Players' reputations if they continue to be out fought

[Pam]

What happens to the esteem that this group are held in if they continue the trend (which began early/mid last season) whereby they are out fought by inferior players on a regular basis?

I have reservations about the tactics that are currently being employed and the way they are affecting the form and confidence of some players.

However, this group of players got their own way by forcing out the nasty man who was shouting at them. For me, that means that they have to, have to show that they were right and that without the nasty man whose nasty words held them back we are going to see ten or twenty percent more effort, team spirit and desire.

So far, it still looks very much like last season in terms of effort, team spirit and desire, with inferior teams taking City for a soft touch who you can rely on not to match your bottle when you play them at your ground.

It still rankles with me the way this group sacrificed the FA Cup final to make their point. Something that should be unthinkable, imo. Personally, my view of the group will be severely tarnished if they do not do something significant by the end of this season.

perhaps there was a good reason the nasty man was shouting at them

Yep. I wouldn't be at all surprised if this was true. But at least we are holistic.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I'd suggest being out fought, and losing because of footballing reasons as Dave said, actually boil down to the same thing- and it has been said on here.

Losing Fernandinho and Silva to go to Milner and Garcia is a phenomenal drop in talent and ability. Players such as Silva and Ferna, not only possess a high work rate but are also as we all know top class players. Some of the passes Fernandinho plays are top drawer and begin so many of our attacks. To have to draft in Garcia and Milner, inherently means we have to rely on work rate rather than skill and ability.

Whilst they should still be better than Sunderlands midfield, a well drilled Sunderland can 'out fight' those players- and when they don't possess the necessary guile it means we can't pass our way through teams.

Playing Milner out wide didn't help at all; Milner has little to no guile, where as in the middle he often plays well. Having Garcia there, meant many players tried more difficult passes in order to avoid passing to Garcia, even if he was in space- I thought this was really noticeable. Added to that it meant Yaya had to drop deeper, and Nasri could not play the role he has been the last few weeks.

The whole loss, in my opinion, came down to not having Silva and Ferna. I do understand the point about work rate though.

Yes, I'd totally agree that was at the root of this defeat dan. But we still should have had a way to beat them. I think the manager needs to work on a more classic 442 or 451 with wide men combination. Get navas coming off the bench and hogging the touch line. Get behind teams a bit more.

It was poor, there's no two ways about it.

 

[charliebigspuds]

Yep. The game was an exact replica of many games last season. Not enough tempo or positive passing, and everyone waiting for someone else to open the defence. Yaya and nasri were just giving it to each other and in the end we resorted to trying to use the wide areas. Which is fine, as long as you do it well. Zab isn't going to do it, and if he keeps running into navas's space neither is he. Nasri can't overlap and kolorov is far too hit and miss.

What was annoying about this game is that, without silva in the team, yet again we couldn't do what we do best: pass our way through teams.

The biggest reason we lost that game was David Silva's absence. We have no one to make us tick without him and that was badly compounded with fernandinho's absence.

We lost the game for football reasons rather than Fight, bottle, winning mentality, whatever you want to call it.

Not true we lost because we were missing joe, vinny, Merlin, ferdandinho, clichy and nasty. That's half of our strongest team. Still, it was very disappointing that the guys stepping in didn't do enough to at least get a point.

I said that in another thread. Our penetrative passing game is gone when you have more than one or two of our second choice players in. Lescott, Milner, kolorov can't pass well enough consistently enough. Demichelis and Garcia are big drops in quality. When you get the lot together you get a performance like Sunday.

We still should have had more than enough to win the game. That's the problem the manager has to solve quick

I don't actually believe we do have enough to win games with these players in, they're not good enough for a team going for the title. I don't understand why we didn't sign a top CB and a very good LB to give Clichy a run for his money, Clichy has been rubbish aswell this season btw. I really don't get it when people go on about our strength of squad, we have a good 14 then the rest are very ordinary.
Coupled with players not good enough we have a manager who doesn't seem to understand what is required to win away and is still struggling to find out how to get the best out of some of our players, apart from Silva, Zab, Aguero, Nasri (I don't say that lightly) and Negredo and maybe now Fernandinho who's found his feet I don't think any other player has played to the ability they're capable of.

