How did he do it?

[Ted Hughes]

They didn't stop us; we fucked up in front of goal, badly.

What they did do which fucked us up, is form a barrier to batter the fuck out of centre midfield, stop Yaya & Silva from breaking away, then once Silva & Yaya, plus the fullbacks got forward, they knew that many of them wouldn't get back quickly enough if they attacked at pace. Matic was key here. If they'd had Lampard or Obi Mikel, it would have been much more difficult.

That's the bit they were referring to imo. That's the 'weakness' Jose has shown them on video. Watford saw it too, as do Liverpool etc.

And not only this season; Liverpool for example were doing that to us under Mancini, as were Napoli. Arsenal did it at our place last season & should have scored six, Dortmund did it. That was v a less adventurous City team but the problem was still there.

Mourinho concentrated his whole team on it, picked a team to exploit it, full of strength & runners. We lost our best runner before the game. If we had signed Fernando, maybe he would have hung back & been quick enough to stop them. Transfer window may have got Chelsea 3 points. Matic in at Chelsea, we lose Fernandinho.

I thought Yaya had a great game v Chelsea apart from the goal, but he is an attacker who does a bit of defending. He most certainly ISN'T Colin Bell, but we expect him to be, unfairly. Didi Hamman mentioned it as a weakness & teams have been exploiting that for years. It's not really his fault.

Our first 11 may well have won that game, but this kind of thing will be a constant problem with people such as Yaya & Silva in that area. They can't attack & defend 100%, one area will get neglected. They try, but they can't do it.

We have to score.

I would add, that if we had 4 great defenders, preferably with pace, then that would be a big help, because even when all 4 are back, we still have a problem v almost anybody.

[bayblue]

We shot ourselves in the foot with team selection and (non) substitutions.

Pellegrini vs Mourinho is like idealist vs pragmatist, or Cavalier vs Roundhead.

Pellegrini, in my mind to his immense credit as I admire that philosophy, has always talked about playing one way, in all teams, and at all grounds, home or away.
As such Pellegrini stuck to his belief.

Mourinho's philosophy is to win, and get the better of his opponent. As such, he adapted his tactics significantly as many have pointed out.

The problem we have is that our idealistic and entertaining strategy of 2-2-4-2 works but puts a massive strain on the centre backs and more defensive midfielders.
Pellegrini went into this match knowing that we were without our main more defensive mid and chose to continue with the Cavalier philosophy. In hindsight this was wrong.

The result was we were outplayed. I know a few people have said it would have been different if YaYa or Silva had scored early on but they didn't and in the meantime Chelsea scored, hit the woodwork three times and at times had our defence scrambling like 7 year olds in the local park. In response we took off Negredo, who was not fit, and put on Jovetic, who looked ok. But, that was it - no other subs and no evident reshaping of the formation.

I guess what interests me is why Pellegrini did what he did. I can think of three reasons:
1. He puts his central philosophy above everything else. If this is the case then we will pretty much carry on as we are. Games will be entertaining. We will win far more than we lose, and if our best players stay fit then we have a chance of beating any team in the land, but more than likely we will come unstuck against the very very best teams.
2. He is happy to amend his philosophy when needed but believed that it was worth a gamble given we were 3 points ahead. In which case he gave it a crack but it failed and we just need to hope it won't be too costly by the end of the season.
3. He is happy to amend his philosophy when needed, but didn't believe he had an a credible alternative given the injury list and so stuck with his preferred approach. This is perhaps the most worrying for me as the mark of a great coach is to get the best out of all the resources he has, and to be flexible when the situation demands. The game slipped away from us after twenty minutes and tactically we barely responded.

I personally, on no evidence other than hearing him talk, believe it's really important to him that we play in one way, and so reason one above would apply.
If so then I think we could get caned by Barca or Bayern again if the injury list doesn't help us but we could still win up to three trophies (assuming Fernadinho's back for the FA Cup) and have a hell of a season to look back on!

[Ted Hughes]

He has already clearly answered those questions.

We are working on an attitude of football & that's how we are going to play until we get it right. I wouldn't start games v Bayern or Barca or even Arsenal, by not trying to counteract them, but he has a clear plan for the reasoning behind it & I'm sure it's also Txiki's plan for everything & will probably be Vieira's if/when he takes over.

He has given the reason as for why he is doing it too.

'Big' teams do this. It's true; the best ones do. He is trying to create an atmosphere at City, where we go into games playing 'our' way & expecting to win.

Is there any evidence that this works ?

YES. Real Madrid & Barcelona. They haven't always played the same tactics, but they play always with the same attitude.

Sometimes they lose, like we just did. Sometimes they lose big.

They just buy a couple more players & off they go again. they don't rely on Mourinho packing the midfield or Mancini playing 5 at the back; they fucking go for it, whatever the tactics & whoever the manager.

