Please let us attack, Mr Mancini...

[Swales4ever]

A couple of things I don't get.. (but please keep in mind, I want Mancini to stay, i.e. I am not "bashing")

1) Where is Ireland? (The player, not the nation) In my opinion, much of the reason that we were so flat-footed and possessed the ball so little, was because Johnson and Ireland were not in the game. Why.. how.. what reasoning do you leave Stevie out? If the point is to play possession, then he is a must in the starting lineup. Which brings me to my next question...

2) What is the identity of this team? Are we similar to Aston Villa, or Barcelona in style? Because it seems as if we hoof the ball up the field, when we have personnel to keep the ball with short-medium passing up the field. I was confused against Sunderland, because on one hand, Barry et al. would boot the ball into the box, with Tevez and Bellers as "target men" (until RSC arrived), and on the other hand, it seems as if Shay was holding the ball up to try and distribute to our backs and midfielders with some passes on the ground. I personally prefer playing a controlled game.

IF Mancini will be City next season (ie if Marwood/Cook will report Sheikh to keep him), his style of football is surely based on the presence of a "deep lying box to box" midfielder with a playmaker in front. So in the case, You will see next season something like:
Someone like Xavi Alonso/Vieira(of few years ago!) - Gareth Barry - St. Ireland (or better if available on the market) - AJ (SWP).

Re. Why.. how.. what reasoning do you leave Stevie out? - because he is - currently - not only out of form but appears also, somehow, out of mind. This has resulted that any chance Mancini had given him, it had turned to be a 10vs11 game. You are spot on the fact that "just a decent Stevie" will be extremely helpfull - but if You look at Stoke 1st FA home and (mostly) Liverpool EPL home, You will see the actual opposite of a playmaker: a Stevie hidden amongst the opps, never stepping at the ball, never dictating the pass to the carrier, never attacking the space between the lines. I saw what he had been able to do previous season, and some friends told me he is also a very sensible person who could have been affected by all the ramblings of this season - but in answering to your question I would say because he had proven not to be (currently) able to provide what the role (You rightly suggested) features - if he could actually be able to provide it, we would had solved half the problem of becoming a side able to impose its game, the second half being (since the end of the season) to give as much "gerovital" as possible to Vieira...

Re. Sunderland game. I wouldn't say straight it was an error, but it seems to me Mancini decided to go for respecting the 11 winners fm SB (confidence building). If I am right, this had 2 weakness: a) lack of a "target man upfront", overdue when You play that kind of opponents; b) the need to get Zaba in to cover possible difensive mistakes fm Micah: I personally rate the potential of Micah few less than a Paolo Maldini and so it's worth trying, but he's still a defensive liability.

Overall and above all, there is no manager who can deal with the problem of the personnel start working after lunch time. It had been stressed and stressed the very urgency to spot on a global focus from minute zero to minute 95: it seems still not working. I am not complaining about the Lads committment, it is a matter of seniority: seniors teams and players come from resting periods and/or from the bench and are immediately capable to give their best, we are still a work in progress.... This is also why I am pretty confident the next Fulham away, will start and end quite differently... :-)

[brite blu sky]

Ironic how the moves he made in the end resulted in a draw instead of a loss, and it would have been a comfortable win without a super Gordon in goal for Sunderland. I seriously wonder about the ability to understand football of who writes peices like this.

Good point CFFR. I was thinking that every team that plays the better teams (RAGS, Arse, Chelski) goes hell for leather at it and sometimes gets ahead early in the game after which they are under huge pressure until the better team (usually) comes through and takes the points.

We have made a transformation - after years of going at it hell for leather, hopefully getting a goal, and then hanging on like grim death for 80 minutes (Sven style), we are now one of the teams who shines through as the game goes on. We have progressed to be classed alongside those teams. And the summer should bring the right extra players.

All we need to do is stop that early goal going in. Simple eh?

the uncredited piece that AntLondon posted is a pile of tosh, written without any understanding of football, and possible without having seen the game. It doesn't deserve even being talked about.

There is no doubt we are encountering teams that are raising their game as the only way to counter us. While that in itself is positive or flattering or whatever, it remains that we cant really deal with it. A better team like Everton might still get 2 goals and continue to beat us to the ball for the whole 90 mins, they did it once and im not sure they wouldn't be able to do it again ( Vieira or not ). Seems to me we have a problem, one part of which is that other teams have seen how they need to play against us to give us problems we cant cope with. Everton gave everyone a lesson in how to go about City, and it is still working.
I have tried to suggest that imo the problem is easy enough to identify, not so easy to solve it seems.
It appears to me that teams who get at us to the extent we cant cope with it, makes us shrink back and remain very deep, we lose contact with the front men and most importantly all the mids are helping out chasing the ball in our own half.. instead of holding space and looking to get into a good space to receive the ball in order to go forward and get it through to the front.
Simply put we go into defensive mode and defensive mentality way too much.

If for example we have Zabba, DeJong and Barry lined up in the mid, surely one of them ( Barry ) should leave the other two to cope and stay in a higher position to receive the ball and then try to distribute it to the feet or in the path of Bellers or Tevez or SWP.

I know that it is easy to say all this but it seems blindingly obvious that we have no outlet to play it forward when teams are trying their level best to stop us playing. The obvious solution to that is to have someone waiting in front of the mids to give the oppo something else to think about if and when they lose the ball.
I have a sneaky feeling this is what Bob brought Vieira in for, as PV wont drop right back into defence to help out, he will hold a higher position knowing that with his passing ability he can slice open the oppo if given half a chance, he also knows that the oppo must bear that in mind, so it becomes a win win situation, the oppo cannot fully commit as many players to harrasing us as there is always the possibility that the distribution player, if he is good, will get the ball at the wrong moment and feed the attack.

