Regardless of how we got the points, or the fact our team was a case of getting 11 fit players on the field (one of those players didn't even have a squad number till MoN took over) a win is a win. I would imagine you would be happy if Man Utd had 90% possession, had 40 shots on target, but you win 1-0 with a highly debatable goal...so please.....get real. Even with our best 11 on the field, it was always going to be a difficult day for us, but given our team...their team, I would have thought even the modt blinkered of mags would say well done...and no other snide comments. I reckon the real reason for these kind of shyte posts from you...we are catching you up.....quickly, your bubble has burst and we are getting a few results. Its only a matter of time now when order has been restored.
You are allowed to think what you want, but you are still wrong...! Seriously though, I honestly dont think Man City had more than 4 real chances all game, and were limited to half chances the rest of the time. Our tactics seemed to be to stop Man City paying through the middle (we packed the middle of the park),and channel their attacks down the wings. Yes, this meant that we conceded corners because our full backs had a lot more to deal with, but MON set up the tactics in the belief that we could cope with the corners and it worked. If Bardo had been at full back with O'Shea I think we would have conceded as many corners, as our tactics would have been the same (and it also possible that Bardo/O'Shea would have a harder time coping with the pace of the Man City wingers, cos they are not as quick as Colback and Gardner - but that is another "what if" that we will never know the answer to). As said, Gardner has played RB for 2 games now, and that's 2 games were we did not concede from open play. No reason to think he wont be just as capable against Wigan. He might have a bad game, but so might any other player in the squad.
Had a few decent discussions with you mate but ur sounding a little bitter and overly trying to downplay an excellent performance by ourselves. If you want us to admit they had chances, could have scored and could on another day have won then there you go, ur right. However nothing is going to take the shine off a magnificent performance by our injury ravaged team, not stats, not statements of how lucky we were or poor they were. At the end of the day we beat Man City, end of.
Of course a win is a win. Not disputing that. I'm just saying that this "win is a win" policy could backfire if you choose to stick to the winning team with two CMs as full backs, as the same team which grabbed a narrow win against City could come unstuck against a lower team. That's all. I've congratulated some mackems, but if you can't accept a little bit of criticism, and you can't accept that Man City had an off day which helped you secure 3 points, then that's your problem, not mine. Grow a pair and deal with it instead of whinging. I don't think you would have conceded as many corners or crosses, and it all comes down to experience in full back positions. A full back dispossessing an attacking player down the flank is only half the story. It then depends on what he does with the ball. Inexperienced full backs may panic and scramble the ball out for a corner, whereas more experienced full backs may play it out to avoid conceding the corners. I think that conceding so many corners is a sign that both full backs had some trouble down their respective flanks. Of course it's a case of 'what ifs', but I watched the game, and I think on another day, your CM full backs could become unstuck in a big way, especially against a team with two designated wingers in a traditional wing-play style. I'd give your CB pairing (and a poor show from Man City) 90% of the credit for keeping a clean sheet against them. This isn't a dig. I'm giving your team praise, but just directing towards different players. I don't know what the big deal is.
Yeah you did, but I just don't think your full backs contributed to that success as much as most of you think. That's all I'm saying. It's just an outsiders perspective.
One outsiders perspective against pretty much everyone inside and most outside who've commented on the matter.
Well thats fair enough and ur welcome to ur opinion mate. Just think it looks abit bad (hence some of the reaction on here) when it appears ur trying to sour our win by repeatedly stating we didnt deserve it and then masking it with a comment on full backs. On that issue personally I think both given the circumstances (out of position, completely new back 4, opposition facing them etc) they were outstanding. As I said tho differences of opinion will occur, especially when Newcastle / Sunderland are involved.
