The mancityfans.net football forum

Despite the nature of the defeat yesterday I am hoping that this has been a wake up call to Mancini and the players within our squad that actually give a shit (as I believe strangely enough that some are only there for the money). I dont believe there is the slightest room for complacency against the scum and maybe this defeat was perfectly timed. We as supporters can/could see that there are serious cracks under the veneer of this City team and they were apparent all over the pitch yesterday. By all means there were some poor performances from players that have been improving and I still think that Mancini has the 'mental' tools to sort it out but we were so poor all over the pitch yesterday that he would have had to remove more than half the team to make a difference.

Yesterday was very symptomatic of a manager beginning to understand the weaknesses within his team and I think Mancini was genuinely shocked by what he saw, hence the lack of tactical countermeasures to change the game. We HAVE to win over the two legs with the scum, HAVE to as I think it will have a direct baring on how the rest of our season goes.

That's one way to look at it but yesterday's performance has taken the edge off Tuesday a little for me, need a day to get over it.
Come on City!

I think that we actually have a better chance against the Rags now in both legs. The reason for this is that he will have seen just how we are lacking when it comes to a fight, and thats what we will be getting in the semi's.
We dont have much of a spine but we do have lots of flair, one or two new players could soon fix this and we will be very close to becoming the team we all wish for.

"hence the lack of tactical countermeasures to change the game"

Is the other view of this that he hadn't a clue tactically what to do to change the game?

As we didn't have anyone on the bench that could stand up to them then i would say no he couldn't change it much. The only player's we had available that would do this were on the pitch and getting their backsides kicked allready.
We are to soft and that's clear to see.

Douglas Higginbottom wrote:"hence the lack of tactical countermeasures to change the game"

Is the other view of this that he hadn't a clue tactically what to do to change the game?

Shusssh...lets not go there, that would be straying into 'typical City' territory and I for one dont think I could handle another full year of bitchin about a manager, I hope Mancini is successful for many reasons and reducing infighting amongst the faithful would be one of them. What I did find interesting about the comments on the game yesterday was that the vast majority of posters commented on the players performance as opposed to the managers, which I believe is justified in this case but I feel if we hit a slump, we will be back to a 'work in progress' and so the saga continues.

Douglas Higginbottom wrote:"hence the lack of tactical countermeasures to change the game"

Is the other view of this that he hadn't a clue tactically what to do to change the game?

KABOOOOOOOOMMMMMMM

This from the man who questions "Mancini vs Hughes" poll. Brilliant double standards.

I think the players probably had one eye on the semi-final yesterday and suffered because of it.

I agree with the OP. The game showed the new manager that the Prem is not a piece of piss and I'd rather that happened at Goodison that at home to the Scum.

saulman wrote:I think the players probably had one eye on the semi-final yesterday and suffered because of it.

I agree with the OP. The game showed the new manager that the Prem is not a piece of piss and I'd rather that happened at Goodison that at home to the Scum.

That's a good point and I hope you are right. It would be only natural for players to alreadyhave their minds on biggest game of this Club in ages and for many of them first chance to get to major final.

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:

saulman wrote:I think the players probably had one eye on the semi-final yesterday and suffered because of it.

I agree with the OP. The game showed the new manager that the Prem is not a piece of piss and I'd rather that happened at Goodison that at home to the Scum.

That's a good point and I hope you are right. It would be only natural for players to alreadyhave their minds on biggest game of this Club in ages and for many of them first chance to get to major final.

it would be horribly unprofessional and reflect very badly oin them and the coaching staff.
If they are set up like last night and play the same then they can forget any major (cough) final. The Scum are not going to stop at 2.

Alex Sapphire wrote:

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:

saulman wrote:I think the players probably had one eye on the semi-final yesterday and suffered because of it.

I agree with the OP. The game showed the new manager that the Prem is not a piece of piss and I'd rather that happened at Goodison that at home to the Scum.

