My opinion about Kolarov

[Ric]

Re: The truth about Kolorov

if micah and cliche wudda played tonight i dont think we'd be having this conversation

I don't think it was purely the full backs who cost us the game tonight. Yaya had one of his poorest games in a City shirt, Dzeko was ineffective, Balotelli looked too eager to please; it was a collectively lethargic performance. I don't thnk changing the full backs would've changed that.

The full backs make a massive difference to how we play. Our back 4 tonight would come last in a Champions League 4 x 100m relay! And last in a 4 x 10m relay! Not one quick player between them, playing against a lightning quick counter attacking team! With our 2 quickest defenders in the stands, makes absolutely no sense!

Also going forward, playing against a back 3, there is always going to be space down the flanks and Zaba offers absolutely nothing going forward. Having Richards overlapping down the right would have allowed Silva to drift inside where he is so effective.

Not playing Richards and Clichy and to a lesser extent Barry and Aguero cost us the game tonight.

Kompany is no slouch, and their first goal came from a corner so quick full backs wouldn't have made much of a difference there. I agree it wasn't a quick back four we played tonight (although probably not as slow as you suggest), but I don't think that was the sole reason we lost. There were plenty of times Zabaleta and Kolarov were in acres of space down the flanks, but were never utilised.

 

[jayblue]

Re: The truth about Kolorov

I don't think it was purely the full backs who cost us the game tonight. Yaya had one of his poorest games in a City shirt, Dzeko was ineffective, Balotelli looked too eager to please; it was a collectively lethargic performance. I don't thnk changing the full backs would've changed that.

The full backs make a massive difference to how we play. Our back 4 tonight would come last in a Champions League 4 x 100m relay! And last in a 4 x 10m relay! Not one quick player between them, playing against a lightning quick counter attacking team! With our 2 quickest defenders in the stands, makes absolutely no sense!

Also going forward, playing against a back 3, there is always going to be space down the flanks and Zaba offers absolutely nothing going forward. Having Richards overlapping down the right would have allowed Silva to drift inside where he is so effective.

Not playing Richards and Clichy and to a lesser extent Barry and Aguero cost us the game tonight.

Kompany is no slouch, and their first goal came from a corner so quick full backs wouldn't have made much of a difference there. I agree it wasn't a quick back four we played tonight (although probably not as slow as you suggest), but I don't think that was the sole reason we lost. There were plenty of times Zabaleta and Kolarov were in acres of space down the flanks, but were never utilised.

i wonder why ?

 

[Ric]

Re: The truth about Kolorov

The full backs make a massive difference to how we play. Our back 4 tonight would come last in a Champions League 4 x 100m relay! And last in a 4 x 10m relay! Not one quick player between them, playing against a lightning quick counter attacking team! With our 2 quickest defenders in the stands, makes absolutely no sense!

Also going forward, playing against a back 3, there is always going to be space down the flanks and Zaba offers absolutely nothing going forward. Having Richards overlapping down the right would have allowed Silva to drift inside where he is so effective.

Not playing Richards and Clichy and to a lesser extent Barry and Aguero cost us the game tonight.

Kompany is no slouch, and their first goal came from a corner so quick full backs wouldn't have made much of a difference there. I agree it wasn't a quick back four we played tonight (although probably not as slow as you suggest), but I don't think that was the sole reason we lost. There were plenty of times Zabaleta and Kolarov were in acres of space down the flanks, but were never utilised.

i wonder why ?

Wrong choices by the player in possession?

 

[Shaelumstash]

Re: The truth about Kolorov

I don't think it was purely the full backs who cost us the game tonight. Yaya had one of his poorest games in a City shirt, Dzeko was ineffective, Balotelli looked too eager to please; it was a collectively lethargic performance. I don't thnk changing the full backs would've changed that.

The full backs make a massive difference to how we play. Our back 4 tonight would come last in a Champions League 4 x 100m relay! And last in a 4 x 10m relay! Not one quick player between them, playing against a lightning quick counter attacking team! With our 2 quickest defenders in the stands, makes absolutely no sense!

Also going forward, playing against a back 3, there is always going to be space down the flanks and Zaba offers absolutely nothing going forward. Having Richards overlapping down the right would have allowed Silva to drift inside where he is so effective.

Not playing Richards and Clichy and to a lesser extent Barry and Aguero cost us the game tonight.

