Closed Man City 2-0 Chelsea

[communicate 2,703]

I am surprised we are just talking about defence, remember they also created a good number of chances when we beat them.

The difference this game is that we were so bad Offensively

[The only place to be 11,313]

The match was lost as soon as we lined up without John Terry and with Mikel.

Mikel's effort (or lack thereof) in the build-up to their second goal summed him up. Ball passes 2 feet in front of him and he doesn't move, he then dawdles back and actually stops running as Nasri continues his run into the box. He's a passenger, always has been and you need 11 men against City.

[laura90 556]

The match was lost as soon as we lined up without John Terry and with Mikel.

Mikel's effort (or lack thereof) in the build-up to their second goal summed him up. Ball passes 2 feet in front of him and he doesn't move, he then dawdles back and actually stops running as Nasri continues his run into the box. He's a passenger, always has been and you need 11 men against City.

Hypocrisy at it's best.

We lost as soon as Terry wasn't on the team sheet.

I bet you were among those who laughed at Pellegrini when he moaned about injuries and blamed them for result.

If we missed Terry that much, what can one say about City who missed Nasri, Aguero, Fernardinho, Lescot, Garcia and Milner due to injury or recovering from them if I'm not mistaken?

He had to play Demichelis as DM which didn't work out any better than Mikel for us.

Many City fans on the stream I watched said game was lost without Fernardinho. Were they right? We just got lucky?

And spare me from 'there were all fit when we beat them earlier' - this was different game and we both know who had the major role in our victory.

Onto the game, we lost it when Pellegrini figured out our game plan and decided he won't fall into the same trap twice, and had fit players to implement his plan.

Little to do with Terry's injury.

Lot to do with our inability to react to the changed conditions of the game.

[The only place to be 11,313]

Hypocrisy at it's best.

We lost as soon as Terry wasn't on the team sheet.

I bet you were among those who laughed at Pellegrini when he moaned about injuries and blamed them for result.

Actually I used that as evidence to support the notion that City's squad depth isn't that great. Weeks ago I said that they were vulnerable if they suffered an injury to Toure or Fernandinho.

If we missed Terry that much, what can one say about City who missed Nasri, Aguero, Fernardinho, Lescot, Garcia and Milner due to injury or recovering from them if I'm not mistaken?

Aguero and Fernandinho are key players for them, part of their tremendous spine (Kompany, Fernandinho, Toure, Silva, Aguero....used to include Hart in that too) much like JT is for us.

He had to play Demichelis as DM which didn't work out any better than Mikel for us.

I agree.

Onto the game, we lost it when Pellegrini figured out our game plan and decided he won't fall into the same trap twice, and had fit players to implement his plan.

Little to do with Terry's injury.

Lot to do with our inability to react to the changed conditions of the game.

Here's where I disagree. Terry is probably our most important player and has been tremendous all season. We missed him against West Brom and we missed him against City. There's a reason why Luiz simply hasn't been chosen over the last few months with any regularity.

It was a subdued performance all round, but we missed the solidity at the back and the leadership on the pitch that JT brings.

[Muzchap 8,966]

Actually I used that as evidence to support the notion that City's squad depth isn't that great. Weeks ago I said that they were vulnerable if they suffered an injury to Toure or Fernandinho.

Aguero and Fernandinho are key players for them, part of their tremendous spine (Kompany, Fernandinho, Toure, Silva, Aguero....used to include Hart in that too) much like JT is for us.

I agree.

Here's where I disagree. Terry is probably our most important player and has been tremendous all season. We missed him against West Brom and we missed him against City. There's a reason why Luiz simply hasn't been chosen over the last few months with any regularity.

It was a subdued performance all round, but we missed the solidity at the back and the leadership on the pitch that JT brings.

The last line sums it up perfectly !!!

JT is not just a great defender - he is a LEADER - that's what we need... When we don't have it - we struggle!!!

[The_Flash 1,144]

I think frank should have been on in that game he is a big calming influence

[Jase 43,479]

Said this the other day, not doubting Terry's influence and leadership in this team for one moment (it's probably a bigger concern that no one seems to be stepping up in his place to take leadership when he's not playing) but do find it funny that when Terry isn't playing and we win a game, nobody mention a word on missing him. The minute we don't win a game without Terry, suddenly the reason of "we missed his leadership, influence etc" comes out from all direction.

[The Skipper 20,609]

Said this the other day, not doubting Terry's influence and leadership in this team for one moment (it's probably a bigger concern that no one seems to be stepping up in his place to take leadership when he's not playing) but do find it funny that when Terry isn't playing and we win a game, nobody mention a word on missing him. The minute we don't win a game without Terry, suddenly the reason of "we missed his leadership, influence etc" comes out from all direction.

Ironically, quite a few wanted him gone last season aswell when he wasn't playing under Rafa.

It's true to an extent that we did miss JTs leadership a little and that yes, we conceded two but at the same time we were so woeful going forward. We didn't create any clear cut chance, not a single one despite playing a pretty strong front four for the game.

The performance as a whole wasn't good enough. Doubt JT would've stopped the loss.

[MHL 47 378]

The match was lost as soon as we lined up without John Terry and with Mikel.

Mikel's effort (or lack thereof) in the build-up to their second goal summed him up. Ball passes 2 feet in front of him and he doesn't move, he then dawdles back and actually stops running as Nasri continues his run into the box. He's a passenger, always has been and you need 11 men against City.

Half-way there with the first part, namely Mikel. He's not quick enough across the ground to cover a fast moving midfield such as Man City's, and it badly showed. Culpable for their second, but that's what you get with him, he has an innate 'ability' of losing/not tracking runners around the box and stands statue like whilst the ball and man passes him by.