That's a good point and I hope you are right. It would be only natural for players to alreadyhave their minds on biggest game of this Club in ages and for many of them first chance to get to major final.

it would be horribly unprofessional and reflect very badly oin them and the coaching staff.
If they are set up like last night and play the same then they can forget any major (cough) final. The Scum are not going to stop at 2.

Considering the injury crisis we have right now, it may not have been worst decision for players to be saving themselves (if that even was the case inthe first place). For me, the semis are billion times more important than Everton game.

In ideal world, of course, we would've got result from all three games.

if any of the players were "saving themselves" and that stinker of a showing was the result, said players should be on the bench on tuesday imo. horribly unprofessional - results in our rivals gaining ground on us, also any momentum we had going into this one is gone - i fucking wish that bastard snow hadn't screwed the original game.

sorry ashton!

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:

Douglas Higginbottom wrote:"hence the lack of tactical countermeasures to change the game"

Is the other view of this that he hadn't a clue tactically what to do to change the game?

KABOOOOOOOOMMMMMMM

This from the man who questions "Mancini vs Hughes" poll. Brilliant double standards.

Seriously NQDP we dont need to have pop at everyone who has double standards on here or we would just end up constantly having pops at one another...oh sorry I forgot, thats what we are doing, hmmm

this analysis from David Pleat is pretty spot on for me....

David Pleat's tactical report: Everton v Manchester City
When City's midfield were overwhelmed the match was ripe for Everton's exploitation


Manchester City manager Roberto Mancini watches as things don't quite go to plan against Everton. Photograph: Alex Livesey/Getty Images

How were Manchester City set up?

Roberto Mancini, satisfied with his winning start as City's manager, replaced the willing Benjani Mwaruwari with the technically superior Roque Santa Cruz and asked Martin Petrov and Craig Bellamy, each cutting inside on their stronger foot, to play wide in what appeared to be an expansive system for an away game. The wingers were charged with exploiting Phil Neville and Leighton Baines, the opposing full-backs, on their weaker sides, with City's 4-2-1-3 technically offering their midfield cover and shielding strengths in Nigel de Jong and Gareth Barry, with Carlos Tevez working feverishly in front of them. It looked well balanced to contain Everton's recent improvement.

Did it succeed?

No. The injury to Santa Cruz forced an adjustment, allowing Robinho a chance to show he has the attitude and determination to perform away from home – something he failed to do – but City's wingers found Baines and Neville resolute and quick off the cover to close. Tevez only occasionally eked out space in the first period, when Marouane Fellaini was never far away. The visitors were pinned back by Everton's early passing and their delivery of a more direct ball to the front. Louis Saha made life uncomfortable for Richards and Vincent Kompany, with Tim Cahill, Steven Pienaar and Fellaini aggressively anticipating the knockdowns and squeezing the play. The supply lines to Petrov and Bellamy became scarce as Everton bossed the game, bypassing City's midfield with the alternative of the direct-ball approach as they mixed up their game.

How did City react?

With their 4-2-1-3 system second best, City's chances of recovery were damaged by an apparent susceptibility to pick up knocks. Benjani replaced the limping Petrov, forcing Robinho and Bellamy to switch, but the system went unchanged. Good teams react and show tenacious qualities. City, in contrast, continued to concede all round the field. Tevez was pushed flatter, staying further up-field and alternating with Benjani – the Argentinian's game is at its best when he is linking the play. Neither Barry nor De Jong, denied Tevez's support, was able to free himself from a spirited marker to receive, and both failed to cope with the industry and pressure of Pienaar, Cahill and Fellaini. Mancini had effectively lost his midfield. Pablo Zabaletta and Javier Garrido, passive full-backs, were deprived of passing options when in possession with Everton's players positioned expertly to deny them a get-out forward ball. Maybe Mancini could have flooded midfield to gain more possession, but it was a day when his side's body language was laboured.