EDIT; Don't get me started on why Barry was allowed to go onloan!

 

[The-Dogs-Pollocks]

I'd suggest being out fought, and losing because of footballing reasons as Dave said, actually boil down to the same thing- and it has been said on here.

Losing Fernandinho and Silva to go to Milner and Garcia is a phenomenal drop in talent and ability. Players such as Silva and Ferna, not only possess a high work rate but are also as we all know top class players. Some of the passes Fernandinho plays are top drawer and begin so many of our attacks. To have to draft in Garcia and Milner, inherently means we have to rely on work rate rather than skill and ability.

Whilst they should still be better than Sunderlands midfield, a well drilled Sunderland can 'out fight' those players- and when they don't possess the necessary guile it means we can't pass our way through teams.

Playing Milner out wide didn't help at all; Milner has little to no guile, where as in the middle he often plays well. Having Garcia there, meant many players tried more difficult passes in order to avoid passing to Garcia, even if he was in space- I thought this was really noticeable. Added to that it meant Yaya had to drop deeper, and Nasri could not play the role he has been the last few weeks.

The whole loss, in my opinion, came down to not having Silva and Ferna. I do understand the point about work rate though.

Yes, I'd totally agree that was at the root of this defeat dan. But we still should have had a way to beat them. I think the manager needs to work on a more classic 442 or 451 with wide men combination. Get navas coming off the bench and hogging the touch line. Get behind teams a bit more.

It was poor, there's no two ways about it.

Seems to me it's a combination of missing silva, playing Garcia in centre midfield and the wrong attitude from the players.

Yes tactics and players make a lot of difference, but you could tell from the first 5 mins that we weren't at it, sloppy passes and very slow build up play right from kick off. The players need to look at themselves and MP needs to get his act together quickly.

How he continues with Garcia as a central midfielder I'll never know he just constantly slows the game down, has poor positional sense and no pace to recover. MP should have loaned him and kept Gaz Baz who is a similar player with more nous and a better understanding of how to win in the prem i.e lazy arse performances won't win games even when playing Sunderland.

Milner is wasted out on the right wing, he doesn't posses the pace to beat his man, however he is a very decent centre mid with good tackling skills, work rate and can see a pass, also has a decent shot. When fern is injured or out of form Milner should play in his position.

He also needs to get more from navas who has been a massive flop so far, People raved about him after the opening game but he hasn't beaten his opponent once since that game and his crossing is very hit and miss, just seems like Swp mark 2 (after he was ruined by Chelski)

I will admit he has been a bit unlucky with injuries so far but you could also argue that he didn't reinforce the back four in the summer when vinnie is constantly injury prone, as is Micah, nastasic is still learning. Demichellis doesn't look any better than kolo to me, but I suppose it's early days for him so he may yet come good.

He seems to have brought out the best in Kolorov and Nasri (although for me he still goes missing when it counts) but other players are really struggling like Clichy and Hart. Plus Dzecko is still shite despite MP making him first choice at the start of the season.

I kind of expected a teething problems when he took over but have been surprised at just how bad some of the performances have been, Bayern, Stoke and now Sunderland are some of the worst since the Sheikh turned up.

 

[jma]

What happens to the esteem that this group are held in if they continue the trend (which began early/mid last season) whereby they are out fought by inferior players on a regular basis?

I have reservations about the tactics that are currently being employed and the way they are affecting the form and confidence of some players.

However, this group of players got their own way by forcing out the nasty man who was shouting at them. For me, that means that they have to, have to show that they were right and that without the nasty man whose nasty words held them back we are going to see ten or twenty percent more effort, team spirit and desire.

So far, it still looks very much like last season in terms of effort, team spirit and desire, with inferior teams taking City for a soft touch who you can rely on not to match your bottle when you play them at your ground.

