Entertainment vs Results

Here is the place to talk about all things city and football!

Entertainment or Results?

I want to be entertained first and foremost
33
61%
It's results business, who cares about step overs and quality of passing when you are lifting trophies?
21
39%
 
Total votes : 54

Entertainment vs Results

Postby Niall Quinns Discopants » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:35 pm

Which one do you see more important? Seeing flair football with lots of goals or do you see it as results business first and foremost. Would you take 1-0 win playing Pearce stylee over 5-5 thriller? Or do you expect to be entertained for your hard earned? Would you rather see us win league by playing "efective" football or finish second but have team playing football for ages Brazil 1982 style.

And I know they are not mutually exclusive but sometimes manager has to make these calls planning for a game. And this is NOT about any individual manager but more how you see watching the game and City.
Sometimes we're good and sometimes we're bad but when we're good, at least we're much better than we used to be and when we are bad we're just as bad as we always used to be, so that's got to be good hasn't it?


Mark Radcliffe
User avatar
Niall Quinns Discopants
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 40255
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:19 pm
Location: Deep in the pimp game
Supporter of: Holistic approach
My favourite player is: Bishop Magic Don Juan

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby Niall Quinns Discopants » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:37 pm

Results for me as it will make my life happier.
Oh, and before some idiot asks, I'm not on a wind up.
Sometimes we're good and sometimes we're bad but when we're good, at least we're much better than we used to be and when we are bad we're just as bad as we always used to be, so that's got to be good hasn't it?


Mark Radcliffe
User avatar
Niall Quinns Discopants
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 40255
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:19 pm
Location: Deep in the pimp game
Supporter of: Holistic approach
My favourite player is: Bishop Magic Don Juan

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby twosips » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:49 pm

The problem comes from believing they're mutually exclusive things. They're not. Entertaining teams can still grind out results too.

But put it this way - i don't think we'd be any higher in the league under Mancini this season and we would have scored a damn sight less so I can at least have more patience in a work in progress that is entertaining.
twosips
Kinky's Mazy Dribbles
 
Posts: 2974
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:58 am
Supporter of: mcfc

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby Beefymcfc » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:52 pm

Both please. I must admit though, I wouldn't mind how we played if we were sat top of the league. If we were there then we must be playing half decent anyway.
In the words of my Old Man, "Life will never be the same without Man City, so get it in while you can".

The Future's Bright, The Future's Blue!!!
User avatar
Beefymcfc
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 46711
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:14 am
Supporter of: The Mighty Blues

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby Original Dub » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:52 pm

twosips wrote:The problem comes from believing they're mutually exclusive things. They're not. Entertaining teams can still grind out results too.

But put it this way - i don't think we'd be any higher in the league under Mancini this season and we would have scored a damn sight less so I can at least have more patience in a work in progress that is entertaining.


Brilliant post
Original Dub
 

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby Bridge'srightfoot » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:54 pm

If we were top of the league but playing Sam Allardyce football and only scoring from long punts and corners then I don't know how happy I'd be.

Entertainment is a priority. We've spent hundreds of millions on world class footballers, they should be putting on a show of some sort.
Bridge'srightfoot
Rosler's Grandad Bombed The Swamp
 
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 9:49 pm
Supporter of: City

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby mr_nool » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:54 pm

I want us to play entertaining, but also to sacrifice entertainment when necessary, e.g. by packing the midfield and playing only one striker. It's not either or - you have to find a good balance.
User avatar
mr_nool
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 26354
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:48 am
Location: Utrecht

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby Original Dub » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:55 pm

I haven't voted because it's kind of one sided I think.

But as i said, if it was only about results I'd just check the classifides.
Original Dub
 

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby Beefymcfc » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:55 pm

Original Dub wrote:
twosips wrote:The problem comes from believing they're mutually exclusive things. They're not. Entertaining teams can still grind out results too.

But put it this way - i don't think we'd be any higher in the league under Mancini this season and we would have scored a damn sight less so I can at least have more patience in a work in progress that is entertaining.


Brilliant post

Why do we seem to keep reverting matters to Mancini?

I'm going to say that we'd be top of the league and scored more goals under Mancini, can anybody state why we would be behind where we are now?
In the words of my Old Man, "Life will never be the same without Man City, so get it in while you can".

The Future's Bright, The Future's Blue!!!
User avatar
Beefymcfc
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 46711
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:14 am
Supporter of: The Mighty Blues

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby ross.mcfc » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:55 pm

Original Dub wrote:I haven't voted because it's kind of one sided I think.

But as i said, if it was only about results I'd just check the classifides.


This.

Silly poll.
ross.mcfc
Joe Hart's 29 Clean Sheets
 
Posts: 5060
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 12:50 am
Location: London

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby I Just Blue Myself » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:58 pm

ross.mcfc wrote:
Original Dub wrote:I haven't voted because it's kind of one sided I think.

