The mancityfans.net football forum

Yes, there are plenty of reasons for frustration with our attack but something tells me this can be sorted eventually, and we even saw some signs of it returning today with players like Bernardo coming back to life, Gundo given more creative freedom to be more effective and the chance creation much better than I can recall most of this season because Pep chose to push forward more.

If/when we get Sergio back and/or sign a lethal finisher this summer by next season, or maybe sooner, the dedication to solidifying the defence may pay off because of how it has hurt us so badly even under Pellegrini.

Pair Pep’s attack and a few different faces with the way our defence is playing and we might score a few less, but we will also concede fewer.

We not only have 3-4 top class centre halves who are barely, or not even in their prime years yet, but Walker who has been consistently fantastic, and Cancelo’s settling in as a decent LB option. I know he can be poor at times, but he also has moments of good defending (had one today and is such a threat going forward. We will need another LB as Cancelo also will be there to replace Walker as he ages out, but these are all good things.

I was thinking we are done in CL and PL after the West Brom match, but I have begun to think more that Pep is adapting, realising he needs to make us more sold in defence, even if there are some sacrifices in the short term to performance, because this is what has hurt us time and time again (other than finishing, yes I am aware).

Going with the double pivot so frequently is a way of practising more solidity, so the side is more used to it when needed in a big fixture away, for example.

Today we didn’t go with the double pivot, but we still didn’t concede against a high powered attacking side in good form who was at home. I wonder if this isn’t as much a coincidence as part of being trained in taking more care.

I know some are angry about us trying to walk it in instead of shoot, and I’m not saying that’s not frustrating, but I was wondering aloud if this is also an instruction to prevent counter attacks from long, low percentage shots that leave us vulnerable on the break when we don’t have a Fernandinho to help. You work with what you have.

Maybe some of us pushed the panic button too quickly, me included. There’s A LOT more to do, and there are concerns but the times we won the league it was with a strong defence.

Fans love Mancini for the resolute defence we had with Zaba/Micah, Komps, Lescott and the more attack minded left backs Clichy/Kolarov.

Pep trying to bring that back and the transition from brazen attacking to this might involve some growing pains, but perhaps it may pay off for us over his last 2 seasons.

I feel like we are playing within ourselves as part of a plan to conserve energy for the business end of the season.

I've got a feeling we will take the handbrake off in the new year and go on one of the long winning runs like we did in Peps two title winning seasons, and part of that this time will be built on the solid defence.

Nickyboy wrote:I feel like we are playing within ourselves as part of a plan to conserve energy for the business end of the season.

I've got a feeling we will take the handbrake off in the new year and go on one of the long winning runs like we did in Peps two title winning seasons, and part of that this time will be built on the solid defence.

Pep is obviously playing the long game but changing it up to ensure we stop getting sucker punched with the longballl, quick break that so many teams have done us with. We’d seen after the Spurs game that the tactics somewhat changed, around the time he was signing his contract, and he moved to a less offensive system, relying on the defence to stop the longball and the attack to put their chances away. This may be a reaction to his recent losses in the CL and obvious losses against Leicester and Spurs (our 2 losses this season).

What was interesting for me was how we played in the Derby. I was totally gobsmacked at how we weren’t pushing on like we normally would, only to be caught on the hop by the ball over the top. But, it was the reaction of Neville throughout the game that was of real observation. He complained all game that we weren’t coming out and after the game, with a miserable face, blamed City for a poor Derby, and that made me smile. Although we are well aware that teams park the bus and hit us on the break, I quickly realised that Neville was counting on this for their win, after all, they’d done it before, no less than 3 times. His despair during and after the game was because we’d changed our tactics, tactics that had hindered their plans instead of playing into them. Is a point at the Swamp ever a bad result?

Looking at the beginning of the season, overall it’s been a bit of a ‘meh’ but it’s quite easy to see that we are missing our last legendary talisman, a player who wreaks havoc for the defence by just being on the pitch. Jesus is just not at his level when it comes to banging them in and without Aguero we just don’t open the space it would allow as if he was there. That cuts down the options for the rest of the team to get space and, when we do, they don’t seem to have the confidence to place it either side of the keeper, or the keeper has a worldie.

We are getting there though and today’s game showed that as long as we can put one away, we can protect our own goal. If we can continue in that vain, growing in confidence with the revised system we are playing, then I’m sure we will be successful going forward.

The analysis after the derby was so shallow and I think is why Pep can’t be bothered with the UK media or media in general.

No one thinks like a manager they think like one who has nothing to lose if they make a mistake, as is the life of a pundit or even journalists who make a living not on tempered reasoning but reactionary analysis that evokes reaction from fans.

This isn’t just the Talk Sport world of analysis. We’re talking the “respected” football media who tbf don’t follow City as much, are shocked that we aren’t scoring/performing well, and we know like to see the bigger clubs fail.

