The mancityfans.net football forum

I really think Lesscot has been hard done by getting drooped?
I thought he was one of our best players of the season last season and has been good this season.
Whenever we play in champions league games he never plays?
Atleast give the guy a chance against the big teams Mancini?

For some reason, it seems that Bob just doesn't fancy Lescott. Possibly Bob wants ball players and considers Lescott too clumsy. If so, I can see his point but at the risk of weakening our defence....maybe not just yet

Last night's game was all about speed and getting the ball around fast,
what i am saying is this was no match for Joleen. I like Nasti.
It's much more a question on form and mental strength, bringing back Lescott
wouldn't sort the things we are struggling with out.

kennyboy wrote:Last night's game was all about speed and getting the ball around fast,
.

And Dortmund did it brilliantly. Lescott's panic when on the ball would have suited our play perfectly and he'd have offered more defensively than Nastasic so another strange decision to keep changing the back 4.

I'm sure Lescott is much more professional, but after he Madrid game and then last night, I'd be telling Mancini to shove it when he told me I was playing on Sunday.

john68 wrote:For some reason, it seems that Bob just doesn't fancy Lescott. Possibly Bob wants ball players and considers Lescott too clumsy. If so, I can see his point but at the risk of weakening our defence....maybe not just yet

Lescott is poor on the ball but is Nasti much better if he is better at all.He might not look as uncomfortable but does he actually do anything significant with it? I think the answer is no but in leaving Lescott out we miss out on all his experience and strength.

Douglas Higginbottom wrote:

john68 wrote:For some reason, it seems that Bob just doesn't fancy Lescott. Possibly Bob wants ball players and considers Lescott too clumsy. If so, I can see his point but at the risk of weakening our defence....maybe not just yet

Lescott is poor on the ball but is Nasti much better if he is better at all.He might not look as uncomfortable but does he actually do anything significant with it? I think the answer is no but in leaving Lescott out we miss out on all his experience and strength.

Nastasic is much more assured & better on the ball than Lescott when not under pressure & much worse when under pressure. Same with his defending.

Blue Since 76 wrote:

kennyboy wrote:Last night's game was all about speed and getting the ball around fast,
.

And Dortmund did it brilliantly. Lescott's panic when on the ball would have suited our play perfectly and he'd have offered more defensively than Nastasic so another strange decision to keep changing the back 4.

I'm sure Lescott is much more professional, but after he Madrid game and then last night, I'd be telling Mancini to shove it when he told me I was playing on Sunday.

Have to agree Dino. It's not about what Lescott IS it's about what he brings to the balance of the team. Nasty is still too young and worse of all does not seem to inspire confidence in Kompany and Ya Ya, thus holding back our most powerful forward force.

At this stage of their respective careers Star Trek is streets ahead of Nasty

Hope he starts at the weekend

Ted Hughes wrote:

Douglas Higginbottom wrote:

john68 wrote:For some reason, it seems that Bob just doesn't fancy Lescott. Possibly Bob wants ball players and considers Lescott too clumsy. If so, I can see his point but at the risk of weakening our defence....maybe not just yet

Lescott is poor on the ball but is Nasti much better if he is better at all.He might not look as uncomfortable but does he actually do anything significant with it? I think the answer is no but in leaving Lescott out we miss out on all his experience and strength.

Nastasic is much more assured & better on the ball than Lescott when not under pressure & much worse when under pressure. Same with his defending.

I agree with the on the ball thing Ted but only to a point.He does look more assured and safer on the ball but he still does NOTHING with it and maybe with that confidence he has he might just give it away at times.Whether it's Nasti or Lescott all they really do is give it to the nearest midfield player or go square to a fellow defender.

Don't really agree though re the under pressure defending.I think Lescott's experience and strength counts for a lot more than whatever Nasti is supposed to bring to the party as a pure defender plus the defence as a unit just seemed more organised with Lescott there.

Something very noticeable last night was the speed that Dortmund moved the ball from back to front compared to us. Too often they were through our midfield and pressurising our defence before we had chance to regroup. They caught us off balance, in positional disarray and we struggled to cope at the back.

