I'd love it if this happened. People get so deluded at times on here. Liverpool are an exceptional team, especially in terms of pressing. The majority of sides in this league try and replicate what they did yesterday, and City will walk through them. It's our first loss all season, excluding the Shaktar game where we played a second team, do you really think other teams haven't already tried this method, including Liverpool when they lost 5-0? How did it go for Napoli and Spurs?
Manchester City 17/18 discussion | "If you're here for the Champions clap your hands" (#6505)
- Thread starter simonhch
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
I'd love it if this happened. People get so deluded at times on here. Liverpool are an exceptional team, especially in terms of pressing. The majority of sides in this league try and replicate what they did yesterday, and City will walk through them. It's our first loss all season, excluding the Shaktar game where we played a second team, do you really think other teams haven't already tried this method, including Liverpool when they lost 5-0? How did it go for Napoli and Spurs?
Fair points I guess.
Not even sure where to start with this one.
As for the Stones comments, ha. He was inconsistent last season and was occasionally weak and had lapses in concentration, which he's also struggled with since returning from injury. But to say he's been "protected by Pep's possession" (what does that even mean?) is ludicrous. Before his injury he was the reason we were so comfortable playing it forward through the middle. He knew which pass to make and when to make it. He's taken Kompany's place, which is something we never thought a CB would do before Kompany retired, and he's taken it because, beyond his ability to play comfortably at the back, he's been rock solid defensively this season. He's clearly not at 100% yet after six weeks out, I'm not sure how much the importance of SIX WEEKS can be stated.
!
How can you disagree with something if you don't understand it?
. I meant that City's possession game limits the amount of ball the opponent gets to attack with. Less attacking = less defending. I stand by my opinion of Stones. Not a great defender by any stretch, just suited to the style of Pep.
Guess we'll just have to wait until Pep leaves in a year or 2 and i'll be proven right
When was the last time they lost to a "random bottom half team"?
Do they? People need not forget that very few if any teams play the way Liverpool play and Jurgen's approach is unique. In the league i cant see another side that'll make city that uncomfortable on the ball and we haven't seen another team do that this season. Sit back merchants will not worry city in the least plus none of those teams press like that even when they concede a goal and go a goal down.
Aguero is coping a lot of unfair criticism for yesterday imo. The different structures of the teams' attacks makes it harder for him than for the opposition lone striker in such a match. Where as the wide players of Liverpool generally play inside, City uses outside players. Mane and Salah were closer to Firminho than Sane and Sterling were to Aguero. Pool knew this and had one defender constantly on his back as there generally wasn't a threat of an inside run from the other attackers. The diamond rotation system that includes a fullback coming inside that City employ was never in effect cause the city structure is different when the defenders are under pressure and when they are not under pressure.
It's a foreboding of what sides of similar quality will do to them in the CL if they don't iron their issues out. I agree that this match is an anomaly domestically, I'd be shocked if this happened to them again this season in the PL.
The role that Guardiola demands of the striker in matches like this, Aguero can't perform. But he couldn't even do the basic things right.
I think we'll lose one more league game this season - Spurs away. 3 points dropped.
But we'll draw at home to United (right after the Champions' League quarter-final) and Chelsea, and away to Arsenal and Everton. 8 more points dropped.
We'll win the rest, I reckon, with maybe Burnley giving us the sternest test at Turf Moor - maybe even nicking a point in the right conditions. 2 points dropped there.
That'll give us 94 points. 29 wins, 7 draws, 2 defeats.
But we'll draw at home to United (right after the Champions' League quarter-final) and Chelsea, and away to Arsenal and Everton. 8 more points dropped.
We'll win the rest, I reckon, with maybe Burnley giving us the sternest test at Turf Moor - maybe even nicking a point in the right conditions. 2 points dropped there.
That'll give us 94 points. 29 wins, 7 draws, 2 defeats.
Tottenham tried to implement the same tactics Liverpool did, and got slaughtered.
Klopp is a good tactical match for Guardiola; that's why the game went like it did. Also, Silva wasn't playing which is a massive advantage.
Klopp is a good tactical match for Guardiola; that's why the game went like it did. Also, Silva wasn't playing which is a massive advantage.
As much as I agree, Spurs are clearly affected psychologically under Pochettino whenever they enter the stadium of a fellow top six team. They'll play the same way at Wembley but they'll give us a much better game simply because they won't be so naive. It's the only serious red flag on the fixture list, imo.
