Mancini's fault

[the_georgian_genius]

Sometimes.......just sometimes it is the players fault by having off days. Milner and Johnson did not have their best days and neither did Tevez. That's our 3 attacking players who underperformed.

Add to that the miss by Tevez who if he had scored that we would of won that comfortably by a couple of goals. I've read alot of shit on here since yesterday with this fake number 9 bollocks about Tevez on his own upfront, where was this talk on Monday?

So shove all this talk up your arses about tactics and this pathetic notion that Mancini is negative (he wasn't negative against Liverpool with the same set up but we lose to a dodgy last min pen after one of the worst misses in Premier League history and all of a sudden it's back to the 3 defensive mids and the negative tactics bollocks?)

Sunderland rode their luck, we didn't. It was one of those games where it makes football the unpredictable exciting game it is.

Mancini and his tactics are fine, move on, stop whinging and understand football.

[BobKowalski]

Sometimes.......just sometimes it is the players fault by having off days. Milner and Johnson did not have their best days and neither did Tevez. That's our 3 attacking players who underperformed.

Add to that the miss by Tevez who if he had scored that we would of won that comfortably by a couple of goals. I've read alot of shit on here since yesterday with this fake number 9 bollocks about Tevez on his own upfront, where was this talk on Monday?

So shove all this talk up your arses about tactics and this pathetic notion that Mancini is negative (he wasn't negative against Liverpool with the same set up but we lose to a dodgy last min pen after one of the worst misses in Premier League history and all of a sudden it's back to the 3 defensive mids and the negative tactics bollocks?)

Sunderland rode their luck, we didn't. It was one of those games where it makes football the unpredictable exciting game it is.

Mancini and his tactics are fine, move on, stop whinging and understand football.

Calm down dear its only a chat about tactics...and the chance to indulge our geeky side as we discuss the false no. 9 formation and inverted wingers. As for being negative well personally I thought most people on here where being fairly positive after a defeat. In fact by football forum standards people are being outrageously positive.

[Socrates]

After the first half Yaya had I don't think many people would have thought it wise to sub him.I think its understandable why Bobby kept him on.We can all say with the benefit of hindsight it was the wrong move but at the time it didn't appeaer that way.

Not the first time Yaya has had a great first half and then been unconvincing in the 2nd is it?

Is he a 1 half player then ? Worse than Elano in that case as Elano managed at least 70 minutes. As you said Doug, some players like Kolo and Anelka can handle fasting but maybe not in the case of Yaya. That can explain his dramatic dip in form in the 2nd half.

Unlikely. I recall reading that Yaya like Tevez needs game time to get up to speed fitness wise as it were. More they play the fitter they get and the better they get. Its a bit like a supertanker. Slow to get going but once at full speed virtually unstoppable.

The Tevez upfront on his lonesome will continue. The 'false no. 9' with inverted wingers is clearly one of Mancini's gameplans. Tevez played this for Taggart's mob with fake ron and shrek. Quieroz is (apparently) a big fan of the 'false no. 9' but him going and the signing of berbs put paid to it.

When it works it looks awesome. When it doesn't it can look pretty negative. Question is what other gameplans does Mancin have up his sleeve and how much do they rely in getting Kolarov and Boateng back or getting Silva up to speed and Balotelli fit? Ade at the moment seems to be Ibra at Barca. To be used in certain circumstances only.

This is going to be one hell of a fascinating season.

Yes, the inversion of the wingers makes it a flexible 4-3-3 rather than a negative 4-5-1. Even after watching the Liverpool match, and the first half against Sunderland, people don't seem to get just how aggressive this formation can be when games go well. As Yaya, Tevez and Silva get up to speed and Kolarov, Boateng and Balotelli return from injury we will see it working better more of the time and it looking a very positive strategy that is very difficult to negate.

[Ted Hughes]

We can only guess at what Mancini's main gameplan is if indeed there is any main gameplan as such. Balotelli on the left in yesterdays team and formation with Milner just edging out Barry (or even De Jong) in the center would have been ideal. Kolarov or even Bridge would have been preferable to Lescott in terms of a better offensive threat. I'm not going to get on Micah's case even with the penalty incident. Balotelli is also a real wild card giving us a greater 'unpredictability' irrespective of formation or tactics.

