Closed Man City 1-1 Chelsea

[CHOULO19 24,332]

we have the smaller tesco's here

couple years ago I nearly declared myself bankrupt through too much borrowing, I managed to recover and promised myself to never borrow a single penny, I will survive, I'm from africa I should be used to famine

I'm sure you can make an exception for this kind of emergency. Beats starving till Friday...

[Bir_CFC 3,455]

I rewatched parts of the match again and I found our problem was that our attackers were uncharacteristically sloppy in the first half. Costa was having trouble getting involved (but he was well marshaled by the CBs) and Hazard and Willian looked clueless in possession. If Hazard and Willian weren't so sloppy we could have had a much better performance. Yeah, we played defensive and they didn't have a lot of help but they didn't help themselves either by making it harder than it was.

If the front 4 played as well as they did last year at the Etihad, I believe we could have won against 11.

I think the fast start by City threw some off mentally. Even when we looked to be mounting an attack, someone would loose focus and misplace a pass. Someone would overdribble. Blaming Jose for defensive tactics is also wrong because we did the same last year but just didn't screw up so bad while attacking. Plus considering this was the most important match for City so far into the season and we still got a point is nothing to scoff at.

People are complaining that we didn't attack City enough when they were down to 10 also have to realize a few things. First, we did attack them, we scored a goal too. Second, we created some more chances too and almost scored a couple more. However, even with the opponent down to 10, it would be stupid to compromise your defence. Can you imagine we try to score a second and they counter us and equalize? That would be way worse imo.

There is one player I would like to single out though - Ivanovic. He fell asleep on the goal we conceded, which was obvious. However, something was wrong with him in the last 10-15 mins of the game. It was like he gave up playing RB. Our back 4 line was almost always just 3 with Ivanovic awol. He was missing for the goal but he was missing for few other City attacks too. It was so bad that at a point I was sitting there thinking did we change our shape to 3 at the back? wtf was going on, until I realize Matic was covering for him at RB while this dude is just waltzing around. He makes some individual mistakes once in a while, but this year his positioning itself has been very poor, he was never this bad at defensive awareness.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

Frustrating thing is that Mangala would have joined us apparently if we matched the same bid as City as he wanted to move to London. I always thought we should go after another CB especially as Terry is not going to carry on being first choice for much after this season and Cahill will be 30 next year. Mangala is only 23 and like you saw already on his debut, was exceptional. Pace, power and pretty much everything you want for a CB.

That was a shit ton of money for a CB, he was my MotM but he also fouled a hell of a lot and never got carded. We'll see in time if he was indeed a miss, I have a sneaking suspicion he was slightly overpriced. Also, who would he replace in our starting XI? He wasn't gonna come here and play off the bench. Terry is captain and Cahill was a pretty good value buy and English... No way were we gonna grab yet another foreign player.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

I rewatched parts of the match again and I found our problem was that our attackers were uncharacteristically sloppy in the first half. Costa was having trouble getting involved (but he was well marshaled by the CBs) and Hazard and Willian looked clueless in possession. If Hazard and Willian weren't so sloppy we could have had a much better performance. Yeah, we played defensive and they didn't have a lot of help but they didn't help themselves either by making it harder than it was.

If the front 4 played as well as they did last year at the Etihad, I believe we could have won against 11.

I think the fast start by City threw some off mentally. Even when we looked to be mounting an attack, someone would loose focus and misplace a pass. Someone would overdribble. Blaming Jose for defensive tactics is also wrong because we did the same last year but just didn't screw up so bad while attacking. Plus considering this was the most important match for City so far into the season and we still got a point is nothing to scoff at.

People are complaining that we didn't attack City enough when they were down to 10 also have to realize a few things. First, we did attack them, we scored a goal too. Second, we created some more chances too and almost scored a couple more. However, even with the opponent down to 10, it would be stupid to compromise your defence. Can you imagine we try to score a second and they counter us and equalize? That would be way worse imo.