I would say they don’t like to just see us fail, as I listen to enough pods and read enough articles to know they want to see more parity and less dominance, which I get. However, what it does is it skews their perspective to have so much desire to see clubs like us fail that means some views are less likely to appear.

So that means it’s good when they see United losing/suffering, or PSG. They love it and want more.

I would say Liverpool, even being successful, get more sympathy and enjoy more of a bromance from “respected” journalists. Why?

Klopp’s background/media approach, their path to success this time in the face of the evil empires: Utd, City, Chelsea and the decline of the past darling Arsenal.

Liverpool, and at times Spurs, even if they dislike Mourhino, are the closest such journalists get to being an underdog they can root for and also being those who have nostalgia, holding HIGH levels of romance for football’s big club past glories. They love Ajax. They want Forrest and Leeds to be back, and Newcastle with the right owner. We don’t fit the bill, because we weren’t in this category then, and United are now seen as a carpetbagging, Yank cash cow, who cares nothing about these values. Emphasizing this plays to covert xenophobic foreigner stereotypes that City experience in a different way, but adds to its generation of “a story” to generate excitement, even if Liverpool also owned by an American who owns multiple sport clubs.

The point is their biases make it difficult to see things in a way that can recognise that Pep is trying something for the long game.

No it’s much more of “a good story” which isn’t always about selling papers as much as just wanting the attention of a pseudo-intelligent hot take, than to ponder alternative and nuanced views. Some journalists are good with words but that doesn’t mean their analysis is as good as the words themselves. Barnay Ronan is a bit of this to me, for example.

It’s like a quality action film director like Christopher Nolan (who I love btw) versus a documentary film maker interested in humanity and social conditions impacting behavior. They have different talents, but just because your good at the visuals and some good story telling with a bit of depth that creates drama and action, doesn’t mean you have the depth and insight as the latter.

Playing Stones and Dias is obviously the reason we have the best defense - all the more reason to slate Baldie for changing it in the last game when there was ZERO need to do so.

Our dross upfront has cost us but so too has PeP.....you do not change a winning side if it can be helped and you certainly do not fuck around with 2 key central defenders side by side that do not leak goals.

carl_feedthegoat wrote:Playing Stones and Dias is obviously the reason we have the best defense - all the more reason to slate Baldie for changing it in the last game when there was ZERO need to do so.

Our dross upfront has cost us but so too has PeP.....you do not change a winning side if it can be helped and you certainly do not fuck around with 2 key central defenders side by side that do not leak goals.

Well done.

PrezIke wrote:The analysis after the derby was so shallow and I think is why Pep can’t be bothered with the UK media or media in general.

No one thinks like a manager they think like one who has nothing to lose if they make a mistake, as is the life of a pundit or even journalists who make a living not on tempered reasoning but reactionary analysis that evokes reaction from fans.

This isn’t just the Talk Sport world of analysis. We’re talking the “respected” football media who tbf don’t follow City as much, are shocked that we aren’t scoring/performing well, and we know like to see the bigger clubs fail.

I would say they don’t like to just see us fail, as I listen to enough pods and read enough articles to know they want to see more parity and less dominance, which I get. However, what it does is it skews their perspective to have so much desire to see clubs like us fail that means some views are less likely to appear.

So that means it’s good when they see United losing/suffering, or PSG. They love it and want more.

I would say Liverpool, even being successful, get more sympathy and enjoy more of a bromance from “respected” journalists. Why?

Klopp’s background/media approach, their path to success this time in the face of the evil empires: Utd, City, Chelsea and the decline of the past darling Arsenal.

Liverpool, and at times Spurs, even if they dislike Mourhino, are the closest such journalists get to being an underdog they can root for and also being those who have nostalgia, holding HIGH levels of romance for football’s big club past glories. They love Ajax. They want Forrest and Leeds to be back, and Newcastle with the right owner. We don’t fit the bill, because we weren’t in this category then, and United are now seen as a carpetbagging, Yank cash cow, who cares nothing about these values. Emphasizing this plays to covert xenophobic foreigner stereotypes that City experience in a different way, but adds to its generation of “a story” to generate excitement, even if Liverpool also owned by an American who owns multiple sport clubs.

The point is their biases make it difficult to see things in a way that can recognise that Pep is trying something for the long game.

No it’s much more of “a good story” which isn’t always about selling papers as much as just wanting the attention of a pseudo-intelligent hot take, than to ponder alternative and nuanced views. Some journalists are good with words but that doesn’t mean their analysis is as good as the words themselves. Barnay Ronan is a bit of this to me, for example.

It’s like a quality action film director like Christopher Nolan (who I love btw) versus a documentary film maker interested in humanity and social conditions impacting behavior. They have different talents, but just because your good at the visuals and some good story telling with a bit of depth that creates drama and action, doesn’t mean you have the depth and insight as the latter.

Very decent review.