But as i said, if it was only about results I'd just check the classifides.


This.

Silly poll.


Typical NQDP.
User avatar
I Just Blue Myself
De Jong's Tackle
 
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 3:59 pm
Supporter of: go౦ԁ sHit✔ʳᶦᵍʰᵗ ᵗʰᵉʳ

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby Bridge'srightfoot » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:59 pm

I Just Blue Myself wrote:
ross.mcfc wrote:
Original Dub wrote:I haven't voted because it's kind of one sided I think.

But as i said, if it was only about results I'd just check the classifides.


This.

Silly poll.


Typical NQDP.

.
Bridge'srightfoot
Rosler's Grandad Bombed The Swamp
 
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 9:49 pm
Supporter of: City

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby BlueinBosnia » Sun Dec 08, 2013 6:15 pm

Entertainment for me. I'd be happier finishing third playing the way we do this season than second playing like we did last.
"Ferguson. Žvaka kurac."
(Ferguson. Chewing-gum cock.)
Old man in a bar in rural Bosnia.
User avatar
BlueinBosnia
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Paul Power's Tash
 
Posts: 10791
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 3:43 pm
Location: Sarajevo, BiH
Supporter of: Team Bridge

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby Ted Hughes » Sun Dec 08, 2013 6:16 pm

Beefymcfc wrote:
Original Dub wrote:
twosips wrote:The problem comes from believing they're mutually exclusive things. They're not. Entertaining teams can still grind out results too.

But put it this way - i don't think we'd be any higher in the league under Mancini this season and we would have scored a damn sight less so I can at least have more patience in a work in progress that is entertaining.


Brilliant post

Why do we seem to keep reverting matters to Mancini?

I'm going to say that we'd be top of the league and scored more goals under Mancini, can anybody state why we would be behind where we are now?


Because most wouldn't play for him, we wouldn't have Negredo & several of our best players would be going through the motions looking for a move.

I have voted for entertainment, but only because we have won some trophies.

If we had won fuck all, I would take it however it came, but now we have, I think it would be no fun at all to be dull.

It's one thing people being jealous because we came into money but imagine a team who comes into money then plays dull football but keeps winning ? All the years of shit, our dreams come true & then we play like Moyes' Everton ? I'd just chuck it in. No interest in that whatsoever.

I'd probably find a lower league team to watch & go on a Bovril/pie eating old school football thing instead.
The pissartist formerly known as Ted

VIVA EL CITY !!!

Some take the bible for what it's worth.. when they say that the rags shall inherit the Earth...
Well I heard that the Sheikh... bought Carlos Tevez this week...& you fuckers aint gettin' nothin..
Ted Hughes
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:28 pm
Supporter of: Bill Turnbull
My favourite player is: Bill Turnbull

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby Niall Quinns Discopants » Sun Dec 08, 2013 6:22 pm

Original Dub wrote:
twosips wrote:The problem comes from believing they're mutually exclusive things. They're not. Entertaining teams can still grind out results too.

But put it this way - i don't think we'd be any higher in the league under Mancini this season and we would have scored a damn sight less so I can at least have more patience in a work in progress that is entertaining.


Brilliant post


Horrible post. I said they aren't mutually exclusive AND said this isn't about individual managers.
Sometimes we're good and sometimes we're bad but when we're good, at least we're much better than we used to be and when we are bad we're just as bad as we always used to be, so that's got to be good hasn't it?


Mark Radcliffe
User avatar
Niall Quinns Discopants
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 40255
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:19 pm
Location: Deep in the pimp game
Supporter of: Holistic approach
My favourite player is: Bishop Magic Don Juan

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby Niall Quinns Discopants » Sun Dec 08, 2013 6:24 pm

Original Dub wrote:I haven't voted because it's kind of one sided I think.

But as i said, if it was only about results I'd just check the classifides.

So if it came to that you'd prefer entertainment. Pretty straightforward.

Also, there's no right or wrong answer here. Just matter of opinion.
Sometimes we're good and sometimes we're bad but when we're good, at least we're much better than we used to be and when we are bad we're just as bad as we always used to be, so that's got to be good hasn't it?


Mark Radcliffe
User avatar
Niall Quinns Discopants
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 40255
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:19 pm
Location: Deep in the pimp game
Supporter of: Holistic approach
My favourite player is: Bishop Magic Don Juan

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby nottsblue » Sun Dec 08, 2013 6:25 pm

Beefymcfc wrote:Both please. I must admit though, I wouldn't mind how we played if we were sat top of the league. If we were there then we must be playing half decent anyway.


In agreement here Beefy. Has there ever been a league title winner who played purely results football, i.e. Stoke or any of Big Sams teams as i assume this is what the thread is about. I've been following and watching football for well over 30 years and i dont recall it.

