What's new

Ratings vs Man City

MOTM

  • Lloris

    Votes: 7 2.2%
  • Walker

    Votes: 15 4.7%
  • Dier

    Votes: 2 0.6%
  • Toby

    Votes: 6 1.9%
  • Wimmer

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Rose

    Votes: 23 7.3%
  • Wanyama

    Votes: 236 74.4%
  • Dembele

    Votes: 9 2.8%
  • Eriksen

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Dele

    Votes: 9 2.8%
  • Kane

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Son

    Votes: 2 0.6%
  • Winks

    Votes: 1 0.3%
  • Sissoko

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 6 1.9%
  • None Deserved

    Votes: 1 0.3%

  • Total voters
    317

jonathanhotspur

Loose Cannon
Jun 28, 2009
10,292
8,250
Not if we are efficient and clinical with our chances.

People have complained continually about our performance against City how we were made to adjust and forced back ok but I actually loved how we came back it was so clinical.

That's a good sign for me regarding our mentality.
What I mean is that we concede a lot of chances when we are unable to play out from the back. I felt it was a theme in our CL campaign.
 

Disconosebleed

Well-Known Member
Dec 22, 2005
2,553
2,569
As bad as that performance was, it stands as a good totem of how far we've come in the past few years. Barely three years ago, City dominated us to a similar extent and won 6-0, and we could have no complaints about that scoreline. On Saturday we came out with a point away to one of the biggest clubs in Europe and it felt like a missed opportunity. The last two seasons have been the first time in my life where a poor performance against a top club will often still lead to a positive result because when things aren't clicking, we still boast a solidity at the back that can keep us competitive, and an incisiveness in attack that can hurt teams.
 

jonathanhotspur

Loose Cannon
Jun 28, 2009
10,292
8,250
True.... but very few teams will be able to do so in such an offensive manner as City -

We are becoming quite a flexible team and I dont doubt we will continue trying to figure out a way to be able to play when we cant get our fullbacks into the game.
Maybe I'm going too far back with this particular example, but even West Ham bent us over last season by taking our full backs out of the game. I think we need a better ball player in the middle of the park than Dembele to compensate for that.

During Sunday's game, I believe we had Dier and Wanyama as the double pivot at one point; that is a pairing I had hoped I would never see again as I believe it invites pressure.
 

Jack

Member
Jun 25, 2004
231
262
When Liverpool beat us 3-2 with Balotelli scoring the winner they invited our press and then had Henderson ping huge crossfield passes to switch the play. This seems like a tactic which would have been effective against city - but then I'm no manager and certainly no Poch.
 

Ionman34

SC Supporter
Jun 1, 2011
7,182
16,793
When Liverpool beat us 3-2 with Balotelli scoring the winner they invited our press and then had Henderson ping huge crossfield passes to switch the play. This seems like a tactic which would have been effective against city - but then I'm no manager and certainly no Poch.

That pretty much sums up part of what I wrote earlier, I think we did try but the pressure was on and the execution poor. Wimmer and Alderweireld both can pick a pass yet, at times, their hoof upfield looked like part of a Sunday league playbook.

They used the long ball to turn us. Their execution was excellent as they managed to put our cb's under constant pressure, finding channels consistently. The fact that both De Bruyne and Silva were at the top of their game aided that massively. Had we managed to do the same early doors, I doubt that Zabaletta or Sane would have caused us so many problems.

In the end you have to say well done City and Pep for the plan and the execution, let down only by their poor showing in the final third.

Poch will be thanking Pep too I reckon, as he'll have learned more about himself and his team from this game than any other he's played to date.
 

SpartanSpur

Well-Known Member
Jan 27, 2011
12,552
43,063
When Liverpool beat us 3-2 with Balotelli scoring the winner they invited our press and then had Henderson ping huge crossfield passes to switch the play. This seems like a tactic which would have been effective against city - but then I'm no manager and certainly no Poch.

I touched upon this in my ridiculously long post. The reason I believe Poch brought Son on was to give us an out ball, and allow us to be more direct. It's something I'm sure we are working on, but I think the priority was put on evolving our game against bus parkers first, as that will apply to twice as many games.

I think the transfer links to pacey/powerful players is part of this, you could see Sissoko being useful in this role for example.

