Stretfordian_Blue said:Garcia had a good game for once,Swansea were controlling the game until he came on.
Dowd is just unbelievable, no consistency whatsoever. A pull from Kompany was a yellow,Chico did the same thing minutes later and got away with it. Joke.
Eastlander said:Great result today under very difficult conditions, against a team clearly capable of playing football.
There were some solid performances and a few ok ones, but again I thought Fern stood out, the man has some engine!
Again we started with 2 up front away from home, against a good team, and although the result is all that matters, what I cannot really understand is why we do this.
It has been written many times by many people, that their choice would be to play an additional MF instead of a striker on games like this, and I also believe that most managers would do this.
Pelle chooses to play 2 up front, which IMHO is very risky, and although it paid off today, it confuses me a little.
So my question is why, what is the rational ? Clearly there must be a very good reason, and as I have never played or coached at a high level, I am hoping some of the more knowledegable guys on this forum can educate me and explain the tactic.
This is not a criticism of Pelle, I would just like to understand better and get others opinions.
Chippy_boy said:Stretfordian_Blue said:Garcia had a good game for once,Swansea were controlling the game until he came on.
Dowd is just unbelievable, no consistency whatsoever. A pull from Kompany was a yellow,Chico did the same thing minutes later and got away with it. Joke.
Cheating is what some might call It.
Yeh, I'm with you on that. It makes more sense if you have Negredo/Dzeko partnering Aguero/Jovetic but playing two of the same kind (not sure how Aguero/Jovetic would work though, haven't seen that) doesn't work for me. Really don't understand Pellegrini's thinking, but hey, as long as this recent form keeps up, I won't be complaining.Eastlander said:Great result today under very difficult conditions, against a team clearly capable of playing football.
There were some solid performances and a few ok ones, but again I thought Fern stood out, the man has some engine!
Again we started with 2 up front away from home, against a good team, and although the result is all that matters, what I cannot really understand is why we do this.
It has been written many times by many people, that their choice would be to play an additional MF instead of a striker on games like this, and I also believe that most managers would do this.
Pelle chooses to play 2 up front, which IMHO is very risky, and although it paid off today, it confuses me a little.
So my question is why, what is the rational ? Clearly there must be a very good reason, and as I have never played or coached at a high level, I am hoping some of the more knowledegable guys on this forum can educate me and explain the tactic.
This is not a criticism of Pelle, I would just like to understand better and get others opinions.
Eastlander said:Great result today under very difficult conditions, against a team clearly capable of playing football.
There were some solid performances and a few ok ones, but again I thought Fern stood out, the man has some engine!
Again we started with 2 up front away from home, against a good team, and although the result is all that matters, what I cannot really understand is why we do this.
It has been written many times by many people, that their choice would be to play an additional MF instead of a striker on games like this, and I also believe that most managers would do this.
Pelle chooses to play 2 up front, which IMHO is very risky, and although it paid off today, it confuses me a little.
So my question is why, what is the rational ? Clearly there must be a very good reason, and as I have never played or coached at a high level, I am hoping some of the more knowledegable guys on this forum can educate me and explain the tactic.
This is not a criticism of Pelle, I would just like to understand better and get others opinions.
Didsbury Dave said:Ducado said:Didsbury Dave said:Some very poor performances today, but a great 3 points.
Nasri and kolorov were awful, particularly first half. Their wide men couldn't believe their luck on that side. They just kept running past them.
The amount of times the front two miss controlled it was unreal. Negredo worst game by far. Better play by them and we could have had half a dozen.
The midfield, like at Sunderland, missed silva dreadfully, wouldn't take responsibility and kept taking the safe option. We were better when yaya went into the hole.
But even given all that, we deserved to win and I'm delighted we did. Those players (kolorov aside) won't play as poorly as that very often.
Navas and kompany played well, but Without Kun and silva, all that matters is the points. We are currently picking up wins with absences and without being at our best. We will get better.
Rather harsh that DD, given the conditions and the amount of games
I'm commenting rather than criticising, mate. I felt we were comfortably the better side and if our attackers had been at it we would have been out of sight before half time. They had a reasonable spell before our second but after that there was only one team in it and 3-2 flattered them.
I'm delighted that we are suddenly winning games without hitting top gear, and with major absentees. The early season run of bad luck is over and our best is yet to come.