I feel like yesterday was the consequence of City slowly but surely starting to slow down. That being said I'm sure they will overcome their form slump pretty soon and still win the league quite comfortably.
In fairness, Spurs have had a midfield crisis for most of the season. With a cut and paste midfield there's virtually no chance of doing anything to City.
Klopp used essentially the same tactics Heynckes used in bayern's 4-0 demolition of Barcelona
Now we can discuss the theoretical aspect of whether those tactics are better than others against Guardiola's positional play, but that'd be a pointless debate
Tactics are only as good as their execution. One of Arrigo Sacchi's maxims is that the "perfect game" ends 0-0. If the two teams execute their tactics to perfection, only luck or individual brilliance can break the tie
You could say that Liverpool's tactics yesterday are the best possible tactics to defeat this city side, but then how many teams are capable of playing like that? And if Stones header were inches lower and City took the lead, what would have happened then? Napoli were able to execute the same defensive tactics for 30 minutes at home and were playing City off the park. Then they slowed down a bit from tiredness, and City scored two goals from set pieces, turned the game on its head and from there Napoli's execution started to crack. They managed to equalise, missed a glorious chance to retake the lead, then gave up a stupid goal minutes later, and that was the game
Southampton and West Ham nearly beat City employing completely different tactics, too. They lost those games because of the sheer gap in the quality of the players
Now we can discuss the theoretical aspect of whether those tactics are better than others against Guardiola's positional play, but that'd be a pointless debate
Tactics are only as good as their execution. One of Arrigo Sacchi's maxims is that the "perfect game" ends 0-0. If the two teams execute their tactics to perfection, only luck or individual brilliance can break the tie
You could say that Liverpool's tactics yesterday are the best possible tactics to defeat this city side, but then how many teams are capable of playing like that? And if Stones header were inches lower and City took the lead, what would have happened then? Napoli were able to execute the same defensive tactics for 30 minutes at home and were playing City off the park. Then they slowed down a bit from tiredness, and City scored two goals from set pieces, turned the game on its head and from there Napoli's execution started to crack. They managed to equalise, missed a glorious chance to retake the lead, then gave up a stupid goal minutes later, and that was the game
Southampton and West Ham nearly beat City employing completely different tactics, too. They lost those games because of the sheer gap in the quality of the players
In fairness, while our record away against the other top 6 teams isn't exceptional, we actually have a reasonable record at the Etihad in recent years.
And were missing Wanyama, Alderweirald and Sanchez, not a good time to be missing some of your main defensive players.
I don't think the people who are saying 'this is how you beat City' are being realistic.
This style of play is exactly how Liverpool play, all the time. Its how they train on a daily basis, its how Klopp buys his players and drills into them, they play it whether its against Man City or Exeter. Sure, they may have done it with more intensity vs Man City. Sure they may have got a few lucky breaks (fully deserved wins though). But that is how they play.
The idea that other teams, who play completely different styles, can just rock up and play this style, against currently the league's best team, without too much practice, seems slightly silly to me.
Joking aside what do our resident City fans think of the whole Sanchez saga?
Obviously I dislike City but rose tinted glasses aside I do feel you are making a bit of a shambles of things in the media department with this one. These constant briefings, pulling out of the deal and now saying that the player preferred them but they have decided against it. The saying doth protest too much springs to mind.
Whatever the reasons I think they have said far too much already and would be best placed to be silent.
Obviously I dislike City but rose tinted glasses aside I do feel you are making a bit of a shambles of things in the media department with this one. These constant briefings, pulling out of the deal and now saying that the player preferred them but they have decided against it. The saying doth protest too much springs to mind.
Whatever the reasons I think they have said far too much already and would be best placed to be silent.
I don't think we've said near that much, just his agent asked for more and we turned it down, even then we've not said that officially and for all we know it bollix and he just prefers United (I read a quote from a Chile player yesterday who said he "always wanted United".
While Sanchez is a top, top player, I said the following back in October in this thread with regards to Alexis and I stand by it 100% (not you personally mate but if I say it now I'm sure someone will storm in and be like "You all wanted him more than anything and we took him so you're furious.")
Manchester Dan also said this on the same page..
"I really don’t want Sanchez in January now. I just don’t think we’ll have a problem scoring goals. I’d be looking to get a LB and if available, a DM and CB. Kompany is toast. Although likely the level we’d be after would be available in summer only.
Unless he’s going for like £15m."
