Varchester City 18/19 discussion

ShadesOfTomato said:
Maybe, but in the league? There hasn't been an English side this good domestically ever. The margin of error if you want to even compete with them is minute and nothing that has been seen before.
Click to expand...
They are by far a very well oiled machine with no significant weakness.

They cruised through the league last season with virtually no competition. This year pool is pushing them but i don't think they are playing that well to put pressure on city throughout the course of the season. The team's character is defined by how they deal with pressure scenarios. Few dropped points and you are no longer top of the table. We are yet to witness that as competition is significantly weak compared to last decade.
 
abdo99 said:
They are redefining the art of defending. They won the league with fabian delph as makeshift left back and average otamendi. in fact None of their back 4 are world class but the way the ball is manipulated means the defence is barely tested. They could play midfielder at CB and wouldn't make any single difference. Certainly in the PL at least. Remains to be seen if they are good enough for the CL
Click to expand...
Well i saw Liverpool tear them apart last season on two occasions. They wilt under pressure. The thing is there are very very few teams who are capable of going toe to toe with them. Until we see that, i don't think waxlyricing everything they do is a good idea.
 
ShadesOfTomato said:
Maybe, but in the league? There hasn't been an English side this good domestically ever. The margin of error if you want to even compete with them is minute and nothing that has been seen before.
Click to expand...

In terms of the PL, if we put up similar numbers to last year I would say we are the best team in the prem ever, but not the best Prem team if that makes sense. I don't think we can say "Hey, we're better than Fergies best United teams" until we've achieved what those teams have, which is the holy grail. United were in 3 CL finals in 4 seasons from 08-11 and would probably have another win had they not run into Pep and the best club side of all time. They also won the premier league 3 times in those 4 years. I think we'll need to do something similar (lets say title this year (sorry), and 1 more in the next 2 seasons along with a CL and a couple of really deep CL runs).

As good an all as we are we've been Semi-Final, Last 16, Last 8 last 3 seasons in the CL so we need massive improvement in Europe. And our league positions have being 4th, 3rd and 1st. While the last 18 months have been pretty much unbelievable we need to do it for another 18-36 to be the best imho.
 
ayushreddevil9 said:
Well i saw Liverpool tear them apart last season on two occasions. They wilt under pressure. The thing is there are very very few teams who are capable of going toe to toe with them. Until we see that, i don't think waxlyricing everything they do is a good idea.
Click to expand...

The same Liverpool couldn't lay a glove on us at Anfield this season... defensively we're a completely different animal this year.
 
padr81 said:
The same Liverpool couldn't lay a glove on us at Anfield this season... defensively we're a completely different animal this year.
Click to expand...
I think its fair to say that Liverpool aren't same as last season.

And the poster was talking in the context of last season.
 
ayushreddevil9 said:
I think its fair to say that Liverpool aren't same as last season.

And the poster was talking in the context of last season.
Click to expand...

I think Liverpool are just found out offensively this season. Teams have learned. The ones that didn't have got ripped apart on the counter ala PSG.
With regards last season 100% we were exposed in both games, the league game in 15 minutes, the CL game I think the bus attack had an impact on tbh...

I disagree with the OP about us redefining defending. Spain, Pep's Barca and even LVG plus many others all had a you can't concede if you have the ball approach long before us.
 
padr81 said:
The same Liverpool couldn't lay a glove on us at Anfield this season... defensively we're a completely different animal this year.
Click to expand...

I think Liverpool are the ones who got worse offensively rather than a lot changing for City. The Champions League will be the true test, Guardiola will need it too after 5 years of underperforming there. Obviously it depends on the draw but I think reaching the semifinals would be the minimum acceptable if you are to cement yourselves among the greatest english teams ever.

A repeat of last year can't happen.
 
Did a poster really say the PL is strong at the moment?

I'd wager a good bet that only 2 PL teams will even make the CL last 16 this season. And one of them will be United and we won't go much further.

City are a strong team, they have two expensive players in every position which has never truly been done before in English football. Whether they have the first team quality to overturn other top European sides remains to be seen, there's a good chance they do. But they've not beaten anybody yet nevermind consistently.
 
