Player thread: Aleksandar Kolarov (2014/15)

[Maly]

Re: Aleks Kolarov - take a bow

Firstly, I know what makes a good defender. I have played football to a decent level for 40 years so think I might have an idea, but thanks for pointing out some of the attributes, which in my opinion Kolarov does possess and you obviously do not. By the way you forgot the most important thing any player, not just a defender needs to be able to do well to be a good defender and that is the ability to retain a football ! If you've got the ball the opposition can't score, this is why we defend well as a team because they are all very good in possession from 1 to 11. Kolarov possesses excellent technique and ball skill,very important in my opinion. obviously you dont think he is the bestest player ever and don't love him. I think he is a very good player, as are pretty much all of our players, who deserves our support rather than being slagged by the numbnuts for the whole game every time he plays, despite many, many good games and effective contributions to our success over the last five years. It would be nice to think that by making these points it might mske some people think twice about how they conduct themselves at the games. On here it is different and you are more than entitled to your opinion like everyone else.

If you know what makes a good defender, then why did you have to wait for me to post what attributes make a good defender, after a number of posters had asked you to do so, to say he's good at all of the areas.

If you honestly think he has all of the above attributes, then me & you have a completely different understanding of football, which is fine, but I'd suggest you watch Kolarov very closely next game he plays, with the attributes mentioned in mind & see if he actually does all of those things well.

With regards to ball retention......I'd say that's crap. Defending as a team may well be about ball retention, but by your reckoning, that makes Lescott poor defensively as his ball retention was poor. Me, I think Lescott is a very good defender, but lacks other attributes which would make him fit into our current team & system. Kolarov does have not bad technique & ball skills, but this has nothing at all to do with defensive attributes, which is what I've specifically highlighted.

He has contributed over the past 5 years, I totally agree, as I have done previously, but you seem blinded by your love for him that you can't see that he isn't good at the defensive side of the game. I appreciate that he has other attributes which add to the team going forwards, but that was never something I've questioned. Teams that cause us problems tend to attack down their right hand side....why do you think that is? (Burnley is a cracking recent example, but please don't think I'm blaming our Burnley performance soley on Kolarov).

Totally agree that booing players is totally unacceptable. There's actually an FA 'experiment' which shows what negative effects abusing players/booing players has. It impacts not only mentally, but physically on the player who is getting abuse including strength believe it or not.

Don't think we'll ever agree on Alex being good/not good at the defensive side of the game, but hey ho, that's football.

So what exactly is 'crap' ? All I said was it is, in my opinion, the most important aspect of defending ! You even say yourself defending as a team is about ball retention ! Those that do it better than others tend to play in the most successful teams, you know the likes of Brazil, Holland, AC Milan, Barcelona, Germany, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich and even our own club, you know the ones that win all the trophies ! Lescott could retain the ball but not to the required standard and had other defensive attributes, which I never said were not important I said ball retention was the MOST important attribute, along with a good football brain. So those who have been unable to do it to the standard required have been shipped out over the years, Richards, Lescott, etc,etc and they go off and play at their level of ability, which is not the successful trophy winning level. Kolarov is a capable defender with good qualities and an outstanding attacking full back, which suits our style of play. Some people like thud and blunder football, can't stand the tikki tacka stuff, etc, that's up to them. I wouldnt watch lower league English football if you paid me, but it's a free world !

Seems we may have crossed wires in that case. I was talking specifically about defensive attributes as a player, as in the art of defending WITHOUT the ball, not about how to be a great defensive unit by retaining possession. These are 2 completely different things.

I presumed you meant that Alex is a good defender as he normally (last few games he hasn't!!!!) retains the ball, which is why I stated crap. My mistake for misinterpreting what you were saying.

 

[schfc6]

Re: Aleks Kolarov - take a bow

I really have to disagree with the bits in bold. Firstly, under Mancini we were a defensive unit starting from the front, you defend as a team not as individuals. Yes we were tight under Mancini, but I'd suggest that this was because of the way we were set up as a team, not because Kolarov is a great defender. Hence the reason why you get certain managers whose teams concede very little regardless of the club they're at or the players they have at their disposal. Much the same as some managers have teams who score loads & concede loads (Twitcher for instance). So for me, your argument doesn't hold water when saying Kolarov is a great defender because he played in a team that didn't concede many. This was Mancini's doing. To prove further, under Hughes we conceded loads, Mancini came in & with the same players we stopped conceding.