Kompany is no slouch, and their first goal came from a corner so quick full backs wouldn't have made much of a difference there. I agree it wasn't a quick back four we played tonight (although probably not as slow as you suggest), but I don't think that was the sole reason we lost. There were plenty of times Zabaleta and Kolarov were in acres of space down the flanks, but were never utilised.

Kompany is probably the quickest of the 4 but he still got exposed against the raw pace of Lavessi a few times.

I agree regarding the first goal, but I think you're veering in to the Andy Gray school of football territory here. It's an overly simple view to only analyse the mistakes on goals you have conceded as the reason you lost.

Football is more complicated that that. The pattern of play ebbs and flows over 90 minutes. We looked vulnerable to counter attacks all night and that affects the way the whole team plays.

It affects how cautious we are when in possession, it affects how high a line the back 4 plays, it affects how eager the full backs are to overlap and offer something in our attacking third.

Playing Clichy and Richards would have completely changed the pattern of the game over 90 minutes.

 

[Ric]

Re: The truth about Kolorov

The full backs make a massive difference to how we play. Our back 4 tonight would come last in a Champions League 4 x 100m relay! And last in a 4 x 10m relay! Not one quick player between them, playing against a lightning quick counter attacking team! With our 2 quickest defenders in the stands, makes absolutely no sense!

Also going forward, playing against a back 3, there is always going to be space down the flanks and Zaba offers absolutely nothing going forward. Having Richards overlapping down the right would have allowed Silva to drift inside where he is so effective.

Not playing Richards and Clichy and to a lesser extent Barry and Aguero cost us the game tonight.

Kompany is no slouch, and their first goal came from a corner so quick full backs wouldn't have made much of a difference there. I agree it wasn't a quick back four we played tonight (although probably not as slow as you suggest), but I don't think that was the sole reason we lost. There were plenty of times Zabaleta and Kolarov were in acres of space down the flanks, but were never utilised.

Kompany is probably the quickest of the 4 but he still got exposed against the raw pace of Lavessi a few times.

I agree regarding the first goal, but I think you're veering in to the Andy Gray school of football territory here. It's an overly simple view to only analyse the mistakes on goals you have conceded as the reason you lost.

Football is more complicated that that. The pattern of play ebbs and flows over 90 minutes. We looked vulnerable to counter attacks all night and that affects the way the whole team plays.

It affects how cautious we are when in possession, it affects how high a line the back 4 plays, it affects how eager the full backs are to overlap and offer something in our attacking third.

Playing Clichy and Richards would have completely changed the pattern of the game over 90 minutes.

Point taken, although I think it's equally over simplistic to state that different full backs would've completely changed the pattern of the game. You could argue that playing attacking full backs woud've left us even more exposed to the counter attack. It's all hypothetical ultimately.

 

[pudge]

Re: The truth about Kolorov

The excuse of, "Kolarov wasn't the only bad player" is fair enough, but it is the fact that he is the one who is consistently poor which is why he is criticized so much

 

[Shaelumstash]

Re: The truth about Kolorov

Kompany is no slouch, and their first goal came from a corner so quick full backs wouldn't have made much of a difference there. I agree it wasn't a quick back four we played tonight (although probably not as slow as you suggest), but I don't think that was the sole reason we lost. There were plenty of times Zabaleta and Kolarov were in acres of space down the flanks, but were never utilised.

Kompany is probably the quickest of the 4 but he still got exposed against the raw pace of Lavessi a few times.

I agree regarding the first goal, but I think you're veering in to the Andy Gray school of football territory here. It's an overly simple view to only analyse the mistakes on goals you have conceded as the reason you lost.

Football is more complicated that that. The pattern of play ebbs and flows over 90 minutes. We looked vulnerable to counter attacks all night and that affects the way the whole team plays.

It affects how cautious we are when in possession, it affects how high a line the back 4 plays, it affects how eager the full backs are to overlap and offer something in our attacking third.

Playing Clichy and Richards would have completely changed the pattern of the game over 90 minutes.

Point taken, although I think it's equally over simplistic to state that different full backs would've completely changed the pattern of the game. You could ague that playing attacking full backs woud've left us even more exposed to the counter attack. It's all hypothetical ultimately.

Yeh that's a fair point as well, it is all hypothetical and changing the full backs may have made no difference. When I saw the starting line up though my initial reaction was that Lavessi and Hamsik were going to rip our full backs apart and I saw nothing during the game that changed my mind! That Maggi had a good go too!

 

[Ric]

Re: The truth about Kolorov

Kompany is probably the quickest of the 4 but he still got exposed against the raw pace of Lavessi a few times.