Peyroteo said:
I think Liverpool are the ones who got worse offensively rather than a lot changing for City. The Champions League will be the true test, Guardiola will need it too after 5 years of underperforming there. Obviously it depends on the draw but I think reaching the semifinals would be the minimum acceptable if you are to cement yourselves among the greatest english teams ever.

A repeat of last year can't happen.
Click to expand...

I think Liverpool have been defended better by everyone not just City, in fact all City had to do was play 10 yards deeper, Liverpool very much try and play the same way, it just doesn't work if teams don't allow them to ping balls behind the fullbacks. City are wise to this, which is the opposite to last season, heat maps from last season show City played with 11 players almost in Liverpools half in the 2 CL games, just a bit below that in the 4-3 in the league.

This year we simply kept Mendy and Walker back and played a decent line (not Jose deep but deep by City standards), this is the opposite to the thing Pep did at Bayern where they got counter attacked to death in the CL so maybe he's learning from his previous result. I wouldn't call 3 semi finals at Bayern underperforming, I'd call it acceptable but not great. His two campaigns at City have been far below par though and both have been down to him playing naively similar to Bayern.

I agree our first tough test in the CL will tell, will he revert to type and vs players who can murder us on the counter play a crazy high line, or continue with the blueprint he set out vs Liverpool.

Don't think a semi is enough to be a great team, we need a win in the next 2-3 seasons and a couple more league titles imho.
 
padr81 said:
The same Liverpool couldn't lay a glove on us at Anfield this season... defensively we're a completely different animal this year.
Click to expand...

And vice versa.

padr81 said:
In terms of the PL, if we put up similar numbers to last year I would say we are the best team in the prem ever, but not the best Prem team if that makes sense. I don't think we can say "Hey, we're better than Fergies best United teams" until we've achieved what those teams have, which is the holy grail. United were in 3 CL finals in 4 seasons from 08-11 and would probably have another win had they not run into Pep and the best club side of all time. They also won the premier league 3 times in those 4 years. I think we'll need to do something similar (lets say title this year (sorry), and 1 more in the next 2 seasons along with a CL and a couple of really deep CL runs).

As good an all as we are we've been Semi-Final, Last 16, Last 8 last 3 seasons in the CL so we need massive improvement in Europe. And our league positions have being 4th, 3rd and 1st. While the last 18 months have been pretty much unbelievable we need to do it for another 18-36 to be the best imho.
Click to expand...

Fair points and I agree. In terms of the league, I just feel you're an absolute monster of the type which hasn't been seen before.
 
Last edited:
ShadesOfTomato said:
And vice versa.



Fair points and I agree. In terms of the league, I just feel you're an absolute monster of the type which hasn't been seen before.
Click to expand...

100%, though we did miss a stonewall peno. But everyone knows you guys are vastly improved at the back and VVD is up there with the best in the world. Despite conceding less goals and less chances, people tend to talk of us as poor defensively still. Also we didn't lay a glove on your last year either (well in the CL).
 
Do people not remember how bad the bottom ten or so teams were in the premier league in the 'top 4' era?
I understand how people feel about Sir Alex Ferguson, but non of his best teams can keep up with a Guadiola team over the course of the season. His teams were notoriously slow starters which is enough to end the title race by December agaisnt this City side.
 
There probably is some truth to that rest of the league being a bit weak in recent years. Chelsea ran away with the league twice when they nowhere near their 2004-06 levels. City stormed to the league last year. This season even Liverpool are winning nearly every game and all the top 4 are winning week in week out, and I don't believe Liverpool, Chelsea and Spurs are all that good.

Obviously I do expect Liverpool fans here to worship City so they can lament this freakish factor stopping them from winning the league.

City are an excellent team but I don't think points totals always tells the full story. Otherwise United 17/18 was better than United 98/99 which obviously isn't true.
 
Bergman said:
Do people not remember how bad the bottom ten or so teams were in the premier league in the 'top 4' era?
I understand how people feel about Sir Alex Ferguson, but non of his best teams can keep up with a Guadiola team over the course of the season. His teams were notoriously slow starters which is enough to end the title race by December agaisnt this City side.
Click to expand...
Possibly. But then again Sir Alex never got a blank cheque to spend 50 million on third fullbacks, centre backs and wingers either. And this is coming from someone constantly telling United fans to give Pep his due credit for the footballing /coaching job he does. He is an incredibly good coach. However, when the discourse moves to all time teams, the hand he's been dealt has to be considered too.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
There probably is some truth to that rest of the league being a bit weak in recent years. Chelsea ran away with the league twice when they nowhere near their 2004-06 levels. City stormed to the league last year. This season even Liverpool are winning nearly every game and all the top 4 are winning week in week out, and I don't believe Liverpool, Chelsea and Spurs are all that good.