It still rankles with me the way this group sacrificed the FA Cup final to make their point. Something that should be unthinkable, imo. Personally, my view of the group will be severely tarnished if they do not do something significant by the end of this season.

Simplistic fan talk to go down the 'they have no bottle' route, I'm afraid. They didn't lose that game because they had no fight. They lost it because they regressed to last season 's square passing along the line, in the absence of silva. This allowed the opposition to keep getting organised and we couldn't break them down.

When a match is fiercely physical, like Chelsea was in the latter stages, these lads give as good as they get. There are certainly problems at the moment, including over reliance on our tight passers, and a big gulf between our first 11 and our reserves.

You get 'outfought' as you call it when you get frustrated, I suppose. That happens with this lot and it happened on Sunday. The belief that a few away wins bring will go a long way to restoring belief.

If it was one game the I'd agree with you. Talk of attitude and 'passion' annoy me intensely when they are presented as an antidote to anything.

But this is a twelve month trend of dropping away points and not turning up away from home. With many different line ups. Many different players present. Many different opposition.

If teams like the rags didn't consistently make a mockery of "the best players will win" then I'd tend to agree it isn't about attitude. But I've just watched a crap rag line up (bar a handful of them) beat a far superior Arsenal line up. I watched them run away from a far superior City team last season. I watched them give a good two legged game to a far superior Real Madrid line up last year. I've watched Chelsea in Europe give Barcelona a game every time they play them. I've watched numerous inferior teams give this City team more than a run for its money away from home.

I've not watched this City team beat a team that has better players than them once. I can't recall the last time this team ground out a few results when playing worse than the other teams.

I have seen this team adopt a relaxed and slow tempo against teams, like against Sunderland, numerous times away from home in the last 12 months and then seem chocked and surprised when the inferior opposition don't roll over and have their tummies tickled.

I've seen this team hammer the same teams at home because they aren't faced with the same challenge, the same belief from the opposition and the same hostility. Regardless of line ups and tactics.

You get a carbon copy away performance from this squad, unless they are faced with a challenging team (not including European teams that are superior, against whom they have crumbled). It starts off slow, with no-one panicking because they know/think that they are better footballers ad have got plenty of time to score a few against some mugs. Then the other team realises that City aren't offering anything like they do at home and grow in confidence. If the opposition scores then City gradually ramp up the panic and don't have the composure and self belief that they are going to turn it around (like Fergie's rags always did or like these same City players do at home). The football breaks down and panic football sets in.

It isn't a certain set of tactics as it has happened for a year with different managers and formations. It isn't selections as it has happened for a year - with Silva, without Silva, with Aguero, without Aguero, or anyone else. It isn't the inability to play in an aggressive (in terms of attitude, not physicality) and dynamic way from the start - I see these players do that most weeks at home and definitely every time they come up against an English team they deem to be one that has the right to be considered one of the best.

So what's left, causing this total difference in atttitude away from home. Complacency, bordering on arrogance and, in my opinion, a lack of determination and the refusal to lose that can be found in teams that dominate (as this squad should be).

 

[dom]

Just come across this interview with Pab Zab in the Guardian.


Pablo Zabaleta has conceded that Manchester City's poor away form is threatening to derail their title challenge.

"There is a long way to go and we have many games to the end of the season, but when you lose points like this it will be really difficult to fight for the title," said Manuel Pellegrini's right-back following City's 1-0 defeat at Sunderland. "Every time we play away though it's not happening for us; we cannot keep a clean sheet. We must defend much better."

Zabaleta, who came on as a second-half substitute in his team's fourth loss in six away matches in the Premier League, accepts that a squad as strong as City's should be doing much better. And particularly at the Stadium of Light, a ground where they have lost their last four league games 1-0.

"We are playing much better at home than we are away but in this league you need away points, especially when you are a team like us that wants to win things," said Zabaleta whose side have now slipped to eighth in the table. "We have only beaten West Ham away and that is not good enough for Manchester City."

He and his team-mates are frustrated they must now wait to try to put things right. "When you have a defeat like this you want to play as quickly as you can, but we now go into an international break, and then we will face Spurs at home, which will be a crucial game for us," said Zabaleta.