Now that said, I think he'll be excellent at United and I'm sure a front 3 of Martial, Lukaku and Sanchez is an exciting prospect with Pogba in behind. Or even scarier is a Chelsea front 3 of Hazard, Alexis and Morata now I've heard they've entered the bidding.
I'm more disappointed he'll be strengthening a rival than the fact he won't be wearing our colours tbh.
Last edited:
I think the media briefs today have taken it a step far. Why disclose Pep has met with the big man and decided it's too much money, claim he's gone back on his word, throw Chelsea in the ring and then claim he always preferred City to United?
Not looking for an argument but just seems a little childish and pointless. I like how United have done business lately and just kept quiet. As you say it's totally possible he just prefers United and fancies the challenge/project/history?
With regards to the rest I would agree with you. You don't need him at all and it could have disrupted things. Pep and the club obviously wanted him though but I think it won't do you any harm him not coming.
The deal actually makes more sense for us. He can play anywhere in the front line, works very hard and has end product. Our right hand side is causing issues as Lingard is better centrally, Mata is a little limited and lacks pace whilst Rashford and Martial are both better on the left. In addition Mikhitaryan is too inconsistent and goes missing (Sanchez is the total opposite to this). The more I think about it the more I think he could be the missing forward piece for us.
I haven't actual seen those and if we did come out with that it is indeed petty. Kind of like I didn't want it anyway when losing a trophy of something.
100% Pep wants him and I'd imagine he's either furious we balked at the fee or he's been promised someone better long term.
You'll have tons of options when he comes in and also can use him as a no.9 for games where big Rom just isn't having the best day. I think if you get him, you'll certainly be in pole position for 2nd and to run us close next season.
At the end of the day, money is nothing and every player goes where it's best. It would be hypocritical of me (and of City) to use it as an excuse. Some of our best and most loyal players came originally for nothing other than a pay day (Aguero, Zabaleta, Silva etc...) and come to love the place, club, team.
Don't see why Alexis can't become a United hero, plus he's usable in the CL which is massive for you guys.
Don't think city fans are crying a river over Sanchez, they are still favorites of walking the league next year, thanks to Pep mostly.
Great post. It's amusing how some debate about tactics as though they are the only factor in winning a football game. A one off game is almost never decided by the choice of tactics. Before yesterday's game just like before that Bayern vs Barcelon game you are talking about, every armchair fan could guess how the managers will set up their team. Nobody was going to outsmart or surprise anyone. To suggest then that one man's tactics proved the difference is an incredibly naïve reductive way to look at it. As you say, there are so many other factors at play and the most important one is execution. There are others like good old fashioned luck, momentum, confidence or individual quality that can change a game. The only way to evaluate any particular tactic or approach is to analyse how it works over a longer period and over a larger number of big games because you can be lucky once or twice but never consistently.
Hes certainly been promised someone else as that was part of the brief from what I can gather.
Anyway lets see what happens. The point about the CL is a good one. Certainly gives us more firepower to compete now the knockout stages approach.
That isn't strictly true. We still created numerous chances and really should have scored again .. however Pep's teams don't give up and City upped their game as well as Klopp's substitution, bringing on Milner for Can, having a massively negative effect - Can had hardly put a foot wrong (he didn't look like he was that tired but he has played every single game for us over the past month or so, due to Henderson's injury and a lack of alternatives) Milner hardly put a foot right in his time on the pitch and was responsible for multiple errors leading to City attacks and FKs. Impressive for someone only on the pitch for 15 mins.
Why do people even bother to post this shit ? Is it the first thing that comes into their heads and then out of their mouths with no thought to accuracy or they don't bother to check their facts ?
We've lost 2 matches this season, to City & Spurs.
http://www.skysports.com/liverpool-results
Can was ill before the game.
I wanted him in the summer, and when it didn't happen I was convinced we'd pay a hefty price, but we've found a balance now that Sanchez could very easily disrupt. We still need a new left-sided defender (doesn't matter whether they're a CB or a LB) and someone to fill in for Sané (because he's young and gets tired quicker than most) but Sanchez would have been a square peg for us. A very good square peg, but for £350k a week I'm not sure it'd be worth it. If he'd demanded £100k less I think he'd be in a blue shirt, but he didn't, so he's not. He's better off going to United because you need him more and will find better use for him.
Is Hazard-Morata-Sanchez particularly scarier than Martial-Lukaku-Sanchez-Pogba?!