There is one player I would like to single out though - Ivanovic. He fell asleep on the goal we conceded, which was obvious. However, something was wrong with him in the last 10-15 mins of the game. It was like he gave up playing RB. Our back 4 line was almost always just 3 with Ivanovic awol. He was missing for the goal but he was missing for few other City attacks too. It was so bad that at a point I was sitting there thinking did we change our shape to 3 at the back? wtf was going on, until I realize Matic was covering for him at RB while this dude is just waltzing around. He makes some individual mistakes once in a while, but this year his positioning itself has been very poor, he was never this bad at defensive awareness.

We haven't played this style with this team at all this year. We haven't really worked on sitting deep and waiting for the opportunities, chalk it up to a bit of unfamiliarity and not having enough days to train it. Having said that City did everything they could to break up the counter, fouls were plentiful from them.

[Stats 7,142]

That was a shit ton of money for a CB, he was my MotM but he also fouled a hell of a lot and never got carded. We'll see in time if he was indeed a miss, I have a sneaking suspicion he was slightly overpriced. Also, who would he replace in our starting XI? He wasn't gonna come here and play off the bench. Terry is captain and Cahill was a pretty good value buy and English... No way were we gonna grab yet another foreign player.

That is the value of young players who have years ahead of them. They are overpriced but that is the reality now. It is not the fact that he would walk into the team but he would keep Terry and Cahill on top of their game and like some people have been criticising Cahill (a bit too harshly imo) he could come in for him if he was having successive bad games and his age is a factor as well. He is 5-6 years younger than Cahill and 10 years younger than Terry. Also judging by what I have heard of him he was excellent in Portugal. We saw how good of a success Carvalho was. I think Mangala will be a quality signing for City. He has a lot of qualites for a CB. Probably one of the fastest CB in football right now and he is still improving. Look how many other players we have bought for quite outrageous fees.

[iseah100 5,612]

That is the value of young players who have years ahead of them. They are overpriced but that is the reality now. It is not the fact that he would walk into the team but he would keep Terry and Cahill on top of their game and like some people have been criticising Cahill (a bit too harshly imo) he could come in for him if he was having successive bad games and his age is a factor as well. He is 5-6 years younger than Cahill and 10 years younger than Terry. Also judging by what I have heard of him he was excellent in Portugal. We saw how good of a success Carvalho was. I think Mangala will be a quality signing for City. He has a lot of qualites for a CB. Probably one of the fastest CB in football right now and he is still improving. Look how many other players we have bought for quite outrageous fees.

He was overpriced. Just cause that's how the market is doesn't mean we have to comply. He looked good in that game cause of how we played, but let's not overrate him either. He is nowhere near Varane or Koscielny, which is why he doesn't start for France. We haven't paid an outrageous fee for a player in the last few transfer windows (Maybe Willian?), and hopefully we continue that way.

[Stats 7,142]

He was overpriced. Just cause that's how the market is doesn't mean we have to comply. He looked good in that game cause of how we played, but let's not overrate him either. He is nowhere near Varane or Koscielny, which is why he doesn't start for France. We haven't paid an outrageous fee for a player in the last few transfer windows (Maybe Willian?), and hopefully we continue that way.

No but the point is which I am making and made before the season started is that we should be after another CB. Due to Mangala's qualities, age and potential I always thought he would be a good option. Because it is likely that we will buy another big name CB in the summer anyway. Mangala and Kompany looks like it will be a quality partnership.

Also that theory about him not starting for France does not add up. Koscielny did not get ahead of Sakho. Does that mean Sakho is better? Not at all. Over 90% would say Koscielny is better than Sakho if you asked them but he is behind him in the national team.

But we have overpayed for many players. Mangala is not worth that fee at all but he is young and for players that age you are going to have to overpay. Like I was saying, it is likely imo that we could spent big on a CB come the summer.

[iseah100 5,612]

No but the point is which I am making and made before the season started is that we should be after another CB. Due to Mangala's qualities, age and potential I always thought he would be a good option. Because it is likely that we will buy another big name CB in the summer anyway. Mangala and Kompany looks like it will be a quality partnership.

Also that theory about him not starting for France does not add up. Koscielny did not get ahead of Sakho. Does that mean Sakho is better? Not at all. Over 90% would say Koscielny is better than Sakho if you asked them but he is behind him in the national team.