"We are so disappointed. We had a great chance to reach third position and we knew before the game that Chelsea had dropped points on Saturday, and that Spurs had lost just before us. It was a great chance, but unfortunately we didn't take it."

Zabaleta is reluctant to make excuses for City's disappointing haul of four points from a possible 18 on their travels but does highlight Pellegrini's bad luck with injuries. "We have had too many problems with injured players – we lost Vincent Kompany for too many games, and now we have lost [Matija] Nastasic, David Silva and Fernandinho, who are very important players for this team," he said. "With Silva, sometimes we look a better team because he is an important player for us, especially in the attacking phase. Having five or six injuries makes it very difficult for us."

Yes , thank Zabba , for being
a) loyal and
b) stating the bleedin obvious

The team could learn from Zabba that

a) it's OK to tackle ... fookin try it sometime ....... and FFS, PRESSS !!!!!!!!!
b) if you get a counter attack .. fookin go for it
c) will you stop dinking the fookin ball around horizontally..

 

[The-Dogs-Pollocks]

What happens to the esteem that this group are held in if they continue the trend (which began early/mid last season) whereby they are out fought by inferior players on a regular basis?

I have reservations about the tactics that are currently being employed and the way they are affecting the form and confidence of some players.

However, this group of players got their own way by forcing out the nasty man who was shouting at them. For me, that means that they have to, have to show that they were right and that without the nasty man whose nasty words held them back we are going to see ten or twenty percent more effort, team spirit and desire.

So far, it still looks very much like last season in terms of effort, team spirit and desire, with inferior teams taking City for a soft touch who you can rely on not to match your bottle when you play them at your ground.

It still rankles with me the way this group sacrificed the FA Cup final to make their point. Something that should be unthinkable, imo. Personally, my view of the group will be severely tarnished if they do not do something significant by the end of this season.

Simplistic fan talk to go down the 'they have no bottle' route, I'm afraid. They didn't lose that game because they had no fight. They lost it because they regressed to last season 's square passing along the line, in the absence of silva. This allowed the opposition to keep getting organised and we couldn't break them down.

When a match is fiercely physical, like Chelsea was in the latter stages, these lads give as good as they get. There are certainly problems at the moment, including over reliance on our tight passers, and a big gulf between our first 11 and our reserves.

You get 'outfought' as you call it when you get frustrated, I suppose. That happens with this lot and it happened on Sunday. The belief that a few away wins bring will go a long way to restoring belief.

If it was one game the I'd agree with you. Talk of attitude and 'passion' annoy me intensely when they are presented as an antidote to anything.

But this is a twelve month trend of dropping away points and not turning up away from home. With many different line ups. Many different players present. Many different opposition.

If teams like the rags didn't consistently make a mockery of "the best players will win" then I'd tend to agree it isn't about attitude. But I've just watched a crap rag line up (bar a handful of them) beat a far superior Arsenal line up. I watched them run away from a far superior City team last season. I watched them give a good two legged game to a far superior Real Madrid line up last year. I've watched Chelsea in Europe give Barcelona a game every time they play them. I've watched numerous inferior teams give this City team more than a run for its money away from home.

I've not watched this City team beat a team that has better players than them once. I can't recall the last time this team ground out a few results when playing worse than the other teams.

I have seen this team adopt a relaxed and slow tempo against teams, like against Sunderland, numerous times away from home in the last 12 months and then seem chocked and surprised when the inferior opposition don't roll over and have their tummies tickled.

I've seen this team hammer the same teams at home because they aren't faced with the same challenge, the same belief from the opposition and the same hostility. Regardless of line ups and tactics.

You get a carbon copy away performance from this squad, unless they are faced with a challenging team (not including European teams that are superior, against whom they have crumbled). It starts off slow, with no-one panicking because they know/think that they are better footballers ad have got plenty of time to score a few against some mugs. Then the other team realises that City aren't offering anything like they do at home and grow in confidence. If the opposition scores then City gradually ramp up the panic and don't have the composure and self belief that they are going to turn it around (like Fergie's rags always did or like these same City players do at home). The football breaks down and panic football sets in.