THIS is what City are trying to build. Of course we will lose sometimes, especially in the early years of putting this together, but in the end, we will be there next to Barca & Real, whilst lesser clubs are relying on a Ferguson or Mourinho to save them.

Wise up everyone ffs.

Chelsea are about their manager & that's it. We are building something.

We are building a philosophy which, if our fans allow it to be built, will transform City to the very top level of clubs. It's got fuck all to do with 4-4-2 or any other formation, it's about belief.

[RodneyRodney]

It was easy for Mourinho.
"My strikers are crap so I'll only pick one of them ; my mids are good so I'll pick 5 of them ; my CB's are strong and playing well so I'll tell them they have responsibility and that the team depends on them"

[Hazy2]

Barca and RM have a duty to entertain, that is why the deluded one failed in Spain to have a relationship with the fans you need wow factor, The wanker that is the deluded one sees himself as the headline act, Chelsea whilst he is there are Jose FC, Barca Ted have been dabbling with a 5ft 2 MF and a coward in Pique for 2/3 years as a centre Half pairing. What we lost on Monday was falling for a counter attack set-up which was allowed to work due to us missing vital players. We also missed a sitter early on when they looked terrified of us. They built on the fact they were not ever having to chase it.

[Ted Hughes]

Barca and RM have a duty to entertain, that is why the deluded one failed in Spain to have a relationship with the fans you need wow factor, The wanker that is the deluded one sees himself as the headline act, Chelsea whilst he is there are Jose FC, Barca Ted have been dabbling with a 5ft 2 MF and a coward in Pique for 2/3 years as a centre Half pairing. What we lost on Monday was falling for a counter attack set-up which was allowed to work due to us missing vital players. We also missed a sitter early on when they looked terrified of us. They built on the fact they were not ever having to chase it.

Under Pep's system, Barca, like Bayern Munich, are able to get away with shit defenders. The accent is on the team closing down rather than just the defensive part. Pep just turned up there with Bayern & did the same to them, but with more athletic players.

If it becomes a problem & they change slightly from the way Pep played, Barca will just sign better defenders & go again.

But whatever happens, they will play v a Chelsea using their system with their attitude, not worry about the oppo. if they lose, they will approach it with exactly the same attitude v the same team the next season but perhaps with a different player here & there. They will not lose those games more times than they win. Equally, they will lose plenty of such games, as will all the top clubs, including us.

[Slim]

It was easy for Mourinho.
"My strikers are crap so I'll only pick one of them ; my mids are good so I'll pick 5 of them ; my CB's are strong and playing well so I'll tell them they have responsibility and that the team depends on them"

Pretty much it, ran over us in midfield and were very good at the back.

Still have shit strikers and I think had we taken a more pragmatic approach to the game instead of the "no-one can live with our game" attitude, the result may have been different.

[Bridge'srightfoot]

Due to certain circumstances I only saw the first half so can't comment on anything that happened in the second.

However , I said it at the time but the Silva miss imo was cruical. In a game of this magnitude where we weren't likely to get that many clear cut chances, you just simply have to score that. Can't afford to miss those in games like this. That as others have said is the one thing that keeps Silva from reaching the very top.
Score that and it's a very different game as once we get a bit of momentum, no body can stop us.

Having said that, they did also have a 4 v 1 which they made a right pigs ear of.
Can't comment on the second half but after briefly reading a report it seems they were deserving of the win.

Although I never think there is really a benefit to losing, at least it will settle some posters who were suggesting we only had 2 or 3 difficult games left. EVERY game is potentially difficult.
I'm sure we can put this defeat behind us and kick on. Although no game is easy, we possibly couldn't have picked a better game this weekend than Norwich. Barring the dead rubber at the end of last season, our recent record against them is fantastic and they always play open football.

[Ted Hughes]

It was easy for Mourinho.
"My strikers are crap so I'll only pick one of them ; my mids are good so I'll pick 5 of them ; my CB's are strong and playing well so I'll tell them they have responsibility and that the team depends on them"

Pretty much it, ran over us in midfield and were very good at the back.

Still have shit strikers and I think had we taken a more pragmatic approach to the game instead of the "no-one can live with our game" attitude, the result may have been different.

Not neccessarily a win though. Probably a draw.

And one of their best chances came from Nasti not jumping at a corner kick. So we pack the midfield, the game is boring as fuck, & we lose 1-0 from a corner.

In a one off game like that, any result is on the cards. Silva scores, we may have won by five, they get a 2nd, they may have won by 3 or 4.

We could dick them or be hammered by them in the cup game, depending on how each player performs on the day.

Dzeko's talented brother would have won us that game, no problem, & this thread wouldn't exist.

[Slim]

Dzeko's talented brother would have won us that game, no problem, & this thread wouldn't exist.

Haven't seen him for a couple of games, is he injured?

[Ted Hughes]

Dzeko's talented brother would have won us that game, no problem, & this thread wouldn't exist.

Haven't seen him for a couple of games, is he injured?