Blackburn with Shearer were a little bit reliant on him but remember them playing good stuff. Likewise the rags usually played good stuff as id the Arse and the dippers before that. Chelsea under Jose were a bit more attritional but still played tasty stuff most of the time.

The common denominator here is good defence. You don't get to be champions if your defence isn't sound. Ask Newcastle fans. See if they would have preferred to win a few games more by winning ugly and winning Prem or by always playing attacking entertaining stuff. The season with Keegans rant they did play better than rags but were perhaps a little naive
nottsblue
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 32462
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 5:17 pm
Location: Nottingham
Supporter of: manchester city
My favourite player is: niall Quinn & Kun

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby zuricity » Sun Dec 08, 2013 6:26 pm

twosips wrote:The problem comes from believing they're mutually exclusive things. They're not. Entertaining teams can still grind out results too.

But put it this way - i don't think we'd be any higher in the league under Mancini this season and we would have scored a damn sight less so I can at least have more patience in a work in progress that is entertaining.


Well , i most certainly think we would be top of the league right now with Roberto.
Last edited by zuricity on Sun Dec 08, 2013 6:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.
zuricity
Allison's Big Fat Cigar
 
Posts: 18391
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: Zuerich,ch

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby Beefymcfc » Sun Dec 08, 2013 6:27 pm

Ted Hughes wrote:
Beefymcfc wrote:
Original Dub wrote:
twosips wrote:The problem comes from believing they're mutually exclusive things. They're not. Entertaining teams can still grind out results too.

But put it this way - i don't think we'd be any higher in the league under Mancini this season and we would have scored a damn sight less so I can at least have more patience in a work in progress that is entertaining.


Brilliant post

Why do we seem to keep reverting matters to Mancini?

I'm going to say that we'd be top of the league and scored more goals under Mancini, can anybody state why we would be behind where we are now?


Because most wouldn't play for him, we wouldn't have Negredo & several of our best players would be going through the motions looking for a move.

I have voted for entertainment, but only because we have won some trophies.

If we had won fuck all, I would take it however it came, but now we have, I think it would be no fun at all to be dull.

It's one thing people being jealous because we came into money but imagine a team who comes into money then plays dull football but keeps winning ? All the years of shit, our dreams come true & then we play like Moyes' Everton ? I'd just chuck it in. No interest in that whatsoever.

I'd probably find a lower league team to watch & go on a Bovril/pie eating old school football thing instead.

It's all hypothetical though. In the Champions season we'd scored more and let in less than this, also having far more points.

And, if Mancini was still here, it's mean the team would play for him and he'd have brought in a few more players of his choice.

Pellers task is to get us winning with good football. If that happens, I'm more than happy but if he starts scraping wins with shit performances, I'll take them as well.

We won't win fuck all if we carry on our away form, it'll keep us exactly where we are, fighting for the also rans.
In the words of my Old Man, "Life will never be the same without Man City, so get it in while you can".

The Future's Bright, The Future's Blue!!!
User avatar
Beefymcfc
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 46711
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:14 am
Supporter of: The Mighty Blues

Re: Entertainment vs Results

Postby Niall Quinns Discopants » Sun Dec 08, 2013 6:32 pm

nottsblue wrote:
Beefymcfc wrote:Both please. I must admit though, I wouldn't mind how we played if we were sat top of the league. If we were there then we must be playing half decent anyway.


In agreement here Beefy. Has there ever been a league title winner who played purely results football, i.e. Stoke or any of Big Sams teams as i assume this is what the thread is about. I've been following and watching football for well over 30 years and i dont recall it.

Blackburn with Shearer were a little bit reliant on him but remember them playing good stuff. Likewise the rags usually played good stuff as id the Arse and the dippers before that. Chelsea under Jose were a bit more attritional but still played tasty stuff most of the time.

The common denominator here is good defence. You don't get to be champions if your defence isn't sound. Ask Newcastle fans. See if they would have preferred to win a few games more by winning ugly and winning Prem or by always playing attacking entertaining stuff. The season with Keegans rant they did play better than rags but were perhaps a little naive


Sutton was on fire that season as well + David Batty, Colin Hendry, Le Saux and Tim Flowers were all quality.

Lot of people are saying they would never want Mourinho because of the brand of football he'd bring.

George Graham era Arsenal was fucking boring to watch. Hard to believe now. Last two rag teams to win it hasn't been exactly illustrious.
Sometimes we're good and sometimes we're bad but when we're good, at least we're much better than we used to be and when we are bad we're just as bad as we always used to be, so that's got to be good hasn't it?


Mark Radcliffe
User avatar
Niall Quinns Discopants
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 40255
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:19 pm
Location: Deep in the pimp game
Supporter of: Holistic approach
My favourite player is: Bishop Magic Don Juan

Next

Return to The Maine Football forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mansour21, Nigels Tackle, PeterParker and 121 guests