I'm still to hear anybody explain which attributes Kolarov has which make him a great defender.

There have been a number of goals which he has been a fault for, but so has Kompany, Zabba, MDM etc, which happens, that's football. However, Kompany, Zabba & MDM are superb defenders as they have the right attributes. Kolarov doesn't, simple as that. Now I'm not saying he's a bad player, but seriously, anybody who thinks he's a great DEFENDER has a completely different understanding of football to me.

If somebody.......anybody can tell me why they think he's a great defender, I'd honesty love to hear their reasons & saying because we don't concede many as a team really doesn't wash as you defend as a team in football with the Manager determining how the team defends. What the front players to defensively impacts on the midfield, which impacts on the defence.

Well, it seems you don't actually disagree. If in a defensive system you agree Kolarov is a decent defender. I have never once suggested Kolarov to be a 'great defender'. As I don't believe him to be a great defender.

He is a decent defender, much better than other defenders with his attacking intent. Could he be a better defender whilst being as effective going forwards? I doubt it. If he were he'd be just about the best left back in the World.

So yes, he could be a better defender, for him to be a better defender we have two options, 1, do away with Pellegrini's front foot attacking style that requires the full backs to give width or 2, 2, sack Pellegrini and bring in someone more defensive.

As I see it Pellegrini uses Kolarov in games where attacking is the main concern, and Clichy for a more defensive option. I see this as the best of both Worlds.

Just for kicks, name me one left back from the World Cup that showed that they were capable of Kolarov's attacking and Clichy's defending.

Ashley Cole is too old.

I do disagree. I'll try to clarify. As a team (more under Mancini than Peller's) we were a very very good defensive unit. I don't agree that Kolarov is a decent defender. Decent player, yes, decent defender no. I also disagree that he would have to alter his attacking play to improve his defensive game.

I'm not suggesting that him bombing up the wing & not being able to get back in time to shore up the defence is an issue as it's impossible to run quicker than the ball. I'm suggesting that he doesn't do the basics of defending well. There is a big difference.

As for the World Cup.....god knows. I struggle to remember what happened last week never mind 6 months ago!!! However, I would suggest that Philip Lahm, David Alba, Marcelo & Jordi Alba are all as good going forwards & all better defensively.

This clears things up a little now. It seems you have no idea what you're talking about.

Mancini multiple title winner and staunch advocate of a defensive stability seemed to think his defensive skills were sufficient to pay upwards of £15 million.
Not only that he proved his worth in that defensive unit.
It's a common misconception in amongst City fans that Kolarov 'can't defend' yet no really has any examples of such. Kolarov was a good defender in Mancini's system.

Mancini rated him, as does Pellegrini, as do Sorriano and Txiki as they've seen fit to offer him a great new deal.
Someone somewhere clearly doesn't know what they're talking about, it must be the highly successful and experienced professional football people.

As for the players you mention, Lahm is about the best full back in the World, possibly one of the best ever. Alaba is excellent. Marcelo and Alba are defensive liabilities. Alba especially.

Kolarov is committed, strong, tough in the tackle experienced defender.
Whilst I agree he could be better defensively, I don't think, nor do two title winning managers or our hierarchy that he is that bad.
Could he be better on occasion, yes. Improve defensively? Yes.

Especially poor or weak. Not at all.

Perhaps you should send your CV to the club, seems you know a great deal more than they do.

 

[Maly]

Re: Aleks Kolarov - take a bow

Well, it seems you don't actually disagree. If in a defensive system you agree Kolarov is a decent defender. I have never once suggested Kolarov to be a 'great defender'. As I don't believe him to be a great defender.

He is a decent defender, much better than other defenders with his attacking intent. Could he be a better defender whilst being as effective going forwards? I doubt it. If he were he'd be just about the best left back in the World.

So yes, he could be a better defender, for him to be a better defender we have two options, 1, do away with Pellegrini's front foot attacking style that requires the full backs to give width or 2, 2, sack Pellegrini and bring in someone more defensive.

As I see it Pellegrini uses Kolarov in games where attacking is the main concern, and Clichy for a more defensive option. I see this as the best of both Worlds.

Just for kicks, name me one left back from the World Cup that showed that they were capable of Kolarov's attacking and Clichy's defending.

Ashley Cole is too old.

I do disagree. I'll try to clarify. As a team (more under Mancini than Peller's) we were a very very good defensive unit. I don't agree that Kolarov is a decent defender. Decent player, yes, decent defender no. I also disagree that he would have to alter his attacking play to improve his defensive game.

