But according to Mourhino you didnt lose. It was a fake result. Jose may be demanding the PL award you the 1 point he came for.
He's started throwing accusations around now in a piss poor attempt to try and sidestep the question. It's a very straightforward question. How does he explain Maureen's claim that Chelsea were the better team in the 2nd half when they conceded twice as many goals as they did in the first half ?
I'll let jose answer: "“In the second half everything changed and we had control of the game and created chances with lots of space in midfield and they couldn’t cope with that. I don’t analyse the opposite manager’s work but no-one will misunderstand me if I say we played well but he felt the result in danger. He made a controlled change for Nasri for Navas and a defensive change Demichelis for Sterling so at this moment everyone knows the 1-0 is a result they want to keep and are in trouble to keep. Their second goal is out of context but that is our mistake. We were punished for mistakes in the second and third goal.” Pellegrini said (fairly imo) " “In the first half we deserved at least three goals,” said Pellegrini. “It was more equal in the second half. Chelsea played better."
Bluster and Guff. How does his claim that Chelsea were the better team in the 2nd half equate, when they conceded twice as many as they did in the first half ?
Pellegrini's a nice guy. Chelsea played better. They couldn't have played any worse! Not Chelsea were the better team. Wasn't the second goal from a corner? Given City were playing for the 1-0 win they did well to get that far up the pitch. Let's be honest, Jose's interview after the game was rambling nonsense.
You do realise CFC is desperately trawling through websites trying to find alternative quotes. CFC is embarrassed Piskie. The fact is he wont address the quotes we've given about the "fake result" and how "City didnt pose a single problem in the second half" despite scoring 2 goals bcos he knows Jose's gone on a bitter rant in fear for his job.
He's not in fear of his job mate, he'd love to be sacked, he's just signed a new contract! He's alienated the support staff, now he's pissed off his captain. He's engineering his exit.
Just in case he thinks he can squirm away without answering my question (which I have asked around half a dozen times now) CFC, how do you explain Maureen's claim that Chelsea were the better team in the 2nd half, given that they conceded twice as many as they did in the first half ?
That's an easy question to answer, though. I'm not saying that this was the case today, as it didn't appear to be to me, but a team can play better and get a worse result. How many times a week do we see the better side lose or at least fail to win?
Why can't CFC answer this ? Also, Chelsea weren't the better side. Man City were in both halves. Chelsea may have played better in the 2nd half than they did in the first, but that was because they were utter ****e in the 1st half. For Maureen to come out and say his team 'had no problems' when they conceded 3 goals and that it was a 'fake result' is frankly, complete bollocks on a monumental scale.
You seem to have a lot of trouble distinguishing between people giving honest opinions and saying something with a specific purpose in mind. It's a bit odd, as you've been following Arsenal for years and Wenger's post-match interviews are as disingenuous as Mourinho's. Perhaps you haven't seen them?
