Page 16 of 18

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:05 pm
by DoomMerchant
Buffalo Soldier wrote:
DoomMerchant wrote:
Blue Blood wrote:first half domination.

second half fold.

92 minute fucking joke of a pen.

I'm done with football for the weekend.


joke of a penalty? he climbed all over him and knocked him down as the header came into the box...Micah was the joker.

I will say this much -- thank fuckl the money hasn't changed us.

happy sunday everybody.

cheers


T'was a blatant offside doomy


cheers mate...i didnt see that on my stream but tbh i didn't watch a replay of it as i was running around my kitchen swearing. ill have to watch it again after it records this afternoon. Gutted we let them stay in the match and get the result...fucking horrific play from fullbacks...we need our two first teamers back quickly because we're looking really weak out wide.

Milner, Jinky were invisifuckingble today really...unusual. TYY looked magnificent first half...lesser so the 2nd. General letdown in the 2nd half makes me wonder, but it's just one match. Ade didn't exactly cover himself in glory when he came on, but had his chance gone in i'd be singing a different tune obv. Kompany as strong as ever.

cheers

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:05 pm
by razor400
Buffalo Soldier wrote:
mancitymark wrote:Richards
Adebayor
Silva
Jo
Zab
Tevez
Lescott

Do us a favour and fuck off, you are not good enough.


Clown


Nah, clowns are amusing. That cunt aint.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:05 pm
by Craig B
dazby wrote:We'll be back next week. Put it down to gelling.

You didn't think we were going to win every game did you?

I'd be more disappointed if the stream hadn't of stopped 5 mins before the end.

I'm used to results like this. Water off a ducks back. We'll be ok, Sunderland looked good in that second half. Wellbeck looked very handy for them.


No we won't.. international break to stew this one over!

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:06 pm
by simon12
mr_nool wrote:
Original Dub wrote:Oh dear.

Two golden chances was all we had for all our domination and possession.

Possession football gets you fuck all against teams like Sunderland. If we'd have gone at them like fuck when we were on top it would have been easy.


Unless, of course, we would've scored with those two golden chances, in which case we would have won.

However we didn`t. We lost 1 nil to a shit team. no matter what is in the press we lost 1 nil. Sick to the back teeth of losing to shit teams. It does not matter whos in charge blah blah blah can`t wait for nqdp analasys.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:07 pm
by brite blu sky
that was a disaster. But it is one of those games, Tevez's miss, brilliant save and a dodgy penalty. Should have been wrapped up by half time. Just take it on the chin, sh*t happens. The disappointing thing was the weak second half performance too many players letting off the gas. We need to learn what we can from this and crack on.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:07 pm
by mancitymark
Buffalo Soldier wrote:
mancitymark wrote:Richards
Adebayor
Silva
Jo
Zab
Tevez
Lescott

Do us a favour and fuck off, you are not good enough.


Clown


Yer, I got called that when I said Samaras was shit when everyone else on here were tossing themselves off after his first two games, We will review this thread in 3 months time and see were we are and who is doing what they get paid to do.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:07 pm
by Original Dub
mr_nool wrote:
Original Dub wrote:
mr_nool wrote:
Original Dub wrote:Oh dear.

Two golden chances was all we had for all our domination and possession.

Possession football gets you fuck all against teams like Sunderland. If we'd have gone at them like fuck when we were on top it would have been easy.


Unless, of course, we would've scored with those two golden chances, in which case we would have won.


Unless, of course, my aunt had balls, in which case she would be my uncle.


You're forgetting the possibility that they would've counter attacked us to death. I'm not saying that it would've happened. Just that it could've.

And I don't find it too unlikely that your aunt actually is your uncle.


Your tactics normally dictate how many chances you are likely to get in a game. I think we played the right tactics in the first, but when they came out like they did, our tactics should have been changed much much quicker than they were.