As i say ive stated this in an over simplified way, but it seems as clear as day to me that we dont hold our ground, get sucked in to chasing around deep and lose all creativity playing it out from deep, cos the guy who should be around as an option to receive is not there

[Citeh&Crew]

Hey, thanks for the reply, Mancio4ever. Very well thought out (as is bbs's post which follows yours).

I have no particular opinion to spout, other than to say I am very curious to see our lineup against Fulham, and even more so to see how we perform in the first 10 minutes.

[Swales4ever]

Hey, thanks for the reply, Mancio4ever. Very well thought out (as is bbs's post which follows yours).

I have no particular opinion to spout, other than to say I am very curious to see our lineup against Fulham, and even more so to see how we perform in the first 10 minutes.

I share the same curiosities too, Mate.

Actually I'm keen to match the party of a more attacking approach vs lessers (as per various posts fm Ant London, particularly).
But in the case I will care to pick more reliable (defensively) FBs and sacrifice Micah...
I should say, something like:
Kolo - Vinnie - Joleon - Zabba
------- Vieira ----------------
AJ -- SI (let's test it again) - GB
Tevez - Bellers (if Ade, I'd prefer away for targeting)

Then, hope and get in front, save Vieira and replace him with NDJ to fix the result...
But if Stevie would not step at and look for the ball, it would be a serious problems...

But again, imo, the proposed idea of Mancio being a bit scared/not trusting to free rein is sensible, and probably, spot on.

[Ted Hughes]

Hey, thanks for the reply, Mancio4ever. Very well thought out (as is bbs's post which follows yours).

I have no particular opinion to spout, other than to say I am very curious to see our lineup against Fulham, and even more so to see how we perform in the first 10 minutes.

I share the same curiosities too, Mate.

Actually I'm keen to match the party of a more attacking approach vs lessers (as per various posts fm Ant London, particularly).
But in the case I will care to pick more reliable (defensively) FBs and sacrifice Micah...
I should say, something like:
Kolo - Vinnie - Joleon - Zabba
------- Vieira ----------------
AJ -- SI (let's test it again) - GB
Tevez - Bellers (if Ade, I'd prefer away for targeting)

Then, hope and get in front, save Vieira and replace him with NDJ to fix the result...
But if Stevie would not step at and look for the ball, it would be a serious problems...

But again, imo, the proposed idea of Mancio being a bit scared/not trusting to free rein is sensible, and probably, spot on.

I agree that Ireland wasn't looking for the ball when he played & has done nothing to deserve a place but I think Mancini should have set up his teams to play with an extra attacking player, be it Ireland or anybody, rather than build a formation which requires 7 men to be mostly behind the ball with others tracking back to help. Our strength is in our forwards & we were one of the best teams in the PL going forward. There should have been a way to be more cautious & solid & work on defense without destroying our attacking threat.

We've been more like our old selves in the 2nd halves of the last two games though, so perhaps we're not far away from solving that problem. We need to or we'll miss all our targets.

[Swales4ever]

Hey, thanks for the reply, Mancio4ever. Very well thought out (as is bbs's post which follows yours).

I have no particular opinion to spout, other than to say I am very curious to see our lineup against Fulham, and even more so to see how we perform in the first 10 minutes.

I share the same curiosities too, Mate.

Actually I'm keen to match the party of a more attacking approach vs lessers (as per various posts fm Ant London, particularly).
But in the case I will care to pick more reliable (defensively) FBs and sacrifice Micah...
I should say, something like:
Kolo - Vinnie - Joleon - Zabba
------- Vieira ----------------
AJ -- SI (let's test it again) - GB
Tevez - Bellers (if Ade, I'd prefer away for targeting)

Then, hope and get in front, save Vieira and replace him with NDJ to fix the result...
But if Stevie would not step at and look for the ball, it would be a serious problems...

But again, imo, the proposed idea of Mancio being a bit scared/not trusting to free rein is sensible, and probably, spot on.

I agree that Ireland wasn't looking for the ball when he played & has done nothing to deserve a place but I think Mancini should have set up his teams to play with an extra attacking player, be it Ireland or anybody, rather than build a formation which requires 7 men to be mostly behind the ball with others tracking back to help. Our strength is in our forwards & we were one of the best teams in the PL going forward. There should have been a way to be more cautious & solid & work on defense without destroying our attacking threat.

We've been more like our old selves in the 2nd halves of the last two games though, so perhaps we're not far away from solving that problem. We need to or we'll miss all our targets.

As I said, an overall less cautious approach is required, I do match Yr. camp and agree.
As matter of personal opinion, I am steady in the school that just "the old good 2 wingers seeking for the line football" does not work and a dominant performance pass - necessarily - through midfield control and ball possession. So that why I am back to square one with Stevie. I am also in the camp of those who think Mancio is cautious because - even given all tactical drills, etc. - our back cannot afford a too unbalanced display. I mean, it is the sum of two weaknesses (or non strenghts if U prefer) a midfield not suit for controll and FBs not solid enough: in turn, imo, U can afford a more unbalanced team (even with lighter FBs) if You can dominate the play in the midfield and decide whether, when and how to impose tempo.

But, at the end of the day, it is also true that we are not talking of winning the League, but just to win 4 of 5 fixtures vs. lesser teams and then meet Spuds & Villans at home with plenty of confidence. Perhaps, as almost in real life, the truth is in the middle and as U said we are not that far from what it takes.... Let's go and see, and hope for the best... :-)