A point at Stoke away - analysis

[john@staustell]

I dont believe I'm a happy clapper in any way. I wasn't for Hughes and I'm not for Mancini, I just support City like all on here.

But now we have these pretensions of grandeur, some horrible disease seems to have spread through many fans, with the latest manifestation being that a point at Stoke is a disaster. We are 4th and some fool (on the other site yesterday) said he felt better when we were in Div 2. Moron.

Personally I have never seen a team play well at Stoke this season or last. Scum and Chelski won (alone with a very, very lucky Brum), but the games were horrible and they had to fight tooth and nail to get the ball down and scrape through.

In this match the defence held up very well, Richards and Lescott particularly. We ground it out, weathered the storm, started to take control and then our (much-maligned) centre-forward, clear through, got their man sent off. We took control and were all set when a defensive howler crowned by one of the world's best keepers suddenly gave them a goal. However whereas we would formerly have then lost, we battled through to take a point with the much-maligned Barry (who always plays better at LB!).

When we had the thread analysisng the next 6 matches (and beyond) I didn't hold out too much hope for Stoke away (nor Chelski away), but thought that we should get good enough results in all the other games - including the missing/awol Everton match - to maintain 4th place at a canter. Hull away and Everton away were two more that no-one will relish.

We will see about that. But FFS Stoke away is a bonus point in the grand scale of things. The (much-maligned) tactics HAD actually conquered Stoke before an individual cock-up.

So stop moaning and lets do Liverpool at home! After Chelski there are some very winnable away games.

[CityFanFromRome]

Top post, cheers for that. Although I haven't seen the match so I can only form an opinion from what I've read here, but Stoke away is never an easy game.

[viking the Odd]

I think most of us would of taken a draw before the game, it was a good result for us, but we won't keep the 4th place, and I don't think we should expect to.

[avoidconfusion]

Normally I would agree with you and I would have been happy with a point. But the fact is they went down to 10m and we should have snatched the opportunity to get all 3 points then rather than just about scrape a draw in the last 3 minutes of the game.

A lot of people keep going on about our "games in hand" ... well that was one of them and we dropped 2 points , that's the way I see it.

If we want to be with the big boys like Chelsea and (hate to say it) United then we need to start beating these kind of shit teams home AND away.... ESPECIALLY when they go down to 10m.

[ant london]

The point itself is a very welcome one. We didn't "throw 2 away", we were extraodinarily fortunate to get that point, a point gained (or should I say stolen/gifted as a result of their perfectly valid goal being chalked off) and I am very glad of it.

There were some positives last night, I thought we looked defensively pretty good. Lescott and Micah were both immense, really even more impressive considering the beasts they were up against. If you add Bridge to that (on the form of his last performance) and bring in Vinnie for Kolo then that is looking at last like a proper defence.

I thought Vieira (to quote Sven) was first half "not so good" but second half "quite good"

Roque Santa Cruz I thought had a very good game, he looks much more mobile than I expected to him and he has a lovely touch and movement. Equally, Adebayor I was pleased with. Someone earlier summed him up for me. He is languid. He doesn't look like he's busting a gut in the same obvious way that Bellamy does but he is not lazy (well he can be but he hasn't been remotely so since coming back from Africa)....both the centre forwards were battling all night, and with fuck all close support from the midfield (or should I say the second defence).

And that was the problem last night (and, actually, where most of my issues with our current play lie). Just what has happened to some of our most needed/influential players??


SWP....I don't know how you can go from amazing to average against the same opponents in 3 days. Wasn't just that he was trying to beat his man and failing, he was just poor.

Zabaleta was horrible, he is just ridiculously inconsistent but it is his hot-headed stupidity that is getting me to the end of my tether with him and to be honest, if we are after a new right back I am pretty sure he will be on his way. And, at the moment, I'm not bothered.

Johnson is finding his feet both in the team and the league and last night was a tough game for both. He didn't have the same impact as on his full debut but hardly surprising.

Petrov was weak and cowardly and poor in general. Like Zabaleta, I can see him being ushered out come summer.

De Jong was ok but not one of his better games.

I simply cannot understand why Mancini brought on Zabba instead of Stevie. We needed a goal and he could have done lots of things to replace Micah (even if most of us didn't think he needed to go off) and bring on a positive substitution. It was a poor poor decision.

It was a good point to have saved, but it was a very flawed showing.

[john@staustell]

Avoid confusion - I think you're sort of agreeing in a roundabout sort of way, because City played the game right, and played well enough to win at Stoke, no easy feat, before cocking it up. Therefore in that way we are looking better. The 'likes of Chelsea' particularly are struggling at these places - Hull and Wigan to name 2.

As for SWP I think it was him Bobby was referring to for not shooting. You run through, you get in the right position in the box, clear on your right foot. Then instead of wellying it in the net you pull it back into space for nobody. Arrrhhh!

SWP is an enigma, either brilliant or dire (giving the ball away) and I think he frustrates the hell out of Bobby.

But I even see people on here saying how we should really be 'going for it' every match, which is why Hughes was sacked and the problem that Bobby was brought in to solve. Leaving ourselves open at the back.

It's a complete change of style. The idea is not to let the other team score, then to hit them hard when you can. It will take time to train the existing players, or to get in the right players in the summer. It aint pretty but it's Italian. It worked for him big-time in Italy, so we need to get a grip.

[The Foggy Blue]

Just because Stoke were down to 10 men doesn't autmatically mean that City should have walked the win. That's just bullshit.