Obviously I do expect Liverpool fans here to worship City so they can lament this freakish factor stopping them from winning the league.

City are an excellent team but I don't think points totals always tells the full story. Otherwise United 17/18 was better than United 98/99 which obviously isn't true.
Click to expand...

Teams are mentally beaten before even actually playing city. It is the fear factor, which United used to have under SAF.

Also, most bottom-half PL teams are not used to this faster version of Tiki-Taka. Even with two-banks of four it is difficult to counter city, who have exceptionally skilled and pacy wingers to stretch them.

Lastly, all PL teams have money. But the top teams have so much money that they can afford the best players in this league who are at least two levels above the best players of say, West Ham. That's the reason for Liverpool and Chelsea getting results, lot of time depending on individual brilliance.

Quality of football is dying because of the huge disparity due to obscene money. After all, it is competition that drives someone to greatness.
 
There is a simple way to compare teams from different eras and it is in terms of trophies.

Football has changed a lot, so it doesn't make sense to say that if you take Brazil 1970, one of the greatest football teams of all time, and put them in the PL now, they will be the best. Actually, they would be the worst if they played in the same manner as they did in 1970.

Same with United 99. It's the best English team ever because it won a treble. But it - without any fitness and tactical improvements - wouldn't fare well in the league now because football has moved. The same group of players coached by a current (and thus tactically evolved) version of Fergie would probably be the best now. Because player by player they seem better than City's counterparts, except for 3-4 names (say Laporte vs Johnsen or Aguero vs Cole). What Fergie would have over Guardiola is willpower, perseverance, man management. Regarding only coaching and tactical acumen Guardiola is better. It would be a fantastic clash.
 
padr81 said:
In terms of the PL, if we put up similar numbers to last year I would say we are the best team in the prem ever, but not the best Prem team if that makes sense. I don't think we can say "Hey, we're better than Fergies best United teams" until we've achieved what those teams have, which is the holy grail.
Our league positions have being 4th, 3rd and 1st. While the last 18 months have been pretty much unbelievable we need to do it for another 18-36 to be the best imho.
Click to expand...

Statistically you are the best ever PL team. You are playing in an era when the PL is of a worse standard than ever though. If the Utd teams of 99 & 2008 were playing in this league i'd be highly confident of beating City's current record. You also have to factor in how hard it was for Utd to win the league year on year. We are the biggest game of the year for most PL teams. Most teams performed at a much higher level against Utd than at other times in the season. You have never faced this though. Due to the money in the PL many small teams accept a defeat against you & save their efforts for games against sides which are nearer to them.


Bergman said:
Do people not remember how bad the bottom ten or so teams were in the premier league in the 'top 4' era?
I understand how people feel about Sir Alex Ferguson, but non of his best teams can keep up with a Guadiola team over the course of the season. His teams were notoriously slow starters which is enough to end the title race by December agaisnt this City side.
Click to expand...

I refer you to my above post.
 
Question is there not a Laporte discussion thread? Had a search for one and nothing has come up but I’m sure there was one at one point.
 
Even though they spent a fortune on defenders, they didn't sign the heirs of Cafu, Maldini, Beckenbauer and Baresi. Yet their defensive stats are incredible:

Season Team Shots on target faced/game Manager

2018-19 Manchester City 1.92 Pep Guardiola
2004-05 Chelsea 2.18 Jose Mourinho
2007-08 Liverpool 2.29 Rafael Benitez
2017-18 Manchester City 2.32 Pep Guardiola
2018-19 Liverpool 2.38 Jurgen Klopp
2005-06 Chelsea 2.47 Jose Mourinho
2005-06 Liverpool 2.63 Rafael Benitez
2006-07 Chelsea 2.63 Jose Mourinho
2006-07 Liverpool 2.66 Rafael Benitez
2004-05 Manchester United 2.68 Sir Alex Ferguson

Class defending is much more than having class defenders. Both defence and attack depend on all players on the pitch. Even Ederson contributes to their attack and even Aguero helps their defence. That view on the Caf that two top signins in defence will solve our problems there is quite suspect imo.
 