I'm not suggesting that him bombing up the wing & not being able to get back in time to shore up the defence is an issue as it's impossible to run quicker than the ball. I'm suggesting that he doesn't do the basics of defending well. There is a big difference.

As for the World Cup.....god knows. I struggle to remember what happened last week never mind 6 months ago!!! However, I would suggest that Philip Lahm, David Alba, Marcelo & Jordi Alba are all as good going forwards & all better defensively.

This clears things up a little now. It seems you have no idea what you're talking about.

Mancini multiple title winner and staunch advocate of a defensive stability seemed to think his defensive skills were sufficient to pay upwards of £15 million.
Not only that he proved his worth in that defensive unit.
It's a common misconception in amongst City fans that Kolarov 'can't defend' yet no really has any examples of such. Kolarov was a good defender in Mancini's system.

Mancini rated him, as does Pellegrini, as do Sorriano and Txiki as they've seen fit to offer him a great new deal.
Someone somewhere clearly doesn't know what they're talking about, it must be the highly successful and experienced professional football people.

As for the players you mention, Lahm is about the best full back in the World, possibly one of the best ever. Alaba is excellent. Marcelo and Alba are defensive liabilities. Alba especially.

Kolarov is committed, strong, tough in the tackle experienced defender.
Whilst I agree he could be better defensively, I don't think, nor do two title winning managers or our hierarchy that he is that bad.
Could he be better on occasion, yes. Improve defensively? Yes.

Especially poor or weak. Not at all.

Perhaps you should send your CV to the club, seems you know a great deal more than they do.

 

[Maly]

Re: Aleks Kolarov - take a bow

Well, it seems you don't actually disagree. If in a defensive system you agree Kolarov is a decent defender. I have never once suggested Kolarov to be a 'great defender'. As I don't believe him to be a great defender.

He is a decent defender, much better than other defenders with his attacking intent. Could he be a better defender whilst being as effective going forwards? I doubt it. If he were he'd be just about the best left back in the World.

So yes, he could be a better defender, for him to be a better defender we have two options, 1, do away with Pellegrini's front foot attacking style that requires the full backs to give width or 2, 2, sack Pellegrini and bring in someone more defensive.

As I see it Pellegrini uses Kolarov in games where attacking is the main concern, and Clichy for a more defensive option. I see this as the best of both Worlds.

Just for kicks, name me one left back from the World Cup that showed that they were capable of Kolarov's attacking and Clichy's defending.

Ashley Cole is too old.

I do disagree. I'll try to clarify. As a team (more under Mancini than Peller's) we were a very very good defensive unit. I don't agree that Kolarov is a decent defender. Decent player, yes, decent defender no. I also disagree that he would have to alter his attacking play to improve his defensive game.

I'm not suggesting that him bombing up the wing & not being able to get back in time to shore up the defence is an issue as it's impossible to run quicker than the ball. I'm suggesting that he doesn't do the basics of defending well. There is a big difference.

As for the World Cup.....god knows. I struggle to remember what happened last week never mind 6 months ago!!! However, I would suggest that Philip Lahm, David Alba, Marcelo & Jordi Alba are all as good going forwards & all better defensively.

This clears things up a little now. It seems you have no idea what you're talking about.

Mancini multiple title winner and staunch advocate of a defensive stability seemed to think his defensive skills were sufficient to pay upwards of £15 million.
Not only that he proved his worth in that defensive unit.
It's a common misconception in amongst City fans that Kolarov 'can't defend' yet no really has any examples of such. Kolarov was a good defender in Mancini's system.

Mancini rated him, as does Pellegrini, as do Sorriano and Txiki as they've seen fit to offer him a great new deal.
Someone somewhere clearly doesn't know what they're talking about, it must be the highly successful and experienced professional football people.

As for the players you mention, Lahm is about the best full back in the World, possibly one of the best ever. Alaba is excellent. Marcelo and Alba are defensive liabilities. Alba especially.

Kolarov is committed, strong, tough in the tackle experienced defender.
Whilst I agree he could be better defensively, I don't think, nor do two title winning managers or our hierarchy that he is that bad.
Could he be better on occasion, yes. Improve defensively? Yes.

Especially poor or weak. Not at all.

Perhaps you should send your CV to the club, seems you know a great deal more than they do.