But we have overpayed for many players. Mangala is not worth that fee at all but he is young and for players that age you are going to have to overpay. Like I was saying, it is likely imo that we could spent big on a CB come the summer.

I don't think we will spend big on a CB unless it's Varane. There isn't many options out there and once Kalas comes back we'll have Cahill, Omeru, Zouma, Kalas, Brana. We're good there.

[Cholo 428]

Cahill, Omeru, Zouma, Kalas, Brana

Though it remains to be seen what happens with them both. Would love to see someone like Varane (very unrealistic now) or Laporte added to our squad.

[Myself 793]

Though it remains to be seen what happens with them both. Would love to see someone like Varane (very unrealistic now) or Laporte added to our squad.

Varane for 50m? Never.

[MichaelDance 552]

Funny I remember that, guess we are all mugs for believing that. The people who during the game screamed his name and put off the people ACTUALLY playing for us, can't believe it.

I knew it the minute Frank came on

Well I'm a bit pissed off about this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29322837

It seems the USA team was fake to get our legend from our team knowing we'd do what he wanted as he did a lot for us and want him to be happy. Extending his stay get lost

Pellegrini the c**t.

[dexteriti 26]

Well I'm a bit pissed off about this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29322837

It seems the USA team was fake to get our legend from our team knowing we'd do what he wanted as he did a lot for us and want him to be happy. Extending his stay get lost

Pellegrini the c**t.

I keep on reading this and I am a bit confused. Wasn't it Chelsea who gave Lampard away. It was Mou who said that it is important to have legends, but not the legends will help the team to become champs.

That's something I like about United. They signed their legends and they never let them the chance to go and play for the opposition (Giggs and Scholes). And I strongly believe Lampard is nowhere near his football career end. It was just Chelsea being too greedy and stupid not to sign his contract under his conditions. A price for an ALL TIME goal scorer! My 50p.

[MichaelDance 552]

I keep on reading this and I am a bit confused. Wasn't it Chelsea who gave Lampard away. It was Mou who said that it is important to have legends, but not the legends will help the team to become champs.

That's something I like about United. They signed their legends and they never let them the chance to go and play for the opposition (Giggs and Scholes). And I strongly believe Lampard is nowhere near his football career end. It was just Chelsea being too greedy and stupid not to sign his contract under his conditions. A price for an ALL TIME goal scorer! My 50p.

We offered him a new contact, but he wanted to start fresh in the new USA league, so we let him go to start his career in the US league which is Man City's club. Man City's Manager who owns both clubs loaned him out to their Premier League, and now want to extend it. Why force Lampard to stay here when he doesn't want to be? Un-happy player == bad game play == loose the match etc...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/chelsea-transfer-news-frank-lampard-3103476

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2627546/Jose-Mourinho-keen-offer-Chelsea-midfielder-Frank-Lampard-new-contract.html

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/392339/REVEALED-Chelsea-legends-Ashley-Cole-and-Frank-Lampard-WERE-offered-new-contracts

http://metro.co.uk/2014/08/02/chelsea-legends-frank-lampard-and-ashley-cole-were-offered-new-deals-reveals-jose-mourinho-4819210/

[dexteriti 26]

Hm, I could be mistaken. There was definitely something between the management and Lampard.

I still believe Mou is not honest about the reason Lampard chose to leave the club. For me it will always be the money Lampard wanted (however I am unable to quote anyone). In any case, I can't see him that passionate one of a sudden to leave the club and compete in MLS where the best player equals worst in 3th Division in UK(no offence to 3th division teams).

[iseah100 5,612]

Hm, I could be mistaken. There was definitely something between the management and Lampard.

I still believe Mou is not honest about the reason Lampard chose to leave the club. For me it will always be the money Lampard wanted (however I am unable to quote anyone). In any case, I can't see him that passionate one of a sudden to leave the club and compete in MLS where the best player equals worst in 3th Division in UK(no offence to 3th division teams).

Lmao! The MLS isn't that bad, you are going way too far.