I think Its hard to talk about them defensively cause it's rare they are ever under pressure given the opposition spend more time taking the ball out of their net. Once you are two down in 15 mins, mentally it's about damage limitation. Will be interesting to see how they get on against the bigger teams in Europe....
 
Litch said:
I think Its hard to talk about them defensively cause it's rare they are ever under pressure given the opposition spend more time taking the ball out of their net. Once you are two down in 15 mins, mentally it's about damage limitation. Will be interesting to see how they get on against the bigger teams in Europe....
Click to expand...

No doubt their attack being so impressive helps their defence because teams are afraid to leave them spaces to exploit. The other thing is that their high pressing is very effective most of the time. In some games it doesn't quite work like against Lyon and they struggle then. Their defence is hugely dependent on high pressing. Which is a big weapon that Jose for some reason dismisses.
 
Denis_unwise said:
Statistically you are the best ever PL team. You are playing in an era when the PL is of a worse standard than ever though. If the Utd teams of 99 & 2008 were playing in this league i'd be highly confident of beating City's current record. You also have to factor in how hard it was for Utd to win the league year on year. We are the biggest game of the year for most PL teams. Most teams performed at a much higher level against Utd than at other times in the season. You have never faced this though. Due to the money in the PL many small teams accept a defeat against you & save their efforts for games against sides which are nearer to them.
Click to expand...

That's not strictly true though is it, the only difference I can think of is players 10-15 years ago may have been physically roughed up more which may have appeared that teams raised their games. Weren't someone like wolves fined for fielding a weakened team against you?
 
Litch said:
I think Its hard to talk about them defensively cause it's rare they are ever under pressure given the opposition spend more time taking the ball out of their net. Once you are two down in 15 mins, mentally it's about damage limitation. Will be interesting to see how they get on against the bigger teams in Europe....
Click to expand...

The difference is that they start their defending from the front.
When The opponent has a goal kick, City attackers are at the the edge of the opposition box thus making it hard to play from the back and leaving a long punt as the only option which is likely to give the ball back to City defenders or keepers to start another attack. If the opponent tries to build from the back, they risk a City interception at a very dangerous part of the field close to the opponents goal (See highlights of City 3 Barcelona 1 last season)

On the contrary when Man Utd opponent have a goal kick, Man Utd players quickly retreat and camp behind the halfway line, this allows the opponent to build up, pass and get into Man Utd attacking half sometimes attacking 3rd almost unchallenged.

Another thing is attackers are encouraged to foul far away from the City goal to stop any potential breakaway
 
Thunderhead said:
That's not strictly true though is it, the only difference I can think of is players 10-15 years ago may have been physically roughed up more which may have appeared that teams raised their games. Weren't someone like wolves fined for fielding a weakened team against you?
Click to expand...

We were the biggest club in the country even when we were doing nothing in the 70's & 80's. It's only natural that other teams will rise to the occasion. When we went on to start dominating this only made us bigger in opponents eyes which made them want to beat us even more. It shows how good SAF was doing what he did with the constant pressure he was under. It was a particular bug bear of SAF's how teams raised their games against us though. I think he had a go at Leeds once when it was Utd & Newcastle going for the league.

Wolves was one isolated incident. We've had the likes of Wigan, West Ham & Everton significantly raise their games against us to stop us winning the league. There are countless other examples of teams putting in their best performances of the season against us. Many times these teams were playing for nothing but pride. When we are at our lowest point in 3 decades this is still the case. I found it unbelievable how many GK's put in their best ever performances against us in Jose's first season.
 
Denis_unwise said:
We were the biggest club in the country even when we were doing nothing in the 70's & 80's. It's only natural that other teams will rise to the occasion. When we went on to start dominating this only made us bigger in opponents eyes which made them want to beat us even more. It shows how good SAF was doing what he did with the constant pressure he was under. It was a particular bug bear of SAF's how teams raised their games against us though. I think he had a go at Leeds once when it was Utd & Newcastle going for the league.

