is more than sterile V gung-ho, there is the solid defence with solid yet attacking midfield with dangerous front line where the team attack as a unit and defend as a unit. Chelsea are often described as boring, they are not, they are solid yet have flair in the right places. We have the players to do this yet use sterile tactics instead.

Even United in the 90s played 4-4-2 with attacking wingers in the big games, and that's one of the reasons they under achieved in Europe because against a more tactically astute manager you will get exposed.

I would say that even though they underachieved, there were times Taggart took risks and won away at Juventus in semi [thuink it was Juve] playing an attacking formation when everyone said Utd would get picked off, sometimes as a manahgfer you have to be bold, take a chance, Mancini has never taken a chance since he got here, not last season [it cost us] and not this seeason and I think the fear is that we will underachieve again due to this fear of being bold and trusting your players to take a risk in a controlled way.

We should take it as a compliment the way United were set up against us, the same way as if they were playing Barcelona or Chelsea or Real Madrid. They came to contain and play on the break, they changed their system because they were showing US too much respect!

Wrong. Remember the Scum had several players out injured - mainly their attacking flair players Giggs, Valencia and Shrek. Nani was half fit with an ankle problem. Several other players had or were recovering from viruses [apparently enduced form Taggarts spit]...so they were severely weakened, we had a very strong side out yet they controlled the game better and under the circumstances, playing away to a team 4th was maybe a point gained, we were at home, full strength [bar 1] and ended up clinging on for the draw. That's dissapointing to say the least.
We have played that system for most of the season,
I'm sure you weren't complaining with the performances and results against Chelsea
I was happy with a win but alarmed at how we played, but we got away with it due to 1 killer strike. That NEVER looked like materialising against a far weaker Scum on wed.

We have played that system for most of the season, I'm sure you weren't complaining with the performances and results against Chelsea and Liverpool, but we were set up in much the same way, it's just we can up against a team that pretty much "parked the bus".
The derby wasn't a great spectacle, it was a very tight, cagey game. Both teams wanted to play on the break and cancelled each other out because neither wanted to attack and leave themselves vulnerable.

Since when did attacking leave you vulnerable? How nieve! OK then, what have football teams been doing for the last 100 years?! How do teams win titles, cups? By attacking whilst retaining a solid base which is what we have! This thing about not attacking for fear of being vulnerable is nonesense when you have the defence we do and the solid midfield we do, its that mind set which holds us back. I actually trust our defence and any of 2 defensive midfielders to be able to cope with opposition attacks, leaving 3-4 players free to attack. Sadly, people like you don't, and more importantly neither does mancini. Maybe it's you who needs to question why, with our defence and a midfield 2 containing DeJong and Barry/Yay/Milner can't allow 3-4 players to attack freely with the 6 defensive players as an insurance if we loose the ball.


It's like watching two defensive boxers, it often makes for a boring fight. But as much as I love him, fighting like Ricky Hatton will only get you so far. Flloyd Mayweather Jnr has often been criticised for being too defensive and boring, will be remembered as one of the greatest of all time


Hate boxing but what I do know, the best boxers have that ONE knock out punch which floors the opponent. We didn't even have a tickle under the chin.
.

I could go through every single point you just made and turn it round but I'm sure the rest of the forum don't want to see this turning in to a slanging match. I will pick you up on the major points, however.

United did indeed play an attacking side away at Juventus in 1999 when they needed 3 goals to go through. That was 11 years ago. Look at the way he has set his side up for the big European games in the last 10 years, he plays with 1 striker in the vast majority. If he only played like this against us because of injuries why was Chicharito on the bench? And why did he bring Berbatov off before he brought him on? Because he knows we are a major threat now.

Chelsea under Mourinho were universally lauded as boring, and it's hard to argue against. They won 6 trophies in 3 years, i'd take that.

If you were alarmed that we played on the counter attack against Chelsea at home and won 1-0 then I suggest you need a change of mentality yourself. Ancelotti said himself in the build up that we beat them twice last year by playing on the counter. That's 3 out of 3 for Mancini against Chelsea playing in this 'alarming' way and they are one of the best sides in Europe.

Teams may have won things with attacking football in the last 100 years, but in the modern day many top teams play with 1 up front, Chelsea under Mourinho, Inter under Mourinho, Liverpool, Arsenal, United at times, Munich, Italy. There's more than one way to skin a cat. Forget the derby, it's one game, we are 4th, 5 points in front of Spurs, if you're not happy with that then dig out your favourite Brian Horton video's and watch us win the odd game 4-3 and get relegated.

 

[K.Reeves right foot]

I could go through every single point you just made and turn it round but I'm sure the rest of the forum don't want to see this turning in to a slanging match. I will pick you up on the major points, however.

United did indeed play an attacking side away at Juventus in 1999 when they needed 3 goals to go through. That was 11 years ago. Look at the way he has set his side up for the big European games in the last 10 years, he plays with 1 striker in the vast majority. If he only played like this against us because of injuries why was Chicharito on the bench? And why did he bring Berbatov off before he brought him on? Because he knows we are a major threat now.

Chelsea under Mourinho were universally lauded as boring, and it's hard to argue against. They won 6 trophies in 3 years, i'd take that.

If you were alarmed that we played on the counter attack against Chelsea at home and won 1-0 then I suggest you need a change of mentality yourself. Ancelotti said himself in the build up that we beat them twice last year by playing on the counter. That's 3 out of 3 for Mancini against Chelsea playing in this 'alarming' way and they are one of the best sides in Europe.

Teams may have won things with attacking football in the last 100 years, but in the modern day many top teams play with 1 up front, Chelsea under Mourinho, Inter under Mourinho, Liverpool, Arsenal, United at times, Munich, Italy. There's more than one way to skin a cat. Forget the derby, it's one game, we are 4th, 5 points in front of Spurs, if you're not happy with that then dig out your favourite Brian Horton video's and watch us win the odd game 4-3 and get relegated.

Actually i'm sure the rest of the forum would as everyone likes a good old row!
The Scum substitution: remember The Scum were the AWAY side. We were the home side. Does this not mean anyhting to you? You make the mistake of justifying OUR tactics based on what ferguson did. For me it's not a caseof worrying about what he did but what we did, we should have taken the game to them more simple. Yes he withdrew a striker for a striker but would he do the same at the Swamp? I doubt it. They would go for the win believe me. Maybe we will have to wait til the return fixture to see just how different it will be.

Yes Chelsea were boring at times but they were boring whilst winning very very consistently. We are not at that level so it's a false comparison. Yes we have beaten Chelsea 3 times. Last season 2 times yet still messed up the overall picture. Don't use the argument of Utd is just another match then latch on o results against another team as an example. We beat Chelsea yet strugled against Blackburn, newcastle, Sunderland etc...Chelsea would destroy these lesser teams, we raise ourselves against Chelsea yet flounder against some smaller teams. THAT is not a recipe for success.

Have many Horton videos mate but why refer to that period?
Unlike you and some others I have faith in the players we have. Just not in the man in charghe of them. I sincerely hope he proves me wrong but game by game the evidence supports my suspicions.