The problem is that no one has dominated us to this extent all season, we were superb first half at Stamford Bridge and even the Utd game was just a pretty tight affair, and you could almost forgive Poch for thinking that we could compete better based on current form. I think Liverpool away will see us dabble with a different style to try and counter this...
 

double0

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2006
14,423
12,258
Against Liverpool we need to play on the counter imo and get directly at their weakness ie their defence.

But tbh I'd take a draw our record at Anfield Old Trafford Emirates Stamford Bridge is pretty disgraceful.
 

thebenjamin

Well-Known Member
Jul 1, 2008
12,164
38,545
Thing that really worried me was how easily they were getting runners from deep through onside. No one was tracking at all.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
39,837
50,713
It's always our fault isn't it, nothing to do with the opposition.

I think on Saturday it was both.

But I also think that Guardiola's tactics and selections were a huge gamble, and if we'd got things even halfway right they could have been exposed.

I think people forget that a lot of pundits picked City to win the title this season. They may be struggling to adapt to Pep's tactics - but there are still world class players on that roster. Don't confuse their struggles with a lack of quality.

Poch got out-foxed, but he made the adjustments, players kept their belief, and we came out of a difficult away match with a point.


It wasn't that long ago that people were complaining that Poch had no "Plan B" - here, he not only had a plan B, he did not wait too long to implement it, and we had the players to make it work.

Hmm...I agree and said as much in my ratings post, Poch does deserve credit for acting quickly and at half time, the problem is, did he (and does he in general) take the right actions that relate to what's happening ?

I think this season we have definitely seen a much more tactically diverse and responsive Poch, and it's really good to see. And it's really hard to be tactically diverse and especially difficult to change things radically in game. So I balance that with any criticism.

I understand the rationale of changing, but it's pretty pointless if those changes don't actually logically address the problems. The biggest issue for me was playing Alli and Kane as a pair and then leaving them up there when it clearly wasn't working and we were getting outfootballed in midfield. The only argument I can think of is Poch was thinking of pumping long balls up to these two to bypass Guardiola's press, but they played high, pressured our FB's and CB's and stopped that possibility completely, and anyway, that tactic is far more viable when the likes of Alli are running from deep past markers, not when they are pushed up with a CB up their arse permanently.

For me, this error was exasperated by chucking on Son, another erratic player who cost us the first goal (and he cost us the losing goal away at Chelsea - lesson not learnt IMO). The better choice for me would have been Winks, who would have facilitated us to play out and beat the press better, meaning their (overload of) offensive players would now have to start running backwards and chasing the ball inside, creating some space for our FB's which in turn stops Sane and Sterling constantly being able to bomb forward into 1v1's with Lloris.

You will argue that Alli scores from CF position - I will counter that by saying Alli scores those goals anyway, and is better generally arriving from deep anyway, and the fact that he only had one chance and created nothing else all game supports this IMO.

You will also argue Son ends up getting the equaliser, and I will say we might not be losing in 2-0 (and it should have been 3-1 and 10 men) in the first place if Poch gets it better, and we wouldn't be 1-0 down and chasing without Son.

We've already beaten City once. It's kind of irrelevant what pundits were saying at the start of the season, what's relevant is now and now that City team are talented but very beatable.

All in all I think, at best, Poch only got it half right, and I think we owe more to a lot of luck and a couple of moments of quality than we do to Poch's tactical dexterity on this occasion but I can take a positive from Pich at least adjusting quickly (and twice) - I also accept people have, in this thread, put up good arguments against me, so it is a fair debate.


Maybe I'm going too far back with this particular example, but even West Ham bent us over last season by taking our full backs out of the game. I think we need a better ball player in the middle of the park than Dembele to compensate for that.

During Sunday's game, I believe we had Dier and Wanyama as the double pivot at one point; that is a pairing I had hoped I would never see again as I believe it invites pressure.

Indeed, less double pivot, more cattle grid.
 
Last edited:

LexingtonSpurs

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2013
13,456
39,042
I

We've already beaten City once. It's kind of irrelevant what pundits were saying at the start of the season, what's relevant is now and now that City team are talented but very beatable.

I think you and I have very different definitions of "very beatable" City have only lost once at home this season - to League leaders, Chelsea.