Wolves was one isolated incident. We've had the likes of Wigan, West Ham & Everton significantly raise their games against us to stop us winning the league. There are countless other examples of teams putting in their best performances of the season against us. Many times these teams were playing for nothing but pride. When we are at our lowest point in 3 decades this is still the case. I found it unbelievable how many GK's put in their best ever performances against us in Jose's first season.
Click to expand...

So in other words your entire argument is built on bias. Liverpool were the biggest club in the country in the 70's and certainly in the 80's.
As for the bolded part :lol::lol:, the answer at best is 1 maybe 0.
 
padr81 said:
So in other words your entire argument is built on bias. Liverpool were the biggest club in the country in the 70's and certainly in the 80's.
As for the bolded part :lol::lol:, the answer at best is 1 maybe 0.
Click to expand...
Liverpool were the most successful club in the 70's and 80's.

Manchester United have been the biggest club in the country since the 60's and always one of the most famous football clubs in the world.
 
padr81 said:
So in other words your entire argument is built on bias. Liverpool were the biggest club in the country in the 70's and certainly in the 80's.
As for the bolded part :lol::lol:, the answer at best is 1 maybe 0.
Click to expand...

Liverpool were the most successful club in the 70's & 80's. Utd were the biggest club though. We averaged higher attendances than them & the rest of the league for the majority of this period. We also had the better star name players. We just never had the manager who could put it all together.

On the other point, The Gk's in the games against Stoke, Burnley, West Ham & Hull at OT all produced world class displays.
 
CA1 said:
Liverpool were the most successful club in the 70's and 80's.

Manchester United have been the biggest club in the country since the 60's and always one of the most famous football clubs in the world.
Click to expand...

Possibly. But only if there is absolutely zero correlation between 'biggest' and actually winning trophies. As someone who was alive and attending games during the 70's and 80's my recollection is that United were a bit of a laughing stock.
 
Their weakness is still the same as last season, problem is even though they sat back at Anfield we haven’t played the same style so it was a much different game.
 
I dont care if this post doesnt belong here, just watched video about loot boxes and guy who`s idea was it, he was wearing City shirt on picture, so you guys are pure evul .!.
 
Liver_bird said:
Their weakness is still the same as last season, problem is even though they sat back at Anfield we haven’t played the same style so it was a much different game.
Click to expand...

Did we sit back? We had more of the ball in that game than you did.
 
el magico said:
Possibly. But only if there is absolutely zero correlation between 'biggest' and actually winning trophies. As someone who was alive and attending games during the 70's and 80's my recollection is that United were a bit of a laughing stock.
Click to expand...
We were the biggest, we had the best crowds and had the most support up and down the country.

We were the country's team particularly with what happened in 58 and with our European Cup success in 1968. When Liverpool were dominant, football around the time started giving itself bad headlines and the general public lost its interest. Liverpool were not a loved team by casual football observers, Manchester United were because of the likes of George Best, Bobby Charlton, Denis Law etc. Liverpool were a ruthless winning machine which is not liked by the British public (see ourselves in the 90's and 00's)

That's why true United fans never flinch when somebody says "all your fans are from London" or whatever because it simply means they've met lots of United fans in London which is a badge of honour for United supporters before the 90's when it started to become a stick to beat us with. I always argue with fellow Manchester based United fans why they question our "out of town" support as being somewhat inferior, that views goes against Manchester United and its history.

We weren't so much a laughing stock, but we were underachievers and in a way, that's what endeared us to the public even more. We also endeavoured to play attacking football which not many teams did in the 70's and 80's. We were a naive team who would fall short. But people always wanted to come and watch Manchester United.
 
CA1 said:
Liverpool were the most successful club in the 70's and 80's.

Manchester United have been the biggest club in the country since the 60's and always one of the most famous football clubs in the world.
Click to expand...

Liverpool were a far bigger deal in the 80's in particular, its not that you weren't massive or one of the most famous football clubs in the world. At that point in time Liverpool were bigger news.

Denis_unwise said:
Liverpool were the most successful club in the 70's & 80's. Utd were the biggest club though. We averaged higher attendances than them & the rest of the league for the majority of this period. We also had the better star name players. We just never had the manager who could put it all together.