I have no idea what I'm talking about 1st sentence yet I know more than the club do last sentence? Which one is it as it can't be both?

Committed, strong, tough in the tackle? Are you confusing Kolarov with Zabba? He tackles like a fucking fairy. Peter Barnes was a more fearsome tackler & so was Paul Simpson!!!!

You actually agree that he could be better defensively so I'm not actually sure what you're driving at as that's exactly my point. Read my previous posts pal. EVERY player has weaknesses which they can improve upon. You might be confusing me stating that he is poor defensively with some who say he should never wear the shirt again......which I've never said.

It's a common misconception that he can't defend? Really? I'd suggest that if you're opinion is in the minority, then it's you who has the misconception that he's a decent at defending. He's a decent full back for what he offers going forwards, but without the ball he's a liability.

I'd disagree that he looked a good defender when Mancini was in charge, but the team looked much better defensively. For me he's been playing much better under Pellers as our attacking open play suits his attacking attributes.

You clearly must know what you're talking about, so which defensive attributes without the ball does Kolarov have in your eyes? Seems to be a question nobody wants to answer.

 

[NQCitizen]

Re: Aleks Kolarov - take a bow

I do disagree. I'll try to clarify. As a team (more under Mancini than Peller's) we were a very very good defensive unit. I don't agree that Kolarov is a decent defender. Decent player, yes, decent defender no. I also disagree that he would have to alter his attacking play to improve his defensive game.

I'm not suggesting that him bombing up the wing & not being able to get back in time to shore up the defence is an issue as it's impossible to run quicker than the ball. I'm suggesting that he doesn't do the basics of defending well. There is a big difference.

As for the World Cup.....god knows. I struggle to remember what happened last week never mind 6 months ago!!! However, I would suggest that Philip Lahm, David Alba, Marcelo & Jordi Alba are all as good going forwards & all better defensively.

This clears things up a little now. It seems you have no idea what you're talking about.

Mancini multiple title winner and staunch advocate of a defensive stability seemed to think his defensive skills were sufficient to pay upwards of £15 million.
Not only that he proved his worth in that defensive unit.
It's a common misconception in amongst City fans that Kolarov 'can't defend' yet no really has any examples of such. Kolarov was a good defender in Mancini's system.

Mancini rated him, as does Pellegrini, as do Sorriano and Txiki as they've seen fit to offer him a great new deal.
Someone somewhere clearly doesn't know what they're talking about, it must be the highly successful and experienced professional football people.

As for the players you mention, Lahm is about the best full back in the World, possibly one of the best ever. Alaba is excellent. Marcelo and Alba are defensive liabilities. Alba especially.

Kolarov is committed, strong, tough in the tackle experienced defender.
Whilst I agree he could be better defensively, I don't think, nor do two title winning managers or our hierarchy that he is that bad.
Could he be better on occasion, yes. Improve defensively? Yes.

Especially poor or weak. Not at all.

Perhaps you should send your CV to the club, seems you know a great deal more than they do.

I have no idea what I'm talking about 1st sentence yet I know more than the club do last sentence? Which one is it as it can't be both?

Committed, strong, tough in the tackle? Are you confusing Kolarov with Zabba? He tackles like a fucking fairy. Peter Barnes was a more fearsome tackler & so was Paul Simpson!!!!

You actually agree that he could be better defensively so I'm not actually sure what you're driving at as that's exactly my point. Read my previous posts pal. EVERY player has weaknesses which they can improve upon. You might be confusing me stating that he is poor defensively with some who say he should never wear the shirt again......which I've never said.

It's a common misconception that he can't defend? Really? I'd suggest that if you're opinion is in the minority, then it's you who has the misconception that he's a decent at defending. He's a decent full back for what he offers going forwards, but without the ball he's a liability.

I'd disagree that he looked a good defender when Mancini was in charge, but the team looked much better defensively. For me he's been playing much better under Pellers as our attacking open play suits his attacking attributes.

You clearly must know what you're talking about, so which defensive attributes without the ball does Kolarov have in your eyes? Seems to be a question nobody wants to answer.

I think in fairness to Kolarov before his recent injury he was strong, with decent positional sense and reliable in the tackle but he has come back very shaky and seemingly lacking a bit of fitness and intensity.

That being said he is obviously better in attacking play. I'm not sure the proposed upgrades are that much better or that there that many of them.

