mosssideblue
Well-Known Member
I think that there is a danger of manufacturing a crisis where none exists. Three defeats in four matches is hardly what was expected but i don't believe there is any reason to trot out the usual bitter jibes that Pellegrini isn't up to it, that the side has no balls, that over £100 million was wasted in the summer window and that all would be well even if we only fielded 8 men as long as we left Toure, Kolorov, Navas (and Dzeko?) out. There are more rational explanations of recent results which might give us a bit of confidence.
Saturday's result cannot be understood without reference to some disgraceful officiating which led me to question the assistants' understanding of the offside rule. I have seen no evidence that de Bruyne was offside, but Pellegrini was right when he argued that the Spurs lad out on their right was at least 3 metres offside when the ball was played. How did the assistant miss it?! It was as flagrant a blunder as the one early in the game at Swansea last season, when I believe the same officials were at fault! This could not have happened at a worse time (the 44th minute) with City well on top and unlucky to be only one goal to the good. The second major error came when the officials ignored Kane's clearly offside starting position for the third - the decisive third - Spurs' goal. The first decision turned the game around, the second blunder sealed it. The second Spurs goal was a comedy of errors at a corner kick. Caballero decided to do some curious Argentine folk dance rather than take part in the game and Fernandinho couldn't block the header at the near post. This would not have been of any importance had Willie been playing!
Corners have been a problem recently - West Ham's second resulted from chaos in our area at a corner and the only doubt seemed to be which of three "free" West Ham players would put it in. Our problem appears to be personnel. We have four excellent CBs but they never play together enough to be comfortable. Our 5 successive wins saw Kompany and Mangala unchanged, but Vinnie didn't see the game with Juve out, Mangala only lasted half of the next game and since then we have paired Otamendi and Dimichelis for a game and a half. Since our win at Crystal Palace Otamendi has played 3 full games and 15 minutes in the CL. This is over twice as much as both Mangala and Dimichelis have managed and Vinnie hasn't played at all since the 75th minute against Juve. These three and a bit games are the only minutes Otamendi has ever played for City. All this is hardly the stability wanted in a key area of the pitch.
We arrive at two key issues: "guts" or leadership and injuries. It has been pointed out today that City have not come from behind to win since we beat Sunderland 4-1 last December. This is worrying but more worrying is that our "leaders" miss so many matches through injury. I think the question of leadership cannot be separated from the spine of the team - leaders have to be in areas of the pitch which allows them to lead: Joe is a leader, Vinnie is the leader, Ya Ya leads, David Silva and Sergio are vocal and influential, and what did they all have in common by 2pm on Saturday afternoon? My records show that, of these key players, even in the title winning season of 2013-4 only Ya Ya played more than 30 full games, while Vinnie managed 28 league games, David 27 and Sergio only 25. Their records last season wer little different. Why do we lose our key leaders and best players so much more than other teams? On Saturday 6 players in all were unavailable and this was down from 10. And City do not name a full 25 man squad! The bench for the last two games has been packed with incredibly promising young lads, but not players who know their way around the PL. Chelsea are putting their poor start down to loss of form from Terry, Fabregas and Costa.... How many of their "superstars" could United get by without? Could Arsenal cope with our injury list?
Great post mate. Sums it up perfectly