In a coma again. Playing him recordings of the Spurs hat trick to try & wake him up.

[sheblue]

Hey folks they hit the woodwork 3 times.
It was not luck.
Do people really think if we scored in the first 15 mins that they would have just rolled over onto their bellies?
It was imbalance in the team coupled with poor individual performances and tactical ineptness.
This idea that if we scored first the game was over, it is just burying the head in the sand.

[Ted Hughes]

Hey folks they hit the woodwork 3 times.
It was not luck.
Do people really think if we scored in the first 15 mins that they would have just rolled over onto their bellies?
It was imbalance in the team coupled with poor individual performances and tactical ineptness.
This idea that if we scored first the game was over, it is just burying the head in the sand.

Absolutely not.

They would have changed tactics & attacked us & probably scored one or two, whilst we hit them for 4 or 5 on the break.

[Foreverinbluedreams]

Hey folks they hit the woodwork 3 times.
It was not luck.
Do people really think if we scored in the first 15 mins that they would have just rolled over onto their bellies?
It was imbalance in the team coupled with poor individual performances and tactical ineptness.
This idea that if we scored first the game was over, it is just burying the head in the sand.

You're missing the point, we score first then we draw them out and have a better chance to pick them off as the space opens up. No one is suggesting they would roll over on their bellies but it becomes a different game altogether if they're chasing.

[Breks]

Absolutely not.

They would have changed tactics & attacked us & probably scored one or two, whilst we hit them for 4 or 5 on the break.

I like your thinking.

[bayblue]

He has already clearly answered those questions. We are working on an attitude of football & that's how we are going to play until we get it right. I wouldn't start games v Bayern or Barca or even Arsenal, by not trying to counteract them, but he has a clear plan for the reasoning behind it & I'm sure it's also Txiki's plan for everything & will probably be Vieira's if/when he takes over. He has given the reason as for why he is doing it too. 'Big' teams do this. It's true; the best ones do. He is trying to create an atmosphere at City, where we go into games playing 'our' way & expecting to win. Is there any evidence that this works ? YES. Real Madrid & Barcelona. They haven't always played the same tactics, but they play always with the same attitude. Sometimes they lose, like we just did. Sometimes they lose big. They just buy a couple more players & off they go again. they don't rely on Mourinho packing the midfield or Mancini playing 5 at the back; they fucking go for it, whatever the tactics & whoever the manager. THIS is what City are trying to build. Of course we will lose sometimes, especially in the early years of putting this together, but in the end, we will be there next to Barca & Real, whilst lesser clubs are relying on a Ferguson or Mourinho to save them. Wise up everyone ffs. Chelsea are about their manager & that's it. We are building something. We are building a philosophy which, if our fans allow it to be built, will transform City to the very top level of clubs. It's got fuck all to do with 4-4-2 or any other formation, it's about belief.

I agree with quite a lot of this, in particular about creating an environment of creating 'our way' and belief. Of the two Spanish clubs they go about this in a different way. Barcelona since Cruyff do have a 'Barca way' of playing. Madrid on the other hand have chopped and changed managers and styles with their sole objective of getting back to number one in Spain and Europe, not a task they have yet achieved. I also agree that in the medium to long term (as long as our owner remains committed) we will be at the top of the tree, after all 95% of the performance variables between teams has been attributed to money! and that's the one commodity we are not in short supply of.
But, I think in the short term we need to be more flexible tactically in how we approach big games, most especially when we are suffering injuries to key players. That's where formation and tactics does come into it and in our two biggest games of the year we haven't demonstrated we can do this.

[tc6828]

I could understand all this discussion on tactics and formations and there manager knows how to psyche out the opposition etc etc if we had no attempts on goal.

The fact is our attacking tactics were spot on in that we created a similar ammount of goal scoring opportunities as we would expect, but this time our finishing was piss poor and we conveted none. Had we gone two up and won the game, you would all be praising our approach.

[bayblue]

I could understand all this discussion on tactics and formations and there manager knows how to psyche out the opposition etc etc if we had no attempts on goal. The fact is our attacking tactics were spot on in that we created a similar ammount of goal scoring opportunities as we would expect, but this time our finishing was piss poor and we conveted none. Had we gone two up and won the game, you would all be praising our approach.

I know what you're saying and who knows what confidence an early goal would have given us.
But we didn't win. The tide turned against us after about twenty or so minutes and after that we were second best and didn't show that we could adapt. Our formation and tactics weren't good enough, and yet from mid way through the first half our deficiencies were glaringly obvious. What did we change? Only one player and nothing else in our shape. We created some more chances but they were better than us.
Don't get me wrong, I love City and love what we've done this year. I just think that unless we can become more flexible we will continue to batter loads of teams but will fall short against the very best.

[sheblue]

The cup game is going to be very interesting.

[Hutch's Shoulder]

The cup game is going to be very interesting.

Indeed; we have a few revenge missions coming up with Sunderland twice and Chelsea again.