I also disagree with bringing Winks on at halftime. The shift in formation was to the familiar 4231 (I think Dele remaining higher up the pitch has more to do with Dele's freedom of motion, than a specific instruction to play 2 up top). Dembele remains a better partner in midfield than Winks. Winks is good at making himself available, and for making good passes - but he does not possess the strength and ball control of Dembele which were needed. So, if Winks was not coming on for Dembele (and Wimmer was always going to be the player coming off to allow Dier to shift to the back 4), then the correct player to come in - based on the bench, was Son. Dembele is also a stronger defender than Winks right now.

Son has the experience playing an AM in the 4231, and is ahead of Sissoko in the pecking order. I don't know how much Winks has played in the front 4 all season - he is the natural Dembele replacement as the CM responsible for moving the ball from the defense to the attack. And, with Eriksen in the side, Winks' skills become redundant in the front 4.

To the extent that you think we should have moved to a 433, or similar - it does not appear that is a formation that we train in. Moving to that formation against a quality squad away from home would have been a disaster, imo.
 

jonathanhotspur

Loose Cannon
Jun 28, 2009
10,292
8,250
I think on Saturday it was both.

But I also think that Guardiola's tactics and selections were a huge gamble, and if we'd got things even halfway right they could have been exposed.



Hmm...I agree and said as much in my ratings post, Poch does deserve credit for acting quickly and at half time, the problem is, did he (and does he in general) take the right actions that relate to what's happening ?

I think this season we have definitely seen a much more tactically diverse and responsive Poch, and it's really good to see. And it's really hard to be tactically diverse and especially difficult to change things radically in game. So I balance that with any criticism.

I understand the rationale of changing, but it's pretty pointless if those changes don't actually logically address the problems. The biggest issue for me was playing Alli and Kane as a pair and then leaving them up there when it clearly wasn't working and we were getting outfootballed in midfield. The only argument I can think of is Poch was thinking of pumping long balls up to these two to bypass Guardiola's press, but they played high, pressured our FB's and CB's and stopped that possibility completely, and anyway, that tactic is far more viable when the likes of Alli are running from deep past markers, not when they are pushed up with a CB up their arse permanently.

For me, this error was exasperated by chucking on Son, another erratic player who cost us the first goal (and he cost us the losing goal away at Chelsea - lesson not learnt IMO). The better choice for me would have been Winks, who would have facilitated us to play out and beat the press better, meaning their (overload of) offensive players would now have to start running backwards and chasing the ball inside, creating some space for our FB's which in turn stops Sane and Sterling constantly being able to bomb forward into 1v1's with Lloris.

You will argue that Alli scores from CF position - I will counter that by saying Alli scores those goals anyway, and is better generally arriving from deep anyway, and the fact that he only had one chance and created nothing else all game supports this IMO.

You will also argue Son ends up getting the equaliser, and I will say we might not be losing in 2-0 (and it should have been 3-1 and 10 men) in the first place if Poch gets it better, and we wouldn't be 1-0 down and chasing without Son.

We've already beaten City once. It's kind of irrelevant what pundits were saying at the start of the season, what's relevant is now and now that City team are talented but very beatable.

All in all I think, at best, Poch only got it half right, and I think we owe more to a lot of luck and a couple of moments of quality than we do to Poch's tactical dexterity on this occasion but I can take a positive from Pich at least adjusting quickly (and twice) - I also accept people have, in this thread, put up good arguments against me, so it is a fair debate.




Indeed, less double pivot, more cattle grid.
I think you are possibly placing too much emphasis on tactics, @Bus-Conductor. I believe there were a number of issues in that first half alone that are not getting enough coverage. I think we lost more second balls than you would usually expect from this side. Our pressing inside our own half in the first 45 was far too passive and sometimes almost non-existent. Poch says there was an issue with our intensity/aggression and I think this was a substantial factor in an uncharacteristic performance. There are two good examples of how we were fast asleep in the first half when defending set-pieces; one was where Otamendi was able to get on the end of a floated free kick at our back post, another was where Zabaleta was left in acres of space on the edge of our box before firing a shot inches past Lloris's post.

