I know some will go off on one, but here is my view on how/what/when yesterday - why pick on park? bar the set piece goal the plan, with park and giggs and scholes was working. City were limited to shots from distance. Some of the chances (nasri) that were in our box were after the changes - Those saying why no valencia, if you look at when he came on and what he did it was the correct decision. he has had a good season but is better against mid-lower teams. Against the bigger teams (barca, city etc) not sure - Smalling was at 'fault' for the goal, however this had more to do with Evans being injured than smalling. Basically anyone who plays the game knows that kind of timing comes with regular games - I have always said we should have tried in Europa etc (to much criticism as some see it as a micky mouse comp) simply because of last night. Basically most of the players get match time and are better prepared for matches if needed (see park, smalling) I have said this many times but there is plenty of evidence (carrick evans but also anderson nani etc) that regular time in the team helps the players. People were slating evans and carrick but are singing their praises (same with ando in the past) but fail to realise that the common denominator is GAMETIME Finally the one that will get every one having a go.............Wayne Rooney Last night the man was a liability in going forwards. He is either knackered/injured or has lost it. He spent so much time berating the ref that he forgot his role IMO. No pace, no trickery NADA. Needs to buck up his ideas and proved for me why he isnt captain material Thoughts? feel free to disagree but refrain from abuse, these are just my views oh and well done City
If Man U had not played for the draw they may have had a chance. Anti-football appears to be catching.
I think it simply boils down to a lack of desire. Man city showed desire and you lacked any kind of desire, that was as clear as daylight for all to see.
Agree on many points - very easy to criticise your managers tactics but he picked a team that he thought could hold for a draw and possibly steal a win on the counter attack. Totally agree with you on Rooney - as bad as I have seen him play for a while (maybe he was frustrated about lack on attacking intent shown by united...) and agree with the comment that City seemed to want it more. Understandable given that they havent won the thing in how ever many years, but I thought the fergie factor would be enough for united. They were second best to too many loose balls and too many 50/50's. You need a clearout and you need some talent in. fast. otherwise i think its between chelsea and city next year (asuming chelsea's rennaisance continues)
I didn't get past 'why blame Park'. I think you'll find no one is blaming Park, it's his selection that is to blame. Therefore, I blame Fergie for picking him. However, far from this plan working what it did was render the side a man down for nearly an hour as he was unfit and a complete waste of time and space. Ji sung Park is not good enough to play for Manchester United, whether he is fit or not. He's ****. The sooner you realise it the better.
apart from carrick, rio, nani and jones who played well? you dont take a player who hasnt played for months and expect a messi like performance. As I said bar the corner and subsequent goal what did city do? I forgot tevez was playing until he was subbed
Yes, but you don't pick a player who hasn't played for months for a game like this. It's not Park's fault he was picked so i don't blame him for his non performance, it is Ferguson's fault for that. Valencia didn't have time to make much difference, it was too late and desperate by then and no one claims he's a miracle worker. Another thing i find strange is how Rooney can be overly criticised when he was left isolated up front on his own with passenger of a player in midfield behind him? The whole dynamic of the side was affected by the team selection, his lack of impact a result of this and our lack of possession . He was still one of our better players.