I agree regarding the first goal, but I think you're veering in to the Andy Gray school of football territory here. It's an overly simple view to only analyse the mistakes on goals you have conceded as the reason you lost.

Football is more complicated that that. The pattern of play ebbs and flows over 90 minutes. We looked vulnerable to counter attacks all night and that affects the way the whole team plays.

It affects how cautious we are when in possession, it affects how high a line the back 4 plays, it affects how eager the full backs are to overlap and offer something in our attacking third.

Playing Clichy and Richards would have completely changed the pattern of the game over 90 minutes.

Point taken, although I think it's equally over simplistic to state that different full backs would've completely changed the pattern of the game. You could ague that playing attacking full backs woud've left us even more exposed to the counter attack. It's all hypothetical ultimately.

Yeh that's a fair point as well, it is all hypothetical and changing the full backs may have made no difference. When I saw the starting line up though my initial reaction was that Lavessi and Hamsik were going to rip our full backs apart and I saw nothing during the game that changed my mind! That Maggi had a good go too!

To be honest mate, personally I would've started Richards and Clichy too, but never mind.

Napoli are a very good side, on the basis of what I've seen tonight and at Eastlands, so sometimes we just have to take defeat on the chin.

We could've done better tonight, but we can't win every game. A win against the scousers and we can move on.

 

[Shaelumstash]

Re: The truth about Kolorov

Point taken, although I think it's equally over simplistic to state that different full backs would've completely changed the pattern of the game. You could ague that playing attacking full backs woud've left us even more exposed to the counter attack. It's all hypothetical ultimately.

Yeh that's a fair point as well, it is all hypothetical and changing the full backs may have made no difference. When I saw the starting line up though my initial reaction was that Lavessi and Hamsik were going to rip our full backs apart and I saw nothing during the game that changed my mind! That Maggi had a good go too!

To be honest mate, personally I would've started Richards and Clichy too, but never mind.

Napoli are a very good side, on the basis of what I've seen tonight and at Eastlands, so sometimes we just have to take defeat on the chin.

We could've done better tonight, but we can't win every game. A win against the scousers and we can move on.

I agree, Napoli are a great side, I'm surprised they aren't doing better in Serie A. You are right that you have to take defeat on the chin, like against Bayern after the first 25 minutes we got outclassed by a brilliant side and I can accept that.

Tonight was frustrating though because I genuinely believe it was avoidable. If we'd played the starting line up we did against the shite, we would have won comfortably tonight.

I understand the need for rotation, it's the only way to stay competitive for a full season, but I think Mancini got the rotation wrong tonight. I think the Napoli game should have been seen as a priority as it was near enough a must win.

 

[Ric]

Re: The truth about Kolorov

Yeh that's a fair point as well, it is all hypothetical and changing the full backs may have made no difference. When I saw the starting line up though my initial reaction was that Lavessi and Hamsik were going to rip our full backs apart and I saw nothing during the game that changed my mind! That Maggi had a good go too!

To be honest mate, personally I would've started Richards and Clichy too, but never mind.

Napoli are a very good side, on the basis of what I've seen tonight and at Eastlands, so sometimes we just have to take defeat on the chin.

We could've done better tonight, but we can't win every game. A win against the scousers and we can move on.

I agree, Napoli are a great side, I'm surprised they aren't doing better in Serie A. You are right that you have to take defeat on the chin, like against Bayern after the first 25 minutes we got outclassed by a brilliant side and I can accept that.

Tonight was frustrating though because I genuinely believe it was avoidable. If we'd played the starting line up we did against the shite, we would have won comfortably tonight.

I understand the need for rotation, it's the only way to stay competitive for a full season, but I think Mancini got the rotation wrong tonight. I think the Napoli game should have been seen as a priority as it was near enough a must win.

With hindsight, perhaps Newcastle should've been seen as the "easier" game of the three (Newcastle, Napoli and Liverpool) but Richards played such an intregral part in the win on Saturday that you can't fault his selection for that game.

Perhaps he and Clichy could've played tonight and been rested on Sunday, but again it's hypothetical. Ask me again on Monday though.

I think progressing from the group stage of the Champions League was obviously important in terms of our prestige and finances, but I never thought we were likely to win it this season whereas the Premiership suddenly seems a more plausible target, given our remarkable start to the season.

If we do get knocked out of the Champions League, I just hope we play the reserves/kids in the Europa League and go all out to win the Premiership.