Where did I say you didn't deserve it? You won, so you deserved it. What I watched just reminded me a lot of our situation earlier on in the season. Our full backs weren't that great, so a lot of crosses got through from the flanks, but it was the CB pairing who mopped those up and prevented goals from being conceded. After all, a cross is just a cross if it doesn't become a goal. When you looked at the scorelines, people expected Simpson and R Taylor to be superb full backs, but in reality, it was Krul, Coloccini and S Taylor who did 80% of the actual goal preventing, and stopped the multiple crosses and corners from turning into goals. There's nothing wrong with that if it works, but all through our great defensive form, I'd have always preferred better, more experienced full backs, as it not only improves the defence even more, but it allows the wingers to bomb forward and attack without having to track back so much.
"and a poor show from Man City" How is that not taking anything away from our performance? Why didnt Man City well? Cos we stopped them from playing well. I hate it when top teams say "you only won cos we played badly" cos it gives zero credit to the opposition for stopping them from playing well and smothering their usual style of play.
Do you want me to be honest, or do you want me to mollycoddle you with nice words? I didn't think what I said meant that much to you. Do you disagree that Man City put out some weaker players and generally underperformed compared to usual, or do you agree but rather I didn't say it out loud and heaped praise on you instead? He's crap. Well, he's average. Too average to have as a first choice full back in a team pushing for top 10.
I know that forums are the place for 'discussion'. However, I would never dream of visiting the Mags board for a 'discussion' as I don't have that much interest in them. I wonder why they visit our board so regularly? Purely to WUM? If so, just ignore them.... You know they're not worth it!
Well lets just say ur Man City were poor, they created loads of chances, uz were lucky, ur fullbacks wernt as great as you thought, Wigan may turn uz ovr if uz play that team (ps uz deserved the win) attitude didnt sound the most approachable to say the least Know its only banter mate but it works both ways, u cant be surprised if you get a little jip for going on like that on a Sunderland board after a win like ours, its either a little naive or a thinly vailed wind up.
I can't really win, can I? I mean all credit to you guys, you beat Man City, but if I said: Man City didn't play as well as they usually do Man City created lots of chances Your full backs might not have contributed to the clean sheet as much as you think You had a slight rub of the green because your goal was offside Would I really be THAT untruthful in making those statements? I really don't know whether people outright disagree, or whether they agree but simply don't want me to say it out loud. It's actually probably the latter. Would it balance it out if I said: You guys nullified a lot of Man City attacks Cattermole had a fantastic game You did very well to grab that goal ? I mean that's all true as well, but they didn't really fit in with what my point was, so the only reason I'd say them would be to give you guys some praise, if you want it that much. Not surprised at all. I expect jip, but predicting how much jip (and from how many people) is tricky.
I disagree mate. A squad like Man City put out cant be deemed as weak no matter who starts. Any of their best 16 players would walk into our squad or your's. I also dont believe they underperformed - we just stopped them from playing like they wanted to - i.e. we made them under-perform by sticking to our game plan and tactics. Also their 2nd half team was their "strongest" 11, and they still couldn't score.
In answer to ur question, no u would not be untruthful at all. Its how you position it, if i went to a Toon board after a fabulous win and pointed out flaws or drawbacks id expect to be told where to go by the vast majority. Anyway im sick of seeing my name on this thread so i'll gracefully depart!
Barry can keep the **** away from my squad. He wouldn't get in over Cabaye or Tiote. I'll honestly tell you what it seemed like when I was watching. It seemed like Man City started with some second-string players (to keep their key players fresh for Liverpool) and it seemed like the Man City players thought they could just turn up and win. They massively underestimated you, and therefore left empty handed. I know what I watched, and whilst I understand the notion that you nullified their game (and you did to a degree) I quite clearly saw a lack of spark, impetus and effort from many Man City players. You can disagree with me if you like. We're all entitled to our opinions. But that's what I saw.
1) They didnt play as well as they normally do because we stopped them from doing so. we had a game plan and stuck to it 2) They created lots of half chances, but only a few (5 max) real chances. We created 3 chances, which were arguably the best of the game. 3) That is an opinion, so cant be deemed a "truthful" or otherwise. I disagree with that opinion though. 4) offside by replay, but not "judgable" by the naked eye. it was too close to call. it was a matter of 10cm.