It isn't a certain set of tactics as it has happened for a year with different managers and formations. It isn't selections as it has happened for a year - with Silva, without Silva, with Aguero, without Aguero, or anyone else. It isn't the inability to play in an aggressive (in terms of attitude, not physicality) and dynamic way from the start - I see these players do that most weeks at home and definitely every time they come up against an English team they deem to be one that has the right to be considered one of the best.

So what's left, causing this total difference in atttitude away from home. Complacency, bordering on arrogance and, in my opinion, a lack of determination and the refusal to lose that can be found in teams that dominate (as this squad should be).

Good posth

 

[Marvin]

I agree with DD about the commitment at Sunderland - nothing wrong with it - it was thepassing in the absence of Silva that was sub-standard.

However, there was complacency at Villa and especially Cardiff

 

[dom]

What happens to the esteem that this group are held in if they continue the trend (which began early/mid last season) whereby they are out fought by inferior players on a regular basis?

I have reservations about the tactics that are currently being employed and the way they are affecting the form and confidence of some players.

However, this group of players got their own way by forcing out the nasty man who was shouting at them. For me, that means that they have to, have to show that they were right and that without the nasty man whose nasty words held them back we are going to see ten or twenty percent more effort, team spirit and desire.

So far, it still looks very much like last season in terms of effort, team spirit and desire, with inferior teams taking City for a soft touch who you can rely on not to match your bottle when you play them at your ground.

It still rankles with me the way this group sacrificed the FA Cup final to make their point. Something that should be unthinkable, imo. Personally, my view of the group will be severely tarnished if they do not do something significant by the end of this season.

Simplistic fan talk to go down the 'they have no bottle' route, I'm afraid. They didn't lose that game because they had no fight. They lost it because they regressed to last season 's square passing along the line, in the absence of silva. This allowed the opposition to keep getting organised and we couldn't break them down.

When a match is fiercely physical, like Chelsea was in the latter stages, these lads give as good as they get. There are certainly problems at the moment, including over reliance on our tight passers, and a big gulf between our first 11 and our reserves.

You get 'outfought' as you call it when you get frustrated, I suppose. That happens with this lot and it happened on Sunday. The belief that a few away wins bring will go a long way to restoring belief.

If it was one game the I'd agree with you. Talk of attitude and 'passion' annoy me intensely when they are presented as an antidote to anything.

But this is a twelve month trend of dropping away points and not turning up away from home. With many different line ups. Many different players present. Many different opposition.

If teams like the rags didn't consistently make a mockery of "the best players will win" then I'd tend to agree it isn't about attitude. But I've just watched a crap rag line up (bar a handful of them) beat a far superior Arsenal line up. I watched them run away from a far superior City team last season. I watched them give a good two legged game to a far superior Real Madrid line up last year. I've watched Chelsea in Europe give Barcelona a game every time they play them. I've watched numerous inferior teams give this City team more than a run for its money away from home.

I've not watched this City team beat a team that has better players than them once. I can't recall the last time this team ground out a few results when playing worse than the other teams.

I have seen this team adopt a relaxed and slow tempo against teams, like against Sunderland, numerous times away from home in the last 12 months and then seem chocked and surprised when the inferior opposition don't roll over and have their tummies tickled.

I've seen this team hammer the same teams at home because they aren't faced with the same challenge, the same belief from the opposition and the same hostility. Regardless of line ups and tactics.

You get a carbon copy away performance from this squad, unless they are faced with a challenging team (not including European teams that are superior, against whom they have crumbled). It starts off slow, with no-one panicking because they know/think that they are better footballers ad have got plenty of time to score a few against some mugs. Then the other team realises that City aren't offering anything like they do at home and grow in confidence. If the opposition scores then City gradually ramp up the panic and don't have the composure and self belief that they are going to turn it around (like Fergie's rags always did or like these same City players do at home). The football breaks down and panic football sets in.

