Welcome Donnarumma!

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

PSG are playing a new keeper because their new ethos is about signing the best young players, especially those who are French. They're now playing the keeper expected to be the next French number 1 for the next 10 years.

It's not a stain on Donnarumma, but more that PSG just didn't want to lose having such a French talent as part of their club.

You also talk about PSG on the football side, but could you just remind me how successful PSG were with him in goal?

Agree with your point about PSG wanting to sign young players.

But Donnarumma has years and years ahead of him as a player.

No... I think that the reason that PSG are parting ways with Donnarumma is that PSG are moving towards a wage structure that Donnarumma doesn't fit into.

IMO if Donnarumma's wages were in line with what PSG want to pay for a keeper he'd still be in their side.

Donnarumma is #1 or #2 at pure shot stopping when in his box - but he's not great at passing, doesn't sweep/show for the ball, and is basically and old-school keeper. That doesn't fit PSG's side - high press - ball retention - but PSG has world class players at every position in their back line to compensate. Sometimes PSG will need to hoof it because of pressure - but often their able to build from the back starting from any one of their 4 world class backfield players and don't need to rely on Donnarumma as another man to pass to.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

An honest question, what build up? A huge hit to us making 1,000 passes around our box at 2 miles per hour until someone commits a bozo and it costs us? Ederson's best moments in recent times have been his long passes, especially to Holland. This so-called build up from the back hasn't produced fruit in quite some time. How about we keep it honest...

By build up when the keeper has the ball I mean this.

We are a ball control side as are most of the top sides in world football now - Pep has revolutionized play in this regard.

So what does ball control mean when the keeper has the ball and we want to build from the back?

Most often, it means that there is some pressure, but given the ability of the keeper, the back line and midfield on the ball, it makes sense to build from the back - the keeper most often passes to one of the back line players and from there the play builds.

In contrast to this, is playing the ball long. Here the keeper hoofs it forwards. In the case of our side, this occurs when the keeper notices that one of our forwards is breaking into space. But it also occurs when the press is so aggressive that playing from the keeper to someone in the backfield/midfield is too dangerous given the opposition press.

Donnarumma doesn't fit our system because we're built on ball control and have relied on a keeper who is excellent on the ball to form an 11th man when building from the back. Our backfield contains several players who are not good under pressure and are not great at passing. In this situation Ederson or another keeper who is great on the ball is essential to compensate. We can still mostly build from the back if our keeper is excellent on the ball in spite of shortcomings in our backfield.

With Donnarumma though - we have a keeper who is worse on the ball than every single one of our backfield players to the extent that it's a last resort to play it back to Donnarumma if we're trying to build from the back.

Which either means that we play from the back as we always have with much more frequent mishaps, or we play it long - leading to much, much less ball control - a long pass forward to a non-breaking Haaland or other player is probably a 50-50 proposition and we'll lose control of the ball much more often that we did in the past.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

Your assessment definitely is premature - the evidence is there in the fact you have to rely on an ‘if’ and an ‘I think’, because the reality is that all you’re doing - guessing - because as yet Donnarumma hasn’t played so much as a single minute for City, so there is no actual evidence anything you’re saying will be borne out when he does.

Do you not think Pep and the Club have considered the differences between Eddie and Donna, and how their respective games will fit how we want to play, before signing him?

If it’s so obvious to everyone that he won’t fit our style, then it’s absurd to think the Club are somehow blind to these differences and signed him expecting Eddie mk 2.

The reality is he’s nowhere near as bad as some are making out in terms of his ball playing abilities, but his signing to me suggests an evolution in our game which I’m excited to see play out.

After last season, I think we’d all agree our approach needs to evolve to stay ahead.

I’ll certainly give it more than a few games to see how we intend to use him before writing off one of the acknowledged greatest keepers of his generation before he’s so much as kicked/saved a ball for us, as some seem so desperate to do.

Cheers.

You make some good points.

But, nonetheless, even absent a single ball kicked with Donnarumma in goal, I'm confident in my assessment - because I base it on what I've seen from virtually every single pundit I've watched from Sky Sports, The Athletic, NBC Sports, numerous much smaller pundits whose opinion I respect, ... and on and on - I've yet to find a single reputable pundit who thinks that Donnarumma is a good signing for us.

 

[Double R]

Still cant quite believe that hes a City player now. Proper top signing, the kind we havent made enough of over the last 18 months. Ambition and balls.

 

[JewelZee]

By build up when the keeper has the ball I mean this.

We are a ball control side as are most of the top sides in world football now - Pep has revolutionized play in this regard.

So what does ball control mean when the keeper has the ball and we want to build from the back?

Most often, it means that there is some pressure, but given the ability of the keeperm the back line and midfield on the ball, it makes sense to build from the back - the keeper most often passes to one of the back line players and from there the play builds.

In contrast to this, is playing the ball long. Here the keeper hoofs it forwards. In the case of our side, this occurs when the keeper notices that one of our forwards is breaking into space. But it also occurs when the press is so aggressive that playing from the keeper to someone in the backfield/midfield is too dangerous given the opposition press.