One other matter which was of concern to me was the utter balls we made of our defensive line/offside trap in that first half. There was ballwatching, Alderweireld getting the run-around from Aguero (he beat him in the air on one occasion), indecision and even Danny Rose making mistakes in his positioning and keeping Zabaleta onside just before he had a 1v1 with Lloris.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
39,837
50,713
I think you are possibly placing too much emphasis on tactics, @Bus-Conductor. I believe there were a number of issues in that first half alone that are not getting enough coverage. I think we lost more second balls than you would usually expect from this side. Our pressing inside our own half in the first 45 was far too passive and sometimes almost non-existent. Poch says there was an issue with our intensity/aggression and I think this was a substantial factor in an uncharacteristic performance. There are two good examples of how we were fast asleep in the first half when defending set-pieces; one was where Otamendi was able to get on the end of a floated free kick at our back post, another was where Zabaleta was left in acres of space on the edge of our box before firing a shot inches past Lloris's post.

One other matter which was of concern to me was the utter balls we made of our defensive line/offside trap in that first half. There was ballwatching, Alderweireld getting the run-around from Aguero (he beat him in the air on one occasion), indecision and even Danny Rose making mistakes in his positioning and keeping Zabaleta onside just before he had a 1v1 with Lloris.


What I think is JH, is that it was possibly a chicken and egg scenario. Poch got things tactically wrong, this meant that everything else suffered. We couldn't press properly because the tactical application by both managers made it harder for us to do so. Guardiola overloaded the middle/forward areas with ball players and also widened the game to nullify our FB's, Poch set up almost identical to Chelsea but pushing Alli right up top, thus reducing our ability to press and play in/through midfield, where against Chelsea we effectively had 6 in two kind of layers, here we had 4, Alli was tactically taken out of the game completely by Poch, not Guadiola. This gave City a numerical advantage in the areas where he wanted them, and allowed them to move the ball between rows and channels with ease. He didn't just nullify our FB's he effectively trapped them in no mans land for the first half, exposing the CB's and when Poch moved to a 442 this didn't solve it, it just moved the problem back 10 yards.

It was a tactical gamble by Pep, but not the first time he's done something similar, he did it to very good effect against ManU early on, second half against Arsenal. In fact, I'd say this was pretty standard Pep (think about the CL games against Barca for Bayern, the league games v Dortmund) etc etc. And we all know Poch is a front foot man.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
39,837
50,713
I think you and I have very different definitions of "very beatable" City have only lost once at home this season - to League leaders, Chelsea.

I also disagree with bringing Winks on at halftime. The shift in formation was to the familiar 4231 (I think Dele remaining higher up the pitch has more to do with Dele's freedom of motion, than a specific instruction to play 2 up top). Dembele remains a better partner in midfield than Winks. Winks is good at making himself available, and for making good passes - but he does not possess the strength and ball control of Dembele which were needed. So, if Winks was not coming on for Dembele (and Wimmer was always going to be the player coming off to allow Dier to shift to the back 4), then the correct player to come in - based on the bench, was Son. Dembele is also a stronger defender than Winks right now.

Son has the experience playing an AM in the 4231, and is ahead of Sissoko in the pecking order. I don't know how much Winks has played in the front 4 all season - he is the natural Dembele replacement as the CM responsible for moving the ball from the defense to the attack. And, with Eriksen in the side, Winks' skills become redundant in the front 4.

To the extent that you think we should have moved to a 433, or similar - it does not appear that is a formation that we train in. Moving to that formation against a quality squad away from home would have been a disaster, imo.


Sorry mate, but that was never a one up top formation. Look at this:

Screen Shot 2017-01-25 at 14.59.59.png


That map effectively shows what a mess we were and why City had it so easy to play where they wanted to play. Look at the massive gaps behind the FB's

I also disagree with bringing Winks on at halftime. The shift in formation was to the familiar 4231 (I think Dele remaining higher up the pitch has more to do with Dele's freedom of motion, than a specific instruction to play 2 up top). Dembele remains a better partner in midfield than Winks. Winks is good at making himself available, and for making good passes - but he does not possess the strength and ball control of Dembele which were needed. So, if Winks was not coming on for Dembele (and Wimmer was always going to be the player coming off to allow Dier to shift to the back 4), then the correct player to come in - based on the bench, was Son. Dembele is also a stronger defender than Winks right now.


I think Winks's ability to show and move the ball quickly and with some alacrity was far more viable than Dembele dribbling, and Dembele got caught doing this several times.

We needed to address two things, City's ability to play in the zones/lanes I tried to highlight (crudely) in my ratings post, press them better in those areas and then get more control of the ball ourselves, stopping them dictating where the game was played.