At the risk of upsetting people the false no. 9 with Tevez and Balotelli instead of fake ron is shades of taggart's mob when Tevez was at the swamp. I don't see us playing Tevez and Ade in the same team but I do see Silva as being more of a second striker playing off a Tevez or Ade or even Balotelli. I also think anyone pining for a traditional target man striker is going to be disappointed. RSC will go and Ade is not really target man potential. Saying that we will probably sign one tomorrow but if we don't then with Tevez, Balotelli, Jo and Ade there is no 'big target man in the box' type player and no sign that Mancini wants to go down that specific route. If its needed at times then either Ade or Balotelli will have to fill that role.

Mancini will always play with three strong central midfielders all of whom bar Nigel can and will be offensive minded as well as being capable of shielding the back four. Against some teams slotting Barry in ahead of De Jong with Milner and Yaya in front and a combo of Balotelli/Ade/Silva/Tevez or Johnson as a 'front 3' is almost a given. Add 2 offensive FB's like Kolarov and Boateng and you have a powerful and skillful atacking unit that is also strong defensively. Want more security then add Nigel and pick 2 from the front 5. Make that 1 as Tevez will always play.

442 with two strikers up top and wingers on their 'natural' side is dead except maybe in a cup tie against lower league opposition and just for the hell of it.

Mancini uses several systems & one of them is 4-4-2 & he's used it many times already with us. Personally I think 4-4-2 is utter shite unless you have wide players who can cross & strikers who can head but for some reason both Hughes & Mancini ended up using it last season & Mancini has mentioned it as one of the sysyems he'll use this season. I hope not too often. He also used proper No 9's as well as false ones at Inter. That was often Ibrahimovic when Mancini whacked long balls at his head whilst the rest of the team stayed in it's own half quite a lot in his last season. More of a false John Fashanu.

[Tru_Blu]

After the first half Yaya had I don't think many people would have thought it wise to sub him.I think its understandable why Bobby kept him on.We can all say with the benefit of hindsight it was the wrong move but at the time it didn't appeaer that way.

Not the first time Yaya has had a great first half and then been unconvincing in the 2nd is it?

Is he a 1 half player then ? Worse than Elano in that case as Elano managed at least 70 minutes. As you said Doug, some players like Kolo and Anelka can handle fasting but maybe not in the case of Yaya. That can explain his dramatic dip in form in the 2nd half.

Unlikely. I recall reading that Yaya like Tevez needs game time to get up to speed fitness wise as it were. More they play the fitter they get and the better they get. Its a bit like a supertanker. Slow to get going but once at full speed virtually unstoppable.

The Tevez upfront on his lonesome will continue. The 'false no. 9' with inverted wingers is clearly one of Mancini's gameplans. Tevez played this for Taggart's mob with fake ron and shrek. Quieroz is (apparently) a big fan of the 'false no. 9' but him going and the signing of berbs put paid to it.

When it works it looks awesome. When it doesn't it can look pretty negative. Question is what other gameplans does Mancin have up his sleeve and how much do they rely in getting Kolarov and Boateng back or getting Silva up to speed and Balotelli fit? Ade at the moment seems to be Ibra at Barca. To be used in certain circumstances only.

This is going to be one hell of a fascinating season.

HEAR! HEAR! to that mate.

[the_georgian_genius]

Sometimes.......just sometimes it is the players fault by having off days. Milner and Johnson did not have their best days and neither did Tevez. That's our 3 attacking players who underperformed.

Add to that the miss by Tevez who if he had scored that we would of won that comfortably by a couple of goals. I've read alot of shit on here since yesterday with this fake number 9 bollocks about Tevez on his own upfront, where was this talk on Monday?

So shove all this talk up your arses about tactics and this pathetic notion that Mancini is negative (he wasn't negative against Liverpool with the same set up but we lose to a dodgy last min pen after one of the worst misses in Premier League history and all of a sudden it's back to the 3 defensive mids and the negative tactics bollocks?)

Sunderland rode their luck, we didn't. It was one of those games where it makes football the unpredictable exciting game it is.

Mancini and his tactics are fine, move on, stop whinging and understand football.

Calm down dear its only a chat about tactics...and the chance to indulge our geeky side as we discuss the false no. 9 formation and inverted wingers. As for being negative well personally I thought most people on here where being fairly positive after a defeat. In fact by football forum standards people are being outrageously positive.

I'm sorry, i just find it funny but utterly frustrating to here football fans go on about tactics after every defeat. Sometimes the tactics were fine, the set up was fine but the players just did not perform as good as the opposition. It happens.