Awh fuck it, it means fuck all anyway now, because our tag of typical city, as it stands, is well and truely alive.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:10 pm
by DoomMerchant
Original Dub wrote:
mr_nool wrote:
Original Dub wrote:
mr_nool wrote:
Original Dub wrote:Oh dear.

Two golden chances was all we had for all our domination and possession.

Possession football gets you fuck all against teams like Sunderland. If we'd have gone at them like fuck when we were on top it would have been easy.


Unless, of course, we would've scored with those two golden chances, in which case we would have won.


Unless, of course, my aunt had balls, in which case she would be my uncle.


You're forgetting the possibility that they would've counter attacked us to death. I'm not saying that it would've happened. Just that it could've.

And I don't find it too unlikely that your aunt actually is your uncle.


Your tactics normally dictate how many chances you are likely to get in a game. I think we played the right tactics in the first, but when they came out like they did, our tactics should have been changed much much quicker than they were.

Awh fuck it, it means fuck all anyway now, because our tag of typical city, as it stands, is well and truely alive.


i've said it more than once, but Mancini's tactics will dictate that when we get our 3-4 chances per match like this one today we need to bury one or two. No different for a Mourinho team tbh. You have to have ice cold killers up front that can finish a chance.

might seem like the obvious but our shots on goal aren't going to flatter us vs a more consistently attacking side's stats. Make sense?

cheeres

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:10 pm
by Douglas Higginbottom
So last year we were awful in the first half at Sunderland , went 1 down then came out with an attacking approach to totally dominate the 2nd half and snatch a draw late on. This year we come with our controlling game and basically dominate the first half without creating that many chances.One perfect chance maybe but we missed it. Then Sunderland come out with a couple of changes of players and a different approach to counter our game and we lose control and give it away at the end with a defensive mistake.

This is going to be an interesting season if we continue with this approach especially in away games.Just as well nobody got carried away when we beat a crap Liverpool outfit!

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:10 pm
by blootoof
Beefymcfc wrote:IMO, we lost it with the tactics. The second half seemed more like the first half at Spurs, with them realising we would sit back and let them come on to us. Mancini screaming from the side-lines is not going to help a team who have no outlet whatsoever, not allowing any form of optional play other than to pass it out of defence - even though we tried.

Lesson learnt, hopefully.


I agree. Can't see him changing though too soon. We should of just went for it today, save this Italian shite for the likes of Liverpool, Arsenal etc

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:11 pm
by shawzy
Were the team doing the tactics that the gaffer set out?
All i seen was Mancini raging on the the touchline for that 2nd half...Never seen him so angry with the squad.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:11 pm
by Buffalo Soldier
mancitymark wrote:
Buffalo Soldier wrote:
mancitymark wrote:Richards
Adebayor
Silva
Jo
Zab
Tevez
Lescott

Do us a favour and fuck off, you are not good enough.


Clown


Yer, I got called that when I said Samaras was shit when everyone else on here were tossing themselves off after his first two games, We will review this thread in 3 months time and see were we are and who is doing what they get paid to do.


You're honestly comparing your assessment of Samaras to calling Tevez shit??!!

The same Carlos Tevez who bagged 29 goals last season? He didn't have a good game today granted but get a grip.

If Tevez stays does that mean you will fuck off in protest? Hopefully.

As for chucking Silva in your little list, the mind boggles. Some people don't deserve what has happened to the club in the last couple of years.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:13 pm
by Chinners
Buffalo Soldier wrote: Some people don't deserve what has happened to the club in the last couple of years.


This

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:15 pm
by Original Dub
Doomy I hear you loud and clear and that's definitely what the aim is, although I think similarities with Mourinho's Chelsea tactics are wide of the mark.

We need to use domination to raise the players game at that given moment and go for the jugular, again and again. Obviously that wouldn't have worked in the second half, but the first?

More than likely.