Look at this from the Guardian's Jonathan WIlson (a brilliant tactical nerd):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... ter-10-men

It appears to be a mental thing to me and it's more common than you would think.

Like Mr CityfanfromRome above, I didn't see the game last night either so my opinions are based on what I've read here. BUT, without a doubt, away to Stoke is one of the most difficult fixtures that a team has in the league season. They are tough, brutal, ugly and have that throw/cross thing. Added to that - Tony Pulis always has the extra motivation of getting one over City (he's never really gotten over the whole playoff in Wembley when he managed Gillingham).

Also, as stated, their goal appears to have been a balls up from us. These things can happen in ugly games...

The one thing I can criticise though is Mancini's poor choice of midfield (again!). Three defensive midfielders just encourages opponents to move up the pitch (their own defence has plenty of time to play it out etc) but more importantly, his selction policy is keeping Ireland (our most creative midfeilder) out of the team.

But anyway, moving on, we're ack at home next Sunday - we have a chance to play at the top table with the big boysand the opportunity rests in our own hands.

COME ON CITY - TAKE IT - IT'S OURS

[CityFanFromRome]

The one thing I can criticise though is Mancini's poor choice of midfield (again!). Three defensive midfielders just encourages opponents to move up the pitch (their own defence has plenty of time to play it out etc) but more importantly, his selction policy is keeping Ireland (our most creative midfeilder) out of the team.

While I agree on this at home against Portsmouth and Bolton, I think exactly because Stoke away is one of the worst games in the league, the midfield selection wasn't too awful. After all, Mancini was brought in principally because we conceded too many goals, and until our back line will have found some consistency, the better way to avoid that is to protect them with the midfield.

As for Ireland, if he were on last season's form I would agree with you, but even when he played he hardly set the world on fire. Sure, there is always the possibility that he might find that killer pass or something, but in his current form, he's not the one I'd rely upon to change a game, at the moment.

[feedthegreek]

last night was a great point imo.
not pretty but an hard fought match we got something out of.
3 times now we have played stoke and not been beaten, pretty good record for me.
no team finds it easy there arsenal spring to mind beaten last season in the league,
and 3-1 this season in the fa cup, that says it all they have been a top four team a long time.
it will be a different game on sunday
one i think we will win, we have a perfect home record and liverpool have not won any of their
last 6 away games.

[The Foggy Blue]

The one thing I can criticise though is Mancini's poor choice of midfield (again!). Three defensive midfielders just encourages opponents to move up the pitch (their own defence has plenty of time to play it out etc) but more importantly, his selction policy is keeping Ireland (our most creative midfeilder) out of the team.

While I agree on this at home against Portsmouth and Bolton, I think exactly because Stoke away is one of the worst games in the league, the midfield selection wasn't too awful. After all, Mancini was brought in principally because we conceded too many goals, and until our back line will have found some consistency, the better way to avoid that is to protect them with the midfield.

As for Ireland, if he were on last season's form I would agree with you, but even when he played he hardly set the world on fire. Sure, there is always the possibility that he might find that killer pass or something, but in his current form, he's not the one I'd rely upon to change a game, at the moment.

So the Ireland debate continues... I fall into the "give him more game time in his proper position" group, so I still think he should be playing when he's fit. However, my problem with the 3 x DM situation is that it basically just hands all the possession to our opponents. There is no pressure being put on their defenders. Any team playing against us can play the ball out of defence with no great deal of pressure and can take time to launch their attacks.

When all we have is 3 extra defenders in midfield and two isolated strikers upfront, when we do get a chance to break, it falls apart immediately...

[Im_Spartacus]

last night was a great point imo.
not pretty but an hard fought match we got something out of.
3 times now we have played stoke and not been beaten, pretty good record for me.

Well, I can agree with the concept that in context of the league, we won at home and drew away. Were we to carry that on throughout the season against every team, life would be tikkity boo. However to counteract that, we drew at home and lost away to hull.

I cannot accept an attitude that it is good that we have played the side that finished 10th 3 times, and your point of pride is that we havent been beaten, that attitiude is surely a lame attempt to polish a turd.

I frankly dont give a shit what teams "struggle" there, the fact is that they finished below us in the league for a reason, and we are above them this season for a reason, we are a better team. We didnt even look like beating them at home last week, and on a record of 4 away games with no win, seem likely to tamely surrender our way out of the FA cup next week unless something changes.

What will your excuse be then?

[john68]

In previous seasons last night's result would have been considered a point gained.

...But times have changed....This season we are pushing to finish in the top 4 and compete with the big boys. To do this, games like Stoke (away) are games we need to win. It is picking up 3pts in games like these that define us and give us the chance to reach for the top spot.
In previous seasons we would have been happy to escape last night with that point....but now we have a squad that man for man is capable of so much more...we should expect to win.

[Ted Hughes]

We battled hard. The 10 man thing is a bit of a red herring. Stoke are a Rugby team but rags always manage to get the ball down & play so we need to learn how to do that against such teams, however we're not playing football v anyone at the moment so why would we v Stoke away? For a team which is struggling, which we are atm, it's a decent result.

The kind of battling most of the team showed is EXACTLY what we need to win games away from home. The football, or lack of it, is nowhere near good enough however & to write it off simply because we're practicing defending cannot continue to be an acceptable excuse. If we carry on like this we'll have just as big a problem sorting out the attack. Enough is enough.

It's time to be positive now. We've done enough tactics, it's time to move up a gear & add football back to the equation. If we don't, our season may be over a week from now, not because we can't get 4th in theory but because nerves may kick in & the crowd will get hostile & we'll underperform because of it, thus making it worse.