Would people be talking about Carlos Tevez cannot play upfront on his own had he actually scored that goal and had the confidence to get another and come away with a great win by a couple of goals? But one freak miss and (another) idiotic moment by Micah Richards and all of a sudden the tactics were to blame! I guess if the tactics were different maybe with Adebayor on the pitch as a "real number 9" then Tevez would definatley have scored that as it was him playing on his own as a "fake number 9" that made him miss that goal?

[BobKowalski]

Sometimes.......just sometimes it is the players fault by having off days. Milner and Johnson did not have their best days and neither did Tevez. That's our 3 attacking players who underperformed.

Add to that the miss by Tevez who if he had scored that we would of won that comfortably by a couple of goals. I've read alot of shit on here since yesterday with this fake number 9 bollocks about Tevez on his own upfront, where was this talk on Monday?

So shove all this talk up your arses about tactics and this pathetic notion that Mancini is negative (he wasn't negative against Liverpool with the same set up but we lose to a dodgy last min pen after one of the worst misses in Premier League history and all of a sudden it's back to the 3 defensive mids and the negative tactics bollocks?)

Sunderland rode their luck, we didn't. It was one of those games where it makes football the unpredictable exciting game it is.

Mancini and his tactics are fine, move on, stop whinging and understand football.

Calm down dear its only a chat about tactics...and the chance to indulge our geeky side as we discuss the false no. 9 formation and inverted wingers. As for being negative well personally I thought most people on here where being fairly positive after a defeat. In fact by football forum standards people are being outrageously positive.

I'm sorry, i just find it funny but utterly frustrating to here football fans go on about tactics after every defeat. Sometimes the tactics were fine, the set up was fine but the players just did not perform as good as the opposition. It happens.

Would people be talking about Carlos Tevez cannot play upfront on his own had he actually scored that goal and had the confidence to get another and come away with a great win by a couple of goals? But one freak miss and (another) idiotic moment by Micah Richards and all of a sudden the tactics were to blame! I guess if the tactics were different maybe with Adebayor on the pitch as a "real number 9" then Tevez would definatley have scored that as it was him playing on his own as a "fake number 9" that made him miss that goal?

Fair enough. I don't disagree that the defeat on Sunday was more about 'shit happens' than anything else. I like the whole Tevez up on his own approach and we have all seen how it can work effectively and if shit hadn't happened then it would have worked against Sunderland. The talk from me about a false no. 9 and inverted wingers was not a dig at Mancini. Far from it. I like where we are going and Liverpool showed it can be an aggressive and positive tactic to use. The downside is that when it doesn't work people will often perceive it as negative and trot out the 'short front man and 3 holding midfielders ffs' line.

[Ted Hughes]

Sometimes.......just sometimes it is the players fault by having off days. Milner and Johnson did not have their best days and neither did Tevez. That's our 3 attacking players who underperformed.

Add to that the miss by Tevez who if he had scored that we would of won that comfortably by a couple of goals. I've read alot of shit on here since yesterday with this fake number 9 bollocks about Tevez on his own upfront, where was this talk on Monday?

So shove all this talk up your arses about tactics and this pathetic notion that Mancini is negative (he wasn't negative against Liverpool with the same set up but we lose to a dodgy last min pen after one of the worst misses in Premier League history and all of a sudden it's back to the 3 defensive mids and the negative tactics bollocks?)

Sunderland rode their luck, we didn't. It was one of those games where it makes football the unpredictable exciting game it is.

Mancini and his tactics are fine, move on, stop whinging and understand football.

Calm down dear its only a chat about tactics...and the chance to indulge our geeky side as we discuss the false no. 9 formation and inverted wingers. As for being negative well personally I thought most people on here where being fairly positive after a defeat. In fact by football forum standards people are being outrageously positive.

I'm sorry, i just find it funny but utterly frustrating to here football fans go on about tactics after every defeat. Sometimes the tactics were fine, the set up was fine but the players just did not perform as good as the opposition. It happens.

Would people be talking about Carlos Tevez cannot play upfront on his own had he actually scored that goal and had the confidence to get another and come away with a great win by a couple of goals? But one freak miss and (another) idiotic moment by Micah Richards and all of a sudden the tactics were to blame! I guess if the tactics were different maybe with Adebayor on the pitch as a "real number 9" then Tevez would definatley have scored that as it was him playing on his own as a "fake number 9" that made him miss that goal?