We can't play the same game against Sunderland as we do against the big teams. No fear against them or we're gonna struggle for fourth IMO.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:16 pm
by ronk
Little bit of a lack of experience there today. We contained them with ease and were all over them, combination of some great goalkeeping and some bad misses kept them in the game. That said, we probably weren't as dangerous to them as we could have been and we never really put them under yellow card pressure (ref didn't want to help either) which would have made it harder for them.

SWP is the kind of guy you want for that situation. He's great at getting kicked off the park.

We lost our shape and let Sunderland into the game. Even then we were mostly solid aside from some half chances. Couldn't believe they were given that penalty, a real home town decision. Proper bump into defender and fall over stuff where he was only interested in going down, no matter what.

The attempts at regrouping were counter-productive, you can easily see that that's where Mancini will be most focused, we had them and we could have still taken them, but not by panicking. That said we have to sometimes risk away draws for the sake of wins.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:16 pm
by Ted Hughes
We stopped passing 2nd half & looked mid table, but the difference between a point & no points was most definitely the substitutions. We hadn't conceded one goalscoring chance before then but looked in trouble all the time afterwards. We looked worse, going forward too. I'm afraid he got it quite horribly wrong. I'm not sure what the master plan was but it failed disasterously. Very poor stuff from Roberto there. Wonder which half was the real City? Hope it's the 1st half.

Tbh Yaya Toure looked to be struggling 2nd half to me, as if he was carrying an injury & should have been the one to go off.

David Silva looks worryingly ineffective at PL level so far, in fact imo he doesn't look as good as Robinho. It's early days but he looked weak & lethargic & barely tried at all when we lost the ball. If Mancini is being fair & honest, he can't play him above others on that showing, it was like Ireland all over again, not tracking back in the last mins even though he's fresh.

There's one particular player who may have won us that game today when it opened out 2nd half. We currently have NOBODY playing as well as him up front. I'm sick of saying his fucking name already.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:18 pm
by simon12
Chinners wrote:
Buffalo Soldier wrote: Some people don't deserve what has happened to the club in the last couple of years.


This

I wonder if this comnment will be ok 03/2011 with nothing to show. Don`t forget we have impatient posters on here.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:19 pm
by Beefymcfc
blootoof wrote:
Beefymcfc wrote:IMO, we lost it with the tactics. The second half seemed more like the first half at Spurs, with them realising we would sit back and let them come on to us. Mancini screaming from the side-lines is not going to help a team who have no outlet whatsoever, not allowing any form of optional play other than to pass it out of defence - even though we tried.

Lesson learnt, hopefully.


I agree. Can't see him changing though too soon. We should of just went for it today, save this Italian shite for the likes of Liverpool, Arsenal etc

Egg-sactly!

May I just say that from what I've seen tactically so far this season, I'm not overly impressed. And even though I'll take a win every day of the week, watching the games themselves is becoming a little tedious.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:24 pm
by Ted Hughes
Beefymcfc wrote:
blootoof wrote:
Beefymcfc wrote:IMO, we lost it with the tactics. The second half seemed more like the first half at Spurs, with them realising we would sit back and let them come on to us. Mancini screaming from the side-lines is not going to help a team who have no outlet whatsoever, not allowing any form of optional play other than to pass it out of defence - even though we tried.

Lesson learnt, hopefully.


I agree. Can't see him changing though too soon. We should of just went for it today, save this Italian shite for the likes of Liverpool, Arsenal etc

Egg-sactly!

May I just say that from what I've seen tactically so far this season, I'm not overly impressed. And even though I'll take a win every day of the week, watching the games themselves is becoming a little tedious.


I loved the football we played 1st half but we lost our passing game 2nd half & as we don't have a centre forward to win 50/50 balls, if we don't pass it, we're fucked. They can play that 'getting on the end of stuff' game much better than us, as can all the wannabe top sides too, bar Arsenal.

Re: The officially official Mackems v City thread with a *

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:31 pm
by david yearsley
A team to be proud of !! I spoke way too fuclin soon! Should have known I suppose