Our slow contrived, keep possession at all costs approach meant we spent too long going from side to side. Dortmund were given allthe time they needed to regroup and reset. They worked hard and pressed us high, effectively stunting our progress.

It made us look ponderous and far too contrived....and sadly far too predictable.

I don't think it had much to do with Lescott or Nasty...it was tactically poor.

Douglas Higginbottom wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:

Douglas Higginbottom wrote:

john68 wrote:For some reason, it seems that Bob just doesn't fancy Lescott. Possibly Bob wants ball players and considers Lescott too clumsy. If so, I can see his point but at the risk of weakening our defence....maybe not just yet

Lescott is poor on the ball but is Nasti much better if he is better at all.He might not look as uncomfortable but does he actually do anything significant with it? I think the answer is no but in leaving Lescott out we miss out on all his experience and strength.

Nastasic is much more assured & better on the ball than Lescott when not under pressure & much worse when under pressure. Same with his defending.

I agree with the on the ball thing Ted but only to a point.He does look more assured and safer on the ball but he still does NOTHING with it and maybe with that confidence he has he might just give it away at times.Whether it's Nasti or Lescott all they really do is give it to the nearest midfield player or go square to a fellow defender.

Don't really agree though re the under pressure defending.I think Lescott's experience and strength counts for a lot more than whatever Nasti is supposed to bring to the party as a pure defender plus the defence as a unit just seemed more organised with Lescott there.

That's what I meant. Nasty looks as if he's better but isn't actually doing anything. He does nothing with the ball & rarely does any defending. Just the odd simple header, but he looks nice & balanced when he does it.

Lescott puts his balls on the line trying to sort out difficult situations & saves the team time & again but because it requires very hard work & last ditch tackling in order to do that, people think he looks poor. Nasty just leaves those jobs to someone else, so looks nice & calm.

In short; Lescott does most of City's defending & Vinny wishes he was playing every week.

Ted Hughes wrote:

Douglas Higginbottom wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:

Douglas Higginbottom wrote:

john68 wrote:For some reason, it seems that Bob just doesn't fancy Lescott. Possibly Bob wants ball players and considers Lescott too clumsy. If so, I can see his point but at the risk of weakening our defence....maybe not just yet

Lescott is poor on the ball but is Nasti much better if he is better at all.He might not look as uncomfortable but does he actually do anything significant with it? I think the answer is no but in leaving Lescott out we miss out on all his experience and strength.

Nastasic is much more assured & better on the ball than Lescott when not under pressure & much worse when under pressure. Same with his defending.

I agree with the on the ball thing Ted but only to a point.He does look more assured and safer on the ball but he still does NOTHING with it and maybe with that confidence he has he might just give it away at times.Whether it's Nasti or Lescott all they really do is give it to the nearest midfield player or go square to a fellow defender.

Don't really agree though re the under pressure defending.I think Lescott's experience and strength counts for a lot more than whatever Nasti is supposed to bring to the party as a pure defender plus the defence as a unit just seemed more organised with Lescott there.

That's what I meant. Nasty looks as if he's better but isn't actually doing anything. He does nothing with the ball & rarely does any defending. Just the odd simple header, but he looks nice & balanced when he does it.

Lescott puts his balls on the line trying to sort out difficult situations & saves the team time & again but because it requires very hard work & last ditch tackling in order to do that, people think he looks poor. Nasty just leaves those jobs to someone else, so looks nice & calm.

In short; Lescott does most of City's defending & Vinny wishes he was playing every week.

Agreed

Does the skipper not have enough 'clout' to be able to have a quiet chat to the manager and point this out?

Savic was comfortable on the ball when not under pressure and none of you would have wanted Lescott dropping in favour of him. It was another shit decision from Bob.

I was wondering last night abut this. I would like to have a look at the games lescott has played and the games he hasn't and see what the results have been. Not just scores but passing, possession in our third, successful tackles and clearances. Corners, shots, shots on target, blocks.

I can't be bothered finding all that shit but as far as I have seen lescott has been no worse than captain wanktastic so far this season and I don't think he deserves any more hit than kompany and definitely doesn't deserve to be scapegoated for our shit team performances.