He's a bit unfortunate in that City players that just run around a lot have their errors and inconsistencies overlooked while Dzeko, Nasri etc are torn apart despite often crucial contributions.

 

[schfc6]

Re: Aleks Kolarov - take a bow

I do disagree. I'll try to clarify. As a team (more under Mancini than Peller's) we were a very very good defensive unit. I don't agree that Kolarov is a decent defender. Decent player, yes, decent defender no. I also disagree that he would have to alter his attacking play to improve his defensive game.

I'm not suggesting that him bombing up the wing & not being able to get back in time to shore up the defence is an issue as it's impossible to run quicker than the ball. I'm suggesting that he doesn't do the basics of defending well. There is a big difference.

As for the World Cup.....god knows. I struggle to remember what happened last week never mind 6 months ago!!! However, I would suggest that Philip Lahm, David Alba, Marcelo & Jordi Alba are all as good going forwards & all better defensively.

This clears things up a little now. It seems you have no idea what you're talking about.

Mancini multiple title winner and staunch advocate of a defensive stability seemed to think his defensive skills were sufficient to pay upwards of £15 million.
Not only that he proved his worth in that defensive unit.
It's a common misconception in amongst City fans that Kolarov 'can't defend' yet no really has any examples of such. Kolarov was a good defender in Mancini's system.

Mancini rated him, as does Pellegrini, as do Sorriano and Txiki as they've seen fit to offer him a great new deal.
Someone somewhere clearly doesn't know what they're talking about, it must be the highly successful and experienced professional football people.

As for the players you mention, Lahm is about the best full back in the World, possibly one of the best ever. Alaba is excellent. Marcelo and Alba are defensive liabilities. Alba especially.

Kolarov is committed, strong, tough in the tackle experienced defender.
Whilst I agree he could be better defensively, I don't think, nor do two title winning managers or our hierarchy that he is that bad.
Could he be better on occasion, yes. Improve defensively? Yes.

Especially poor or weak. Not at all.

Perhaps you should send your CV to the club, seems you know a great deal more than they do.

I have no idea what I'm talking about 1st sentence yet I know more than the club do last sentence? Which one is it as it can't be both?

Committed, strong, tough in the tackle? Are you confusing Kolarov with Zabba? He tackles like a fucking fairy. Peter Barnes was a more fearsome tackler & so was Paul Simpson!!!!

You actually agree that he could be better defensively so I'm not actually sure what you're driving at as that's exactly my point. Read my previous posts pal. EVERY player has weaknesses which they can improve upon. You might be confusing me stating that he is poor defensively with some who say he should never wear the shirt again......which I've never said.

It's a common misconception that he can't defend? Really? I'd suggest that if you're opinion is in the minority, then it's you who has the misconception that he's a decent at defending. He's a decent full back for what he offers going forwards, but without the ball he's a liability.

I'd disagree that he looked a good defender when Mancini was in charge, but the team looked much better defensively. For me he's been playing much better under Pellers as our attacking open play suits his attacking attributes.

You clearly must know what you're talking about, so which defensive attributes without the ball does Kolarov have in your eyes? Seems to be a question nobody wants to answer.

So basic sarcasm escapes you too?
Both statements highlight what I think about your opinion. To clear things up, I think you have no idea and I don't think you should send your CV to City.

I have highlighted what I see as his strengths.
I think he has decent appetite for defending, he's quite difficult to take on. He show opponents down the line a blocks a lot of crosses. He's aggresive when attacking the ball and looks to retain possession when possible.

As I say, where your arguement simply falls down, those paid to assess, select the team, offer contracts, recruit players all seem to beg to differ with you.

I have watched Kolarov play well, play poorly, but I along with those that matter at the club seem him as a decent defender and a very good attacking outlet. You may disagree, but it's not just me you're disagreeing with.

Pick have asked, you keep ignoring,Madame some goals where Kolarov is at fault, he's so poor there should be plenty of examples.

I personally have never seen him torn apart quite like Zabaleta was in Rome. For the record I think Zabaleta is far superior to Kolarov in terms of almost everything.

 

[jimmygrimblesboots]

Re: Aleks Kolarov - take a bow

a lot of debate on whether kolarov is good enough , i dont think this has been in any doubt , hes a very good full back , and would walk into most elite clubs teams in europe but his attitude on occasions is diabolical , he just was not interested against Sheff Wed , from the 1st minute he showed no appetite for the game , and that is the most damning thing you can say about any player . He needs to give 100% effort in every game , zabs,vinny,merlin,dinho,fernando,milner etc etc have all had bad games , but at least they play like they give a f*ck.