The gap between United and City in terms of player ability is large right now. Bringing Sanchez to United will go a long to bridging that gap. That's the point here.
Guessing they just go get Griezmann in the summer then? Slightly more expensive package but 2 and a bit years younger. Would make a great deal of sense.
Taking in to account the current wealth of attacking talent City have at their disposal, would Griezmann be that much of an upgrade, if at all?
Sanchez will walk straight in to our first 11, significantly upgrading it in the process. This purchase will certainly bridge the gap.
Also, who's to say United won't be in for Griezmann as well? Sanchez won't close the gap entirely, we will need further purchases if we ever hope to rival them on an even keel.
Last edited:
Sanchez and Griezmann strike me as pretty similar style players who occupy similar spaces on the pitch, would surely be one or the other. If Pep fancied Sanchez to play the false 9 role id imagine Griezmann would fit the role pretty well too. Dybala could be another option I guess.
really? There's a reason he was Pep's number one attacking target in the summer.
My thoughts precisely.
But i for one applaud the decision.
Gone are the days when players/agents used to demand absurd salary/fees etc to join City.
We decide the terms and play by our own rule now rather than agreeing to whatever the player/agent wants.
I think another reason not to abide by his demands is the ill effect it may have on our squad.
Sanchez getting paid more than KDB might cause disharmony in the squad and all the pending contract negotiations may try to exploit Sanchez Salary.
Moreover we are pretty stable in attack. So,I would like to see the defense being sorted out instead of investing huge sum on Sanchez.
BTW, there is no denying the fact that Sanchez is a phenomenal player and United definetly will improve with him in their squad.
You mean Summer 2017 is over!?
High transfer spending =/= massive salaries/agent fees. What City pay clubs for a player is irrelevant to the package they/their agent receives.
Yeah, agreed about the Sanchez decision. Would have loved him at City but not if it means he's getting paid much more than the likes of de Bruyne. No way we can justify that. Not to mention if he's given his word on a deal then reneged on that because someone's offered him more money then it's the right thing to walk away. Given the position we are in the league the outlay required on Sanchez would not have been justified in January, and if reports are true that we're going to save the money and use it for someone in the summer like Griezmann or Dybala then I'd be more than happy.
Players that will cost a lot more money with no indication they will reach the level of Sanchez in the PL. You'll also be in competition once again with the worlds biggest clubs all promising more and more wages as the spiralling costs reach silly levels once again. Strange stance for you as a fan saying you cant justify it...justify what..its not your money...its probably largely blood money as well...bringing De Bruyne into it like he wont get an increase soon enough anyway is laughable. Fact is you want him and you'd be happy to watch your owners secure him no matter the cost, and then increase other players if needed...it will within 24 months anyway!!!
Last edited:
This "can't get paid more than De Bruyne, lad" talk is a load of bunkum.
Seriously, does anyone at City or their media lapdogs genuinely think that's a moral high ground to take? It's Kevin fecking De Bruyne, ffs, not Lionel Messi.
Seriously, does anyone at City or their media lapdogs genuinely think that's a moral high ground to take? It's Kevin fecking De Bruyne, ffs, not Lionel Messi.
That's the whole point, he's supposedly close to signing a new deal. We sign Sanchez and pay him substantially more than everyone else then you really think de Bruyne's agent is just gonna do feck all about it? It's his job to do something about it.
Yeah, and it's Alexis Sanchez, not Lionel Messi. It's got nothing to do with morals, either.
Last time the agent fees came out (2017) City had paid the most of all clubs.
You keep holding on to that imaginary moral high ground.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39526917
De bruyne's game now is world class while alexis's performances have been great but definetly no way near de bruyne's performance.
No one is defying Sanchez's quality as a player but even though the overall money might not be that huge in today's market, any future contract negotiations will face this deal's implications.
City stepped back because the gentleman's agreement was broken, nothing else.
I dont think that its a question of affording Sanchez and his agents wage/fees demands.
"Players that will cost a lot more money with no indication they will reach the level of Sanchez in the PL"
This statement is not necessarily true. Players like Sane/Jesus in the long run will be far more beneficial. But i knid of understand what you are trying to imply. However i think thats not appropriate for all the cases, most case yes.
Yeah but those agents didn't increase their price when other clubs expressed interest. That's the point. We can easily afford Sanchez's demand today but then it might become a general notion in all our future deals which we don't want to entertain.
Hilarious watching City fans suddenly preach financial prudence like they give a single tiny f*ck about it.