There may have also been another error tactically and that was Luiz at centre-half. He looked unsure and uncomfortable all game long. Perhaps and with the benefit of hindsight, without Terry the better move may have been to play Cahill and Ivanovic as the centre-halves, Cole as a natural left-back, Dave at right-back and pushed Luiz into midfield as we did in our league win there.

Ramires had an absolute stinker and isn't generally playing well at the moment. He was culpable for their first, watch how he 'jumps' at Clichy, Clichy just feints past him and three passes later the balls in the net. Naive defending at best, lazy at worst.

It should not be forgotten that City had the benefit of a full weeks rest owing to the postponement of their mid-week fixture, whereas we had a tough game at West Brom, in my view this was a significant factor. They looked far fresher and lively.

Good game by Dave, MOM for me.

[Special Juan 28,182]

As well as Azpi has done we need a new left back as much as we need a striker IMO. I'm slowly but surely growing frustrated by Ivanovic at RB because for me he is far too predictable in both his going forward and also his annoying trait of crossing from mid-way in the opposition half.

I'm not saying he's been poor at all, he's done well, but we need better than that and I am a huge fan of Azpilcueta and his energy, and want him at RB soon as possible.

[kellzfresh 7,229]

Half-way there with the first part, namely Mikel. He's not quick enough across the ground to cover a fast moving midfield such as Man City's, and it badly showed. Culpable for their second, but that's what you get with him, he has an innate 'ability' of losing/not tracking runners around the box and stands statue like whilst the ball and man passes him by.

02

There may have also been another error tactically and that was Luiz at centre-half. He looked unsure and uncomfortable all game long. Perhaps and with the benefit of hindsight, without Terry the better move may have been to play Cahill and Ivanovic as the centre-halves, Cole as a natural left-back, Dave at right-back and pushed Luiz into midfield as we did in our league win there.

02

Ramires had an absolute stinker and isn't generally playing well at the moment. He was culpable for their first, watch how he 'jumps' at Clichy, Clichy just feints past him and three passes later the balls in the net. Naive defending at best, lazy at worst.

02

It should not be forgotten that City had the benefit of a full weeks rest owing to the postponement of their mid-week fixture, whereas we had a tough game at West Brom, in my view this was a significant factor. They looked far fresher and lively.

02

Good game by Dave, MOM for me.

Exactly.

Perfect analysis of the game. For some strange reason some people didn't think city looked fresher than us.

The mere fact that city were pressing better than us(were the best in the league at pressing opposition) is evidence of fatigue.

And mikel was too slow to keep up with city's pace in possesion. Ramires too had stinker and exactly as u said has had a terrible 2014 so far. That's why I said earlier we missed luiz pressing energy and quick releases to hazard like he did in our earlier match. People hav underestimated the impact that had on the overall outcome of the match

[communicate 2,703]

Ironically, quite a few wanted him gone last season aswell when he wasn't playing under Rafa.

It's true to an extent that we did miss JTs leadership a little and that yes, we conceded two but at the same time we were so woeful going forward. We didn't create any clear cut chance, not a single one despite playing a pretty strong front four for the game.

The performance as a whole wasn't good enough. Doubt JT would've stopped the loss.

Finally somebody realized that we were absolutely dreadful going forward, I don't remember we have any chance at all.

We kept talking about missing JT and mikel and Luiz are awful but even when we won in Etihad, city had several good chances to score. The difference this time is they did score and we did absolutely nothing to even threatened their defense

[diskoviolente 425]

It was disappointing to watch, but to be honest, out of the two games I rather take the league win over them. I expected us to get seriously trimmed twice by them, and given our industrious performance against them a fortnight ago, this is a loss we can take on our skin and there are obvious reasons why we lost - having to play our best players was a given, though they might be overplayed. The problem is that we really need them all fit against Everton, especially Hazard and Willian. Good thing is that Oscar should be fit and that we don't have CL football this week. My personal priority is the league this season, so I hope that Mou gives them a good drill and will make a good selection for Sat.

[CMS 382]

You missed the point. Jeez! must I have to break down everything to some folks? I merely said Jose was trying to play safe and not put everything out there, so he wouldn't have to play every three days. Being out of the FA cup now gives him more time to prepare for important cups. Contrary to most, I think his priority is The BPL and the champions league. He's very clever at masking his real goals and intentions. Pelelgrini was playing with emotions and got suckered in into a rivalry that didn't really exist. He put too much into a cup that carries less weight. If you have watched Jose's teams long enough, you will be able to tell when he really wnats to go out for the win at all costs.

I hate to quote myself, but did I not call this? Barca 2 City 0. 70/30 possession..

[kellzfresh 7,229]

I hate to quote myself, but did I not call this? Barca 2 City 0. 70/30 possession..

They stood no chance to me. Its simple, any team that is used to holding possession and dominating against even big teams, will have to change their style and fall short when they meet a better ball hugger than them, A.k.a barca.

[MHL 47 378]

City did OK last night. They had a bit of a 'welcome to our world' shock with UEFA appointed officials, although having said that the 'offside' goal scored by Barca was just onside. I thought they matched Barca up pretty well. Jose is correct (again), this isn't the best Barca side. Messi looked less than his usual self, didn't seem to have that explosive burst of acceleration that gets him away from players in the first 2-3 metres.

Their crucial mistake was to have Negredo so isolated, he's good but he ain't Drogba. Drogba used to keep at least 3 of Barca's back four occupied and honest and didn't allow both full backs to bomb on relentlessly.

Jesus Navas wasn't like his namesake i.e. he didn't see a cross all night. For the role Navas appeared to play last night Milner was the right man. If Navas was supposed to break quickly and support Negredo, he failed miserably.

Kompany was immense, Silva very good except he made the wrong decision to shoot and not square to Nasri when it was 1-0 and City were down to 10. 2nd goal probably puts Barca through.