 

[Maly]

Re: Aleks Kolarov - take a bow

This clears things up a little now. It seems you have no idea what you're talking about.

Mancini multiple title winner and staunch advocate of a defensive stability seemed to think his defensive skills were sufficient to pay upwards of £15 million.
Not only that he proved his worth in that defensive unit.
It's a common misconception in amongst City fans that Kolarov 'can't defend' yet no really has any examples of such. Kolarov was a good defender in Mancini's system.

Mancini rated him, as does Pellegrini, as do Sorriano and Txiki as they've seen fit to offer him a great new deal.
Someone somewhere clearly doesn't know what they're talking about, it must be the highly successful and experienced professional football people.

As for the players you mention, Lahm is about the best full back in the World, possibly one of the best ever. Alaba is excellent. Marcelo and Alba are defensive liabilities. Alba especially.

Kolarov is committed, strong, tough in the tackle experienced defender.
Whilst I agree he could be better defensively, I don't think, nor do two title winning managers or our hierarchy that he is that bad.
Could he be better on occasion, yes. Improve defensively? Yes.

Especially poor or weak. Not at all.

Perhaps you should send your CV to the club, seems you know a great deal more than they do.

I have no idea what I'm talking about 1st sentence yet I know more than the club do last sentence? Which one is it as it can't be both?

Committed, strong, tough in the tackle? Are you confusing Kolarov with Zabba? He tackles like a fucking fairy. Peter Barnes was a more fearsome tackler & so was Paul Simpson!!!!

You actually agree that he could be better defensively so I'm not actually sure what you're driving at as that's exactly my point. Read my previous posts pal. EVERY player has weaknesses which they can improve upon. You might be confusing me stating that he is poor defensively with some who say he should never wear the shirt again......which I've never said.

It's a common misconception that he can't defend? Really? I'd suggest that if you're opinion is in the minority, then it's you who has the misconception that he's a decent at defending. He's a decent full back for what he offers going forwards, but without the ball he's a liability.

I'd disagree that he looked a good defender when Mancini was in charge, but the team looked much better defensively. For me he's been playing much better under Pellers as our attacking open play suits his attacking attributes.

You clearly must know what you're talking about, so which defensive attributes without the ball does Kolarov have in your eyes? Seems to be a question nobody wants to answer.

So basic sarcasm escapes you too?
Both statements highlight what I think about your opinion. To clear things up, I think you have no idea and I don't think you should send your CV to City.

I have highlighted what I see as his strengths.
I think he has decent appetite for defending, he's quite difficult to take on. He show opponents down the line a blocks a lot of crosses. He's aggresive when attacking the ball and looks to retain possession when possible.

As I say, where your arguement simply falls down, those paid to assess, select the team, offer contracts, recruit players all seem to beg to differ with you.

I have watched Kolarov play well, play poorly, but I along with those that matter at the club seem him as a decent defender and a very good attacking outlet. You may disagree, but it's not just me you're disagreeing with.

Pick have asked, you keep ignoring,Madame some goals where Kolarov is at fault, he's so poor there should be plenty of examples.

I personally have never seen him torn apart quite like Zabaleta was in Rome. For the record I think Zabaleta is far superior to Kolarov in terms of almost everything.

Fuck me you just don't get what I'm saying do you? He's a good full back, no question, but his basic defensive skills are poor. If you were to coach a kid how to defend, you certainly wouldn't show them a video of Kolarov & say that's how you do it. I've already listed factual attributes as to what makes somebody sound from a defensive point of view & in my opinion, he could improve on every single aspect, therefore I think he's poor defensively. As I've already mentioned, he has been at fault for goals we've conceded, but so has Zabba, Vinny, Hart etc etc. Being at fault for the odd goal here & there doesn't mean you are poor defensively, so that really is a mute point. Anybody can make a mistake, but I'm not talking about mistakes.

The one & only occasion I remember him being hard in the tackle was a pre-season game (can't remember when) where he was captain of a team full of kids. He took responsibility as the leader during that game & I doff my cap to him for doing so. Normally he is a fairy.

