again you are on the wind up hahaha yes on other days city will hit 4/5 goals but when you get in there face it wont happen hence sunderland 1 man city 0 and as we all know mon will change the tactics for wigan
I honestly have no idea whay anyone responds to chaps, he is a wum who likes a bite and always gets one.
No idea why Cest reverts to insults, when his 1st argument against you was perfectly valid. Man City could have scored 2 or 3, but so could we. In terms of real goal scoring opportunities we were equal - yes Man C had more shots but most of them were from long range and were pretty speculative and also the time they hit the woodwork was from a corner. Our "full backs" were immense, and Andy JOhnson was frustrated all game. Gardner make 100% of his tackles, and Colback wasn't far off (about 90%). Some of the points you make can be relevant and fair, but this time, no offence intended, you're talking **** and are obvioulsy wumming.
I'm not on the wind up at all. If you consider me stating the fact that Man City came close to scoring numerous times as a 'wum attempt', then you need to man up and just accept it. Sorry about pissing all over your chips after a great result but it is how it is. What I'm saying is that, even though your two CM fullbacks helped towards a win against Man City, it's illogical to keep them there and use the old "stick to winning ways" mentality. Why? Because despite the result (which I've gave you guys all credit for) things just didn't go well for Man City, and it really was one of those days where they weren't going to score. However, they were given the opportunity to take chances which could have resulted in 2 or 3 goals on another day. Even though Wigan aren't as good, they're perfectly capable of exploiting those chances which Man City failed to capitalise on. For that reason, despite the good result, it would be wise to draft the experienced full backs back in and go against the grain on this particular change of starting XI. I was basically agreeing with ajmaddison, but because I did anything OTHER than suck mackem balls, I get grief. Alright. If that's how you feel then you continue to play two CMs in the full back positions over your experienced full backs. If you're disagreeing with my point, then that's obviously what you would prefer, right? Of course, Martin O'Neill is actually a magic wizard, and probably the only guy in the world of football itself who could take two CMs with almost no defending experience, and make them have an "immense" game as full backs against one of the strongest teams in Europe. Get real man.
The problem isn't the fact that you don't 'suck mackem balls' as you so eloquently put it. It's that you're boring. You're always on the board and it's just a bit sad really.
Colback actually has experience as a full back, cos he played there for Ipswich during his loan. He has also stated that he is happy playing there. Also, our regular left back (Ricco) is also a midfielder who has been converted to LB, and Bardo is a RB who plays at LB when needed. So we have no experienced "natural" left backs at our club anyway. However we have 3 players who can do a bloody good job there - and would be happy to see any of them do so. In fact, I would pick the 2 midfielders to play there over Bardo anyway, as they offer an attacking dimension that Bardo does not give us. As for the RB slot: O'Shea: Has been **** there, and has had his best games in the CB position. Bardo: Very good defensively, but lacking the attacking side to his game Elmo: Has played RB for his country, but no experience there in the premier league Gardner: Midfielder who has played 2 games at RB for us, but has been immense. Made all of his tackles against Man City, and adds an attacking threat as well. So the only natural right back we have is Bardo, but he has his own weaknesses in any case. As for Gardner, I have no idea if MON has a magic wand or not, but Gardner has done a very good job at RB and in fact he has been excellent there - I doubt he would want to play there permanently but there is no doubt that he can do. So my questions to you: 1) WHo do you think our experienced full backs are? cos apart from Bardo, we have no players at the club who have been playing in those positions for their entire careers. 2) Why swap Gardner for Bardo, when Gardner is more than capable and Bardo probably wont be 100% match ready cos he has been ill for the last week? 3) Why do you think Gardner (or Colback) would do well against Man City, but do badly against Wigan? That presumption makes no sense.
Your choice of full backs who have gave you a respectable 'goals conceded' average over the course of the season. We're talking months, not just one day. Sorry, but you don't become an 'immense' full back if you're a CM and suddenly get drafted in with about 3 days notice, and I can tell. If you take your red and white tinted spectacles off for a moment, you could maybe see that Man City got a hell of a lot of balls into the box, and Adam Johnson was having a field day. I'd personally say that your CBs handled the majority of the defensive effort. It reminds me of our defence earlier in the season. Our two full backs weren't that good at stopping balls getting in from the flanks, but the awesome CB pairing nullified them all, so goals were minimised. Personally, I'd opt for the experienced full back over a CM who had one good day in one game. But hey, maybe that's just me. Imo, Man City just had a really unlucky day. It reminds me of when we faced Swansea, and we had something like 18 shots (compared to their 3) but they just weren't going in. Man City came close, very close, including the woodwork. The defensive unit worked on the day, which is great, but it really smacked of a situation where, on another day, with a little bit more luck, the team could have 3 or 4. It wasn't a case of comfortably handling the attacks. It was a case of avoiding conceding goals by a hairs width. They were camped inside your box for lengthy periods. I'm not saying I THINK they would do poorly. Not at all. I just think it's a risky tactic, because the notion of "sticking with a winning formula" doesn't always work. You might find that a simple change of tactics, or even a change of opposition players, could expose the lack of defensive experience of the two centre midfielders and cause a whole host of bother.
