Premier League Gameweek 29 (3rd - 5th March 2018)

Genuine question: did the commentators used to be this one-sided when we were dominant? I don't remember being so, but perhaps that's just because it will have been nice to hear.

You'd genuinely think City were 3-0 up, having created a dozen clear chances given the commentary. Also, that they were all saints who used their free time to raise orphan puppies, while Pep cures world hunger and the owners are philanthropists.

Just incredible. Chelsea have basically denied City a decent shot, and are not only getting no credit for defensive shape, they're being roundly mocked by the commentators for not being more attacking.
 
Apart of Sane's magic run what have City offered? Apart from City vs United this is the first time I've watched them. Boring Pep possession football strikes again.
 
Beachryan said:
Genuine question: did the commentators used to be this one-sided when we were dominant? I don't remember being so, but perhaps that's just because it will have been nice to hear.

You'd genuinely think City were 3-0 up, having created a dozen clear chances given the commentary. Also, that they were all saints who used their free time to raise orphan puppies, while Pep cures world hunger and the owners are philanthropists.

Just incredible. Chelsea have basically denied City a decent shot, and are not only getting no credit for defensive shape, they're being roundly mocked by the commentators for not being more attacking.
Click to expand...

Yup, they sure did. Used to drive me banana's.
 
Bojan11 said:
Otamendi is such a dirty cnut.
Click to expand...

Yes.
mancan92 said:
How can you setup your team to play counter attack yet lump the ball forward at every opportunity to the smallest player on the field?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that's necessarily down to Conte. 3-4 times they've panicked when Hazard is in no space to receive the ball and they've lumped it forward. But they've done well in holding off City IMV. When teams play like this against a possession crazy side like City they look like Spain did at their most boring.

The game needs a few crunching challenges and some bust ups to spark into life.
 
Peanut Butter said:
You make a good point though. So many teams have won the title only to go to compete crap the season after. Utd finishing 7th after 1st, then Jose's Chelsea won a title and looked awful season after, same with this Chelsea.

Football, especially in England, is unpredictable as hell. People get too carried away with the "City will dominate for 100 years now" etc. No one knows what will happen next week let alone next season.

I do think Pep will keep the City players hungry but I also said the same about Conte and Chelsea this time last season.
Click to expand...
Both of those examples came about due to a change of manager (in our case) or in Chelsea’s case Jose lost the dressing room.
 
padr81 said:
Yup, they sure did. Used to drive me banana's.
Click to expand...
Which era out of interest? I felt like that with the mostly English team in the late 90's, but since then it's been pretty negative imo. The last title-winning team was basically dismissed as dull and lucky.
 
Walters_19_MuFc said:
Disagree. Son, Sanchez, Hazard, Sterling, Martial, Willian, Salah, Mane. He's not considerably better than any of the aforementioned players, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
He's not 'considerably' better than three of these players, maybe. He's considerably better than the rest. And some of the names must be a joke!
 
You'd think it's a must win game for City the way the game's gone when in reality it's Chelsea who need the points. City can afford to draw and even losing won't change anything for them.
 
Beachryan said:
Which era out of interest? I felt like that with the mostly English team in the late 90's, but since then it's been pretty negative imo. The last title-winning team was basically dismissed as dull and lucky.
Click to expand...

yeah, I'd say 90 to early 2000's I think after the invincibles it started to wane a bit (Arsenal kind of became media darlings because they were so pretty on the eye, like current City). I think as United became more efficient and Ferguson drifted away from 442 it wasn't as much. Of course the Tevez, Rooney, Ronaldo team too but that was drooled over on merit.

Your team that beat Mancini's City never got the credit it deserved imho. That City team was probably the most balanced and strongest team we've ever had (till this season). One of my big issues with Pelligrini was the way he disassembled that team and gradually made it weaker. For me that was one of Ferguson's best titles, because he beat a truly top City squad with a very average United one. Don't think there is another manager in football that could have done that. As you say that team got far less credit than deserved, even if they did look workmanlike.
 
I like Nevilles no nonsense commentary these days. If you’re lazy and shit, he will call it!

Suprised Sky hasn’t told him to tone it down abit incase it offends a vegan transgender somewhere!
 
Gutless and tumescent from Conte. Can't believe he hasn't gone with a striker. They press, we lump it up, they win it back because the height of the front three is a combined 10ft. Hazard playing in a position he doesn't enjoy playing in. Fabregas with no cover in midfield when we all know his legs aren't there to cover the ground needed. Persisting with Alonso and Moses when we have Zappacosta and Palmieri on the bench too (who can both get forward) makes no sense. I think Conte is done after this game if we lose it.
 
AngliaRed said:
I like Nevilles no nonsense commentary these days. If you’re lazy and shit, he will call it!

Suprised Sky hasn’t told him to tone it down abit incase it offends a vegan transgender somewhere!
Click to expand...
He would have been better on the Arsenal game. That would have gone down in history.
 
Yesss!!! Now give me that city lover tag.

We win tomorrow and top 4 is sealed imo.
 
Bernardo, he's been doing really well recently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.