However, I digress. I must be completely wrong in MY opinion (& the vast majority of our match going fan base I'd hazard a guess) as I didn't realise you worked for City or have a direct line into what the people who matter at the club think about his defensive qualities. Therefore knowing that they beg to differ with me. My mistake.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

Re: Aleks Kolarov - take a bow

I'm fairly new on here. The reason I only read the forum for years without joining in is because quite a lot of what I would read, was just two people getting into very personal arguments on a thread and forgetting about why the topic was started in the first place.
I think that is sort of happening here. There is nothing wrong in different opinions. Who is right and who is wrong is very subjective.
The one thing coming out of all this seems to be that people in general agree that 'to boo a blue' is wrong, as someone put it. I very much agree with this but could we not apply this to the forum also that to get personal with fellow blues, at the very least, is distracting to the body of the thread but also is of little value to the people involved.
My personal opinion is that it's never right to shout anything other than encouragement at anyone playing in a City jersey. We can all moan to each other but nothing should be shouted at a player while he is on the park, that is likely to harm the teams performance. Sounds simplistic. But we have two players for the LB position, both of whom in games this season been, have criticized heavily and also praised at different times. Opinions change from game to game. It's not to far back that Kolorov's form was being praised. Clichy's form was very poor. A few good games and we say he has turned the corner, perhaps. The point is we only realistically have the two at the moment and until one or both of them are replaced, they should get full support once they are on the pitch.
At the risk of making myself very unpopular, I'll give you an extreme example.
I followed the Irish National team, going to all the games for years. Keane had the bust up with McCarthy, split the country opinion (you can guess where I stood on the matter), causing McCarthy to get sacked. Brian Kerr was brought in as manager. In my opinion his sole purpose was to get Keane back into the fold. He did this eventually and half the people going to the matches saw it as the Saviour returning while the rest of us saw it as the vilest most nauseating, U-turn and a massive kick in the bollox to Mick McCarthy. When Keane played his first game again for Ireland half the crowd wanted him booed. Me being a City supporter wanted it more than most. But no, I chose to neither cheer him nor boo him. Why? I detested him but wanted what was best for the team.
It's a bit like the Tevez situation a few years back. Some couldn't see their way to cheer him again, but you couldn't boo a City player that was trying to contribute.
This isn't a rant and the first paragraph is probably none of my business, but Kolorov may being going through bad form, but we're one injury away from having to rely on him. Getting his back up is not the answer.

 

[oakiecokie]

Re: Aleks Kolarov - take a bow

I'm fairly new on here. The reason I only read the forum for years without joining in is because quite a lot of what I would read, was just two people getting into very personal arguments on a thread and forgetting about why the topic was started in the first place.
I think that is sort of happening here. There is nothing wrong in different opinions. Who is right and who is wrong is very subjective.
The one thing coming out of all this seems to be that people in general agree that 'to boo a blue' is wrong, as someone put it. I very much agree with this but could we not apply this to the forum also that to get personal with fellow blues, at the very least, is distracting to the body of the thread but also is of little value to the people involved.
My personal opinion is that it's never right to shout anything other than encouragement at anyone playing in a City jersey. We can all moan to each other but nothing should be shouted at a player while he is on the park, that is likely to harm the teams performance. Sounds simplistic. But we have two players for the LB position, both of whom in games this season been, have criticized heavily and also praised at different times. Opinions change from game to game. It's not to far back that Kolorov's form was being praised. Clichy's form was very poor. A few good games and we say he has turned the corner, perhaps. The point is we only realistically have the two at the moment and until one or both of them are replaced, they should get full support once they are on the pitch.
At the risk of making myself very unpopular, I'll give you an extreme example.
I followed the Irish National team, going to all the games for years. Keane had the bust up with McCarthy, split the country opinion (you can guess where I stood on the matter), causing McCarthy to get sacked. Brian Kerr was brought in as manager. In my opinion his sole purpose was to get Keane back into the fold. He did this eventually and half the people going to the matches saw it as the Saviour returning while the rest of us saw it as the vilest most nauseating, U-turn and a massive kick in the bollox to Mick McCarthy. When Keane played his first game again for Ireland half the crowd wanted him booed. Me being a City supporter wanted it more than most. But no, I chose to neither cheer him nor boo him. Why? I detested him but wanted what was best for the team.
It's a bit like the Tevez situation a few years back. Some couldn't see their way to cheer him again, but you couldn't boo a City player that was trying to contribute.
This isn't a rant and the first paragraph is probably none of my business, but Kolorov may being going through bad form, but we're one injury away from having to rely on him. Getting his back up is not the answer.

Why not ?? The fucker gets mine up !!!