Donnarumma doesn't fit our system because we're built on ball control and have relied on a keeper who is excellent on the ball to form an 11th man when building from the back. Our backfield contains several players who are not good under pressure and are not great at passing. In this situation Ederson or another keeper who is great on the ball is essential to compensate. We can still mostly build from the back if our keeper is excellent on the ball in spite of shortcomings in our backfield.

With Donnarumma though - we have a keeper who is worse on the ball than every single one of our backfield players to the extent that it's a last resort to play it back to Donnarumma if we're trying to build from the back.

Which either means that we play from the back as we always have with much more frequent mishaps, or we play it long - leading to much, much less ball control - a long pass forward to a non-breaking Haaland or other player is probably a 50-50 proposition and we'll lose control of the ball much more often that we did in the past.

I hope you're as eager to educate us when this all blows up in your face. I know I'll be here.

 

[Nicholas van Whatsisface]

Cheers.

You make some good points.

But, nonetheless, even absent a single ball kicked with Donnarumma in goal, I'm confident in my assessment - because I base it on what I've seen from virtually every single pundit I've watched from Sky Sports, The Athletic, NBC Sports, numerous much smaller pundits whose opinion I respect, ... and on and on - I've yet to find a single reputable pundit who thinks that Donnarumma is a good signing for us.

That’s fair enough mate.

I don’t personally rate Sky Sports or the Athletic as having anything remotely useful or insightful to add to the debate, and would prefer to trust the direction of our Manager (based on his track record of actual delivery on the pitch) and our DoF - who are deeply experienced at building successful teams, and will have evaluated the players’ strengths and weaknesses as part of the decision making process before signing him - with a clear idea on how we intend to use him in the team.

They’re not immune to making mistakes - of course not - but they’ve earned my trust, and deserve the chance to at least try and implement the plan they clearly had in mind when they made the decision to sign him before we write them all off.

What I refuse to believe is that Sky, the Athletic and a few fan accounts on YouTube somehow have access to a level of insight and a set of data sources that the Manager and DoF haven’t even considered, and that his relative strengths and weaknesses will somehow be a surprise revelation to them at his first training session.

That’s beyond implausible, so I’m prepared to ignore all the melodrama.

But we all have our trusted sources of information, and clearly those are different from person to person.

The time to evaluate for me is at the end of the season, not before he’s played so much as a single minute in our team.

 

[JewelZee]

Agree with some of your points.

PSG departed ways with Donnarumma mostly due to Donnarumma's wage demands according to what I've read.

That said, PSG - like us - play a ball control system - as both a means of offense and defense. Unlike PSG, we are unable to cope with Donnarumma's weakness at passing - PSG has world class and IMO several #1 in the world players at LB, LCB, RCB and RB. All of them have pace and all of them are excellent on the ball and all of them are excellent when under pressure (AIt Nouri is weak on defense and tends to dribble into trouble when under pressure; Gvardiol is perfect; Dias is less good than Gvardiol but certain can fit with Donnarumma; Stones is perfect; Lewis is terrible and Nunes has potential but isn't great either).

A little research on Donnarumma would reveal that he's #1 or #2 at shot stopping in his box. And that he's not great at commanding the box on - for example corner kicks - and isn't gifted on the ball - and doesn't sweep - and doesn't offer himself as a passing option when building from the back.

Look - I hope that Donnarumma is successful in our side - but for me, he doesn't at all fit our system (not good on the ball) and furthermore, unlike PSG, we can't cope with this deficiency if we want to most often play from the back.

Sure Pep might change our system to hoof it much more often... but that's counter to everything that Pep has done in his entire career so I very much doubt that this is happening.

TL/DR
Welcome Donnarumma - I very much hope that you'll succeed.
But at the same time, given the way that we've always played under Pep and given Donnarumma's average passing ability (at best) coupled with our current defensive line - Donnarumma is a misfit and were going to be worse than if Ederson or Trafford were in goal IMO. I may be wrong in this opinion of course - but pretty much every single pundit I've watched expresses the exact same opinion.

Again I may be wrong - and I hope that I am for the sake of our side - but if I'm wrong, then so are 90% or so of all football pundits.

Those pundits you keep bringing up hate our guts. You want to talk percentages? Everything that 90% says is 100% opposite to what's true regarding City. They've been straining themselves sick to denigrate Haaland since the day he signed. Whenever they universally pan something we're going to do it only reinforces my belief that we are doing what's best for City, such as the signing of one Kevin DeBruyne. We can revisit this after Donnarumma has actually been here a bit. I'll be here for it.

 

[citymad]

It’ll be interesting to see how opponents adjust against us from here. I expect teams will press higher, especially when Donna’s on the ball, and they’ll likely look to whip in more crosses and really lean on set pieces. That means Pep probably needs to tweak our style, and might take a few games to settle into it. I can see our players moving the ball forward quicker to clear danger, which could open the game up more. Definitely going to be interesting to watch.

 

[malg]

Bloody hell, I didn't know how shit he was until I came on here.