Fair enough. I don't disagree that the defeat on Sunday was more about 'shit happens' than anything else. I like the whole Tevez up on his own approach and we have all seen how it can work effectively and if shit hadn't happened then it would have worked against Sunderland. The talk from me about a false no. 9 and inverted wingers was not a dig at Mancini. Far from it. I like where we are going and Liverpool showed it can be an aggressive and positive tactic to use. The downside is that when it doesn't work people will often perceive it as negative and trot out the 'short front man and 3 holding midfielders ffs' line.

It is quite negative in many respects to play that system v Sunderland but the team is new & half of the players aren't match fit (it goes back to stupidly dumping Bellamy, we needed him for these games & have weakened ourselves). We passed the ball superbly 1st half though & should have killed the game. We then got tired, or Yaya did. Hopefully, by the end of the season, we'll be passing just as well with a more attacking 11 against such teams eg; Balotelli playing on the left & Milner in midfield with 2 attacking fullbacks. If we're not, it will only be because things have gone wrong somewhere.

[david yearsley]

Dumping Bellamy and keeping Jo ....mmmmm..... no brainer eh? Has Mancio´s English reached a sufficient level to embrace English idioms? If so here´s one he might want to rearrange - nose , off , cut , spite , don´t , your , to , face , your.

[Socrates]

Dumping Bellamy and keeping Jo ....mmmmm..... no brainer eh? Has Mancio´s English reached a sufficient level to embrace English idioms? If so here´s one he might want to rearrange - nose , off , cut , spite , don´t , your , to , face , your.

You reckon Bellamy would have made more impact than Jo as an injury time sub then? That's a bit optimistic. Or are you saying he would have been better than Milner?

[dazby]

Balotelli has scored Bellers position so it's a non argument.

[brite blu sky]

There are a few posters who have got a point on this thread. But bottom line why everyone was not searching for rusty blades was that it was one of those games where some one off mistakes and misfortune shaped the game.
However given the 0-0 at 60 mins it is clear to many that Yaya was not in it and it is disappointing that Mancini didnt see that or do anything about it. He could have taken Yaya off and brought Milner into the middle for instance and put swp onto one of the wings.
Imo that was all that was needed at that time.
So in resumen there was nothing wrong with the tactics imo. Fluke we were not ahead and in a different game altogether and bad choices for subs by Bob that didn't pay off. Another day and we would have stuffed them 3-0 like the scouce.

[david yearsley]

Dumping Bellamy and keeping Jo ....mmmmm..... no brainer eh? Has Mancio´s English reached a sufficient level to embrace English idioms? If so here´s one he might want to rearrange - nose , off , cut , spite , don´t , your , to , face , your.

You reckon Bellamy would have made more impact than Jo as an injury time sub then? That's a bit optimistic. Or are you saying he would have been better than Milner?

Simply saying it´s a squad game and you should put your differences aside for the greater good. Even with all of 2 minutes left Bellers or ANYONE for that matter would have had more impact than Jo. Milner wasn´t at his best so Bellers for him with 20/25 left would have been an option - to keep Jo is nothing short of baffling

[Socrates]

There are a few posters who have got a point on this thread. But bottom line why everyone was not searching for rusty blades was that it was one of those games where some one off mistakes and misfortune shaped the game.
However given the 0-0 at 60 mins it is clear to many that Yaya was not in it and it is disappointing that Mancini didnt see that or do anything about it. He could have taken Yaya off and brought Milner into the middle for instance and put swp onto one of the wings.
Imo that was all that was needed at that time.
So in resumen there was nothing wrong with the tactics imo. Fluke we were not ahead and in a different game altogether and bad choices for subs by Bob that didn't pay off. Another day and we would have stuffed them 3-0 like the scouce.

maybe he just wanted to get as much playing time as possible into Yaya to get him up to full fitness?

[brite blu sky]

There are a few posters who have got a point on this thread. But bottom line why everyone was not searching for rusty blades was that it was one of those games where some one off mistakes and misfortune shaped the game.
However given the 0-0 at 60 mins it is clear to many that Yaya was not in it and it is disappointing that Mancini didnt see that or do anything about it. He could have taken Yaya off and brought Milner into the middle for instance and put swp onto one of the wings.
Imo that was all that was needed at that time.
So in resumen there was nothing wrong with the tactics imo. Fluke we were not ahead and in a different game altogether and bad choices for subs by Bob that didn't pay off. Another day and we would have stuffed them 3-0 like the scouce.

maybe he just wanted to get as much playing time as possible into Yaya to get him up to full fitness?

maybe so, but i see Mancini as more analytical than that and would pull anyone if he felt they were not at the races.