Son did none of this. Either putting Winks on, or at least dropping Alli back there first, or both, would have been better moves for me.
 

jonathanhotspur

Loose Cannon
Jun 28, 2009
10,292
8,250
What I think is JH, is that it was possibly a chicken and egg scenario. Poch got things tactically wrong, this meant that everything else suffered. We couldn't press properly because the tactical application by both managers made it harder for us to do so. Guardiola overloaded the middle/forward areas with ball players and also widened the game to nullify our FB's, Poch set up almost identical to Chelsea but pushing Alli right up top, thus reducing our ability to press and play in/through midfield, where against Chelsea we effectively had 6 in two kind of layers, here we had 4, Alli was tactically taken out of the game completely by Poch, not Guadiola. This gave City a numerical advantage in the areas where he wanted them, and allowed them to move the ball between rows and channels with ease. He didn't just nullify our FB's he effectively trapped them in no mans land for the first half, exposing the CB's and when Poch moved to a 442 this didn't solve it, it just moved the problem back 10 yards.

It was a tactical gamble by Pep, but not the first time he's done something similar, he did it to very good effect against ManU early on, second half against Arsenal. In fact, I'd say this was pretty standard Pep (think about the CL games against Barca for Bayern, the league games v Dortmund) etc etc. And we all know Poch is a front foot man.
I can't comment on those other games, @Bus-Conductor, because I do not think I saw any of them. I do remember someone (possibly Brendan Rodgers) saying that football is made up of the technical, the tactical, the physical and the psychological, and I cannot help but think there was something not right with our mental preparation for the game.
 

whitesocks

The past means nothing. This is a message for life
Jan 16, 2014
4,652
5,738
I think you are possibly placing too much emphasis on tactics, @Bus-Conductor. I believe there were a number of issues in that first half alone that are not getting enough coverage. I think we lost more second balls than you would usually expect from this side. Our pressing inside our own half in the first 45 was far too passive and sometimes almost non-existent....
We did not really press Yaya - he seemed to have too much time on the ball.
I dont know if that was Eriksen's job - the closest he got was, as I remember, when Yaya seemed to pick him up by the throat.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
39,837
50,713
We did not really press Yaya - he seemed to have too much time on the ball.
I dont know if that was Eriksen's job - the closest he got was, as I remember, when Yaya seemed to pick him up by the throat.

Eriksen spent from about 25 minutes onwards as a RM. It should have been Alli pressing Yaya, but Alli was busy marking Kane.
 

jonathanhotspur

Loose Cannon
Jun 28, 2009
10,292
8,250
Eriksen spent from about 25 minutes onwards as a RM. It should have been Alli pressing Yaya, but Alli was busy marking Kane.
I have been going through the first hour of the game with a fine tooth comb and I think you are talking out of your arse about Alli. Nobody in a white shirt worked harder than him, he frequently led our pressing, he ran like a dog and his movement was top drawer, in my opinion. It wasn't his fault that our metronome had a day off or that Kane's touch and link-up play were not up to snuff.
 

TorontoYid

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2013
1,640
1,691
End of the day, we didn't play well and were lucky to come away with a point. If we don't fix that then we have no chance of overtaking Arsenal let alone winning the league
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
39,837
50,713
I have been going through the first hour of the game with a fine tooth comb and I think you are talking out of your arse about Alli. Nobody in a white shirt worked harder than him, he frequently led our pressing, he ran like a dog and his movement was top drawer, in my opinion. It wasn't his fault that our metronome had a day off or that Kane's touch and link-up play were not up to snuff.

Eriksen and Kane were poor no doubt. But Eriksen was shifted out and spent most of the game as a RM.

I don't know about Alli's movement being top drawer, I'd have to watch it again, but it certainly was more within Alli's remit to press Yaya than Eriksen - as per what was claimed above?

And I still don't think Alli should have been doing his running there.
 

thinktank

Hmmm...
Sep 28, 2004
45,893
68,893
Eriksen and Kane were poor no doubt. But Eriksen was shifted out and spent most of the game as a RM.

I don't know about Alli's movement being top drawer, I'd have to watch it again, but it certainly was more within Alli's remit to press Yaya than Eriksen - as per what was claimed above?

And I still don't think Alli should have been doing his running there.
BC, sometimes Eriksen is just poor and that's it.
 
Top