However to the best of my knowledge mate they dont have Nasri, Dzeko, Aguero, Silva etc. so although they may be able to capitalise on chances created by 'world class players' are they able to create said chances? Ps how dare you use Jack Bauer's name in vain, forshame, truly forshame.
You have to admit, they didn't play very well, did they? I mean all credit to you guys, but Man City put on a poor show. This is the team which beat Man Utd 6-1 at Old Trafford, or whatever it was. They put out a formation with some second-choice players, massively underestimated you and got their arses tanned, which they deserved. It's that sort of arrogance which will backfire spectacularly, and it was nice to watch. Wigan do a surprisingly good job with simple tactics of crosses and getting the ball in the box. Give them half a chance and they'll take it. We underestimated Wigan earlier on in this season, and whilst we beat them, it was one of the toughest matches we've had in a while.
Hmmm dont they have the worst goal difference in the Premier League and the least amount of goals scored?!
Give them half a chance and they'll take it... Interesting. Stat attack: Their forwards... Moses - 54 games - 4 goals Di Santo - 39 games - 5 goals Samon - 16 games - 1 goal Rodallega - 100 games - 22 goals Considering their strikers goal to game rate ranges from 1 in 5 to 1 in 16 I'd suggest they need a **** loads more chances than 'half a chance' for them to take it.
I'm sure Stoke thought that before they got held 2-2 at the Britannia. Sure Liverpool thought it too before they got held 0-0 at Anfield. Or Chelsea before they got held 0-0. Too many people underestimate Wigan and end up finding it a lot more difficult than they thought. Whilst it didn't fall right for Man City on the day, Wigan could quite easily pop up and bag 2. That's just football, and that's why I'd opt for the stable and experienced full backs, instead of choosing the makeshift CM full backs after successfully navigating ONE game where Man City had 25 shots on and off target.
I'm not that worried if they can't even muster half a chance in two games with very average Chelsea and Liverpool sides.
Johnson having a field day? I dont think so. He wasnt able to do much against Colback and Mcclean, so swapped sides at half time. He wasnt able to do much then either. You could count the amount of true goal scoring chances they had on one hand, and 2 of those (including Richards hitting the woodwork) came from corners and not open play. The rest of the time they were reduced to long shots and half chances. With a bit more luch, Bendtner would have scored in the 1st 3 minutes, Sess would have scored his chance and so would have Gardner. If both teams had scored their best chances, the game would have finished 4-4. But since when does "what if" apply? Man City played very well, around the half way line where 70% of the action was. But they could not break through our defence. Yes they beat Man U 6-1, but Man U did not set up defensively like we did in order to hit them on the counter. Man U tried to fight fire with fire and got stuffed cos of it. If we had tried to "out-play" Man City we would have lost 12-1. Our tactics worked and our defence stopped Man City from playing well in the final 3rd - we stopped them, they didnt just have a bad day - which was the most important thing to do. Rose tinted? I dont believe so, cos if another team did the same as us I would give them just as much credit. I said Gardner was more than capable, proved across 2 games (he came on as RB in our previous game as well). His performance against Man City was immense, I did not say he is an immense RB in general - but he is more than capable to play there. And if Bardo is less than 100% fit I see no reason to risk him.
seems like it is all hypothetical anyway, as O'Neil has said Bardo only has an outside chance of being fit enough and the rest are not expected to make a return (Ricco, Westwood, Brown, Turner, Bramble).
Yeah you stopped them, so fair play. However, they also had a very bad day. They had no goals despite: 59% possession 11 shots on target 14 shots off target 10 corners (which players gave away those corners exactly?) 6 goalscoring opportunities missed by Dzeko One might say that they broke through your defence a ****load of times, but just failed to find their own end product. But hey, if you think they had immense performances then go for it. It doesn't bother me. I just think the scoreline heavily, heavily flatters just how much of a defensive performance your two CMs managed in the full back positions, which is my entire point. I would say that your CB pairing had the vast majority to do with it, and on another day, you might use those CMs again, concede 3 or 4 and wonder what the hell just happened.
Have a guess who has 10 posts on this thread, out of 39... Couple of clues... He's not bothered....and he likes to suck Mackems balls. Any idea's?