 

[Matt Diablo]

Cheers.

You make some good points.

But, nonetheless, even absent a single ball kicked with Donnarumma in goal, I'm confident in my assessment - because I base it on what I've seen from virtually every single pundit I've watched from Sky Sports, The Athletic, NBC Sports, numerous much smaller pundits whose opinion I respect, ... and on and on - I've yet to find a single reputable pundit who thinks that Donnarumma is a good signing for us.

Your definitely chatting a load of shite

 

[Jwoody19]

Imagine the meltdown on here if he assists Haaland on Sunday.

 

[Longdarnit Blue]

Pep and our management team are complete numpties who know nothing about football or how we play. Regarding all the esteemed media and reputable pundits, they’re Nostradamusly correct in their future assessment. The reason they aren’t top class managers winning multiple trophies and earning millions a year for their efforts is that they prefer to inflict their own sad little shitey opinions on the uninformed masses. A noble and selfless undertaking I’m sure but I’d rather give Pep, and his team the benefit of the doubt before throwing Donnarumma under a bus for being unable to play the City way. We’re in danger of sounding like - “this is mancheshercity we’re talking about” here.
Those that can - do, those that can’t - become football reporters or pundits.

 

[Burtonblue]

Cheers.

You make some good points.

But, nonetheless, even absent a single ball kicked with Donnarumma in goal, I'm confident in my assessment - because I base it on what I've seen from virtually every single pundit I've watched from Sky Sports, The Athletic, NBC Sports, numerous much smaller pundits whose opinion I respect, ... and on and on - I've yet to find a single reputable pundit who thinks that Donnarumma is a good signing for us.

Tbh I stopped reading at Sky Sports and the Athletic…..especially when the respect word was used.
Cobblers.

 

[malg]

Pep and our management team are complete numpties who know nothing about football or how we play. Regarding all the esteemed media and reputable pundits, they’re Nostradamusly correct in their future assessment. The reason they aren’t top class managers winning multiple trophies and earning millions a year for their efforts is that they prefer to inflict their own sad little shitey opinions on the uninformed masses. A noble and selfless undertaking I’m sure but I’d rather give Pep, and his team the benefit of the doubt before throwing Donnarumma under a bus for being unable to play the City way. We’re in danger of sounding like - “this is mancheshercity we’re talking about” here.
Those that can - do, those that can’t - become football reporters or pundits.

City fans should have learned from our previous with pundits:

1. David Silva - wasn't he questioned for being too small for this league?
2. Yaya - didn't some pundit question who he was even though he'd played in a CL final out of position against the Rags?
3. KdB - oh aye, Chelsea reject.
4. Haaland - some tool reckoned he would be doing well to score 14/15 in his first season. Mind you he was a tool and apologised afterwards.
5. Didn't some moron say the best signing one Summer window was Charlie Adams for Liverpool when we'd signed Aguero?

I'm sure there have been more and for other teams as well. Pundits just spout their own opinions and for a very big part of the time talk utter bollocks.

 

[malg]

Tbh I stopped reading at Sky Sports and the Athletic…..especially when the respect word was used.
Cobblers.

Same here.

 

[east2]

Bloody hell, I didn't know how shit he was until I came on here.

You’d think we’d signed DonnOnana judging by some of the bed wetters on here…

 

[Centurions]

Cheers.

You make some good points.

But, nonetheless, even absent a single ball kicked with Donnarumma in goal, I'm confident in my assessment - because I base it on what I've seen from virtually every single pundit I've watched from Sky Sports, The Athletic, NBC Sports, numerous much smaller pundits whose opinion I respect, ... and on and on - I've yet to find a single reputable pundit who thinks that Donnarumma is a good signing for us.

Joe Hart knows a thing or two about goalkeeping, he seems enamoured.

 

[Zin 'messiah' Zimmer]

Cheers.

You make some good points.

But, nonetheless, even absent a single ball kicked with Donnarumma in goal, I'm confident in my assessment - because I base it on what I've seen from virtually every single pundit I've watched from Sky Sports, The Athletic, NBC Sports, numerous much smaller pundits whose opinion I respect, ... and on and on - I've yet to find a single reputable pundit who thinks that Donnarumma is a good signing for us.

The same collective media outlets spouted the same about KDB, silva and Aguero, all either too small, mentally weak and inflated in price…

I certainly get the point regarding those in front and at full back, however, a fit again Rodri, invariably sees a drop off in opposing teams press, coupled with his ability to spin and drive like nobody else in any league, he’s always been the key to the system, he also has the perfect foil in Reijnders when doubled up on….

Let’s just see, I wouldn’t be putting too much faith in the Shaka hislops, Craig burleys, Gary Neville et al, more blunders in that collective than Michael J fox in goal

 

[bluedanza]

He pretty much single handedly knocked Arsenal and scousers out of the champions league last year. One particular save from Odegard was unbelievable.
Without him, PSG don’t win the CL. I think it’s a great signing but no doubt there’ll be many ready to jump on any mistake.

 

[Coljj]