It isn't a certain set of tactics as it has happened for a year with different managers and formations. It isn't selections as it has happened for a year - with Silva, without Silva, with Aguero, without Aguero, or anyone else. It isn't the inability to play in an aggressive (in terms of attitude, not physicality) and dynamic way from the start - I see these players do that most weeks at home and definitely every time they come up against an English team they deem to be one that has the right to be considered one of the best.

So what's left, causing this total difference in atttitude away from home. Complacency, bordering on arrogance and, in my opinion, a lack of determination and the refusal to lose that can be found in teams that dominate (as this squad should be).

Just had a chance to read this and it is spot on and those lazy fookers should have it pinned to their dessing room cubilcles

I don't mind seeing City battle and lose.. it's tht lack of fight that is pissing me off..

 

[Marvin]

Simplistic fan talk to go down the 'they have no bottle' route, I'm afraid. They didn't lose that game because they had no fight. They lost it because they regressed to last season 's square passing along the line, in the absence of silva. This allowed the opposition to keep getting organised and we couldn't break them down.

When a match is fiercely physical, like Chelsea was in the latter stages, these lads give as good as they get. There are certainly problems at the moment, including over reliance on our tight passers, and a big gulf between our first 11 and our reserves.

You get 'outfought' as you call it when you get frustrated, I suppose. That happens with this lot and it happened on Sunday. The belief that a few away wins bring will go a long way to restoring belief.

If it was one game the I'd agree with you. Talk of attitude and 'passion' annoy me intensely when they are presented as an antidote to anything.

But this is a twelve month trend of dropping away points and not turning up away from home. With many different line ups. Many different players present. Many different opposition.

If teams like the rags didn't consistently make a mockery of "the best players will win" then I'd tend to agree it isn't about attitude. But I've just watched a crap rag line up (bar a handful of them) beat a far superior Arsenal line up. I watched them run away from a far superior City team last season. I watched them give a good two legged game to a far superior Real Madrid line up last year. I've watched Chelsea in Europe give Barcelona a game every time they play them. I've watched numerous inferior teams give this City team more than a run for its money away from home.

I've not watched this City team beat a team that has better players than them once. I can't recall the last time this team ground out a few results when playing worse than the other teams.

I have seen this team adopt a relaxed and slow tempo against teams, like against Sunderland, numerous times away from home in the last 12 months and then seem chocked and surprised when the inferior opposition don't roll over and have their tummies tickled.

I've seen this team hammer the same teams at home because they aren't faced with the same challenge, the same belief from the opposition and the same hostility. Regardless of line ups and tactics.

You get a carbon copy away performance from this squad, unless they are faced with a challenging team (not including European teams that are superior, against whom they have crumbled). It starts off slow, with no-one panicking because they know/think that they are better footballers ad have got plenty of time to score a few against some mugs. Then the other team realises that City aren't offering anything like they do at home and grow in confidence. If the opposition scores then City gradually ramp up the panic and don't have the composure and self belief that they are going to turn it around (like Fergie's rags always did or like these same City players do at home). The football breaks down and panic football sets in.

It isn't a certain set of tactics as it has happened for a year with different managers and formations. It isn't selections as it has happened for a year - with Silva, without Silva, with Aguero, without Aguero, or anyone else. It isn't the inability to play in an aggressive (in terms of attitude, not physicality) and dynamic way from the start - I see these players do that most weeks at home and definitely every time they come up against an English team they deem to be one that has the right to be considered one of the best.

So what's left, causing this total difference in atttitude away from home. Complacency, bordering on arrogance and, in my opinion, a lack of determination and the refusal to lose that can be found in teams that dominate (as this squad should be).

Just had a chance to read this and it is spot on and those lazy fookers should have it pinned to their dessing room cubilcles

I don't mind seeing City battle and lose.. it's tht lack of fight that is pissing me off..

Did you seriously see a lack of fight at Sunderland and Chelsea? I didn't. Maybe a lack of know-how at Sunderland