On the other point, The Gk's in the games against Stoke, Burnley, West Ham & Hull at OT all produced world class displays.
Click to expand...

Liverpool were a bigger deal, you guys were still huge but liverpool were bigger.
I'd argue the star names as you looking back with United tinted glasses. Liverpool had some of the best players and biggest stars in English football history in that era... Souness, Daglish, Barnes, Lawro, Rush. In fact the list of UK's top 20 players of all time features Daglish, Souness, Keegan and Barnes. Denis Law is the only United player from that era there and he left you guys in the early 70's.

I remember Lee Grant doing ok but you spent 90 minutes kicking the ball wide and straight at him. In both games v Stoke you had 49 shots and 16 on target. You were complete architects of your own downfall that season. He got ratings of 8/10 and 7/10 for his performances in both games... so pundits and those watching without United tinted glasses would say he didn't have the game of his life in either.

The Burnley keeper was unreal that day (Heaton?), I'll give you that but besides that it was a season where you constantly fluffed your lines in front of goal. Zlatan despite doing excellent missed tons of big chances that year. The keepers weren't doing unreal things, you were just finishing poorly. Your entire team Zlatan and Pogba aside practically crapped themselves in front of goal for the entire season, and as I said Zlatan missed a ton of guilt edged chances (albeit not from panic or losing confidence). Even Martial (who seems to have his mojo back this season) was spurning opportunities he'd bury this season.
 
padr81 said:
Liverpool were a far bigger deal in the 80's in particular, its not that you weren't massive or one of the most famous football clubs in the world. At that point in time Liverpool were bigger news.



Liverpool were a bigger deal, you guys were still huge but liverpool were bigger.
I'd argue the star names as you looking back with United tinted glasses. Liverpool had some of the best players and biggest stars in English football history in that era... Souness, Daglish, Barnes, Lawro, Rush. In fact the list of UK's top 20 players of all time features Daglish, Souness, Keegan and Barnes. Denis Law is the only United player from that era there and he left you guys in the early 70's.
Click to expand...

You don't know what you're talking about.

Liverpool were much, much more successful and their players were better than ours in that period so of course they have more listed in those lists.

They weren't a bigger, more watched or more famous team.

Liverpool haven't won a league title for 30 years but they're still the 2nd biggest team in the country.

Manchester United have been the biggest club in Britain since the late 50's.

I couldn't tell you who've won the last 50 baseball championships but I'll tell you now that the New York Yankees are the most famous team and their famous players roll off the tongue.

Sometimes the period your successful in is a massive infleunce.
 
CA1 said:
You don't know what you're talking about.

Liverpool were much, much more successful and their players were better than ours in that period so of course they have more listed in those lists.

They weren't a bigger, more watched or more famous team.

Liverpool haven't won a league title for 30 years but they're still the 2nd biggest team in the country.

Manchester United have been the biggest club in Britain since the late 50's.

I couldn't tell you who've won the last 50 baseball championships but I'll tell you now that the New York Yankees are the most famous team and their famous players roll off the tongue.

Sometimes the period your successful in is a massive infleunce.
Click to expand...

Ok, you are American? I was curious as to why you had so little understanding of English football. I don't know one single player from the New York Yamkees I'm afraid. Joe Bontana?
 
CA1 said:
You don't know what you're talking about.

Liverpool were much, much more successful and their players were better than ours in that period so of course they have more listed in those lists.

They weren't a bigger, more watched or more famous team.

Liverpool haven't won a league title for 30 years but they're still the 2nd biggest team in the country.

Manchester United have been the biggest club in Britain since the late 50's.

I couldn't tell you who've won the last 50 baseball championships but I'll tell you now that the New York Yankees are the most famous team and their famous players roll off the tongue.

Sometimes the period your successful in is a massive infleunce.
Click to expand...

For the bolded bit that was a reply to Denis saying you had better stars and bigger players.

With regards the rest, I left Manchester in 1983, moved to Ireland and I can assure you over here it was Liverpool, Liverpool, Liverpool. The same when I spent a bit of time in Italy 86-88. Speaking from my own experience if you mentioned English football it was Liverpool... everywhere I've been.

It's only my opinion but in my experience thats how it was. Liverpool on the radio, Liverpool on the tv. Liverpool were the ones most kids supported of the english sides in those days too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.