The mancityfans.net football forum

Beefymcfc wrote:Love it, City Boys know their shit. Our defence is the only thing they can still rely on, determined by one game in the CL, what are they going to do when keep breaking these records?

Oh, I know, make the stats up, just like the Rags not losing for a billion years!

Fake news Donald.

nottsblue wrote:Five successive away clean sheets. A club record. Stick that in your pipe city haters

That's quite an uplifting stat. Great win today and our form is going to make an exciting few months to end the season here

Excellent win and we totally dominated the game.

john@staustell wrote:

sidSmith wrote:Sky going on about how shit we are at the back. In a game where we won 2-0

For me our problem is a poor final ball time and again when we have them at our mercy

That was certainly the case today but I was never nervous about the outcome.

The commentary made it sound like an after the Mayor's event, dampening down an event that rivals the best around the globe. Barca and Real would be lorded for winning a game against a stubborn side but as it's us, against a perennial underdog, then it's shit news.

We really showed our stuff and the Rag media don't like it. Me personally, I'm loving it.

Ba da da da daaaa

Sky brought up a stat for chances and it was 10 each.
Can someone tell me how they work these stats out because i sure can't remember then having 10 chances??

gmercer1 wrote:Sky brought up a stat for chances and it was 10 each.
Can someone tell me how they work these stats out because i sure can't remember then having 10 chances??

I think it was 10 times they had the ball in our half

nottsblue wrote:

gmercer1 wrote:Sky brought up a stat for chances and it was 10 each.
Can someone tell me how they work these stats out because i sure can't remember then having 10 chances??

I think it was 10 times they had the ball in our half

I remember four saves from Willy and a couple of headers just wide of the goal. Plus one shot on the post. And that's just from the top of my head.

BookJunior wrote:I'm sick of Pat Nevin on the radio and refuse to buy Sky on principle.

This anti-City illness is gradually infecting all of the media companies.

Just watch the radio with the sound off. Simple.

BlueinBosnia wrote:

BookJunior wrote:I'm sick of Pat Nevin on the radio and refuse to buy Sky on principle.

This anti-City illness is gradually infecting all of the media companies.

Just watch the radio with the sound off. Simple.

The correct solution.

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:

BlueinBosnia wrote:

BookJunior wrote:I'm sick of Pat Nevin on the radio and refuse to buy Sky on principle.

This anti-City illness is gradually infecting all of the media companies.

Just watch the radio with the sound off. Simple.

The correct solution.

Turned off and switched to Johnny Crossan's channel.

Mase wrote:

Beefymcfc wrote:Kolarov has been impressive today.

As always mate. Hurry and do the MOTM thread, I'm keen to get my vote in early.

Kolarovs fault we kept a clean sheet today, but seriously he played very well. Still got the nerves going a bit when he got near halfway.

branny wrote:

Mase wrote:

Beefymcfc wrote:Kolarov has been impressive today.

As always mate. Hurry and do the MOTM thread, I'm keen to get my vote in early.

Kolarovs fault we kept a clean sheet today, but seriously he played very well. Still got the nerves going a bit when he got near halfway.

I feel we're much better when he partners Stones rather than Otter. The amount of covering the other defenders have to do when Otter just dives in is unreal.

Am I watching the same game that MotD are reporting. I remember City having all the early play but they've showed just the Sunderland chances. 4 chances to 1.

branny wrote:

Mase wrote:

Beefymcfc wrote:Kolarov has been impressive today.

As always mate. Hurry and do the MOTM thread, I'm keen to get my vote in early.

Kolarovs fault we kept a clean sheet today, but seriously he played very well. Still got the nerves going a bit when he got near halfway.

I'm much happier to see him playing in the middle rather than at left back. And to see him playing instead of the Otter.

A question raised when I was watching was " why does every cross into City's box find a Sunderland head"

On a different day one might have gone in but to me ,apart from one,they didn't feel threatening and if they had scored we would just have had to change gear.

Beefymcfc wrote:Am I watching the same game that MotD are reporting. I remember City having all the early play but they've showed just the Sunderland chances. 4 chances to 1.

I thought that as well....
And the commentator nearly creaming every time Sunderland get a chance and monotone when we score.
I never really bought into the alleged media bias, but this season it's so bloody obvious it's really beginning to bother me, every City story has a negative slant, sure we get plenty of praise from the pundits....what else can they do but praise us when we win....but they take every opportunity have a go at our defence...blissfully unaware that it's 5 consecutive clean sheets away from home for the first time in God knows how long.
I think if WHU get anything from tomorrow's game, I think we will win the league ! Chelsea will shit a brick !!

Sparklehorse wrote:

Beefymcfc wrote:Am I watching the same game that MotD are reporting. I remember City having all the early play but they've showed just the Sunderland chances. 4 chances to 1.

I thought that as well....
And the commentator nearly creaming every time Sunderland get a chance and monotone when we score.
I never really bought into the alleged media bias, but this season it's so bloody obvious it's really beginning to bother me, every City story has a negative slant, sure we get plenty of praise from the pundits....what else can they do but praise us when we win....but they take every opportunity have a go at our defence...blissfully unaware that it's 5 consecutive clean sheets away from home for the first time in God knows how long.
I think if WHU get anything from tomorrow's game, I think we will win the league ! Chelsea will shit a brick !!

We had a lot of the early play but didn't really create much. Sunderland created quite a few good chances in the first half, despite not having much of the ball, so it's not surprising that the highlights focused on showing their shots as showing highlights of a team passing the ball around with little end product is not very interesting.

We stepped up in the second half and took control. We dominated possession and created lots of chances.

aaron bond wrote:

Sparklehorse wrote:

Beefymcfc wrote:Am I watching the same game that MotD are reporting. I remember City having all the early play but they've showed just the Sunderland chances. 4 chances to 1.

I thought that as well....
And the commentator nearly creaming every time Sunderland get a chance and monotone when we score.
I never really bought into the alleged media bias, but this season it's so bloody obvious it's really beginning to bother me, every City story has a negative slant, sure we get plenty of praise from the pundits....what else can they do but praise us when we win....but they take every opportunity have a go at our defence...blissfully unaware that it's 5 consecutive clean sheets away from home for the first time in God knows how long.
I think if WHU get anything from tomorrow's game, I think we will win the league ! Chelsea will shit a brick !!

We had a lot of the early play but didn't really create much. Sunderland created quite a few good chances in the first half, despite not having much of the ball, so it's not surprising that the highlights focused on showing their shots as showing highlights of a team passing the ball around with little end product is not very interesting.

We stepped up in the second half and took control. We dominated possession and created lots of chances.

To the point that they didn't bother with the Silva offside goal, or the numerous chances we created? You do realise we had about 7 chances in that half.

What was the comment from RatBoy2, 'Sunderland were the better side, at least for the first 40 minutes'?