Man City Post Match

[HighPeakFox]

3 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

Good post buddy and of course you’re right. It’s about ‘hope’ at the end of the day. Under Rodgers it was felt we had none, under Smith et al, it’s felt we do.

I just find it fascinating how different slants are provided to ‘things’ based on this. 
It’ll be an exciting run in, if nowt else.

Col, you only need to see how Rodgers still dominates this forum to see how minds work (or not, depending on your viewpoint).

[Fazzer 7]

Soy has to start v wolves. Would love to know what went down between him and Rodgers. Mendy for Ndidi and possibly Praet for KDH, Nacho for Vardy and we're in with a shout. 

[slymunn]

13 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

The first two goals were unfortunate. Stones has never scored a goal like that and probably never will again. Harsh penalty later and we'd be up against it whoever we played. 

 

Even with the ManC changes they still had a better team than most in the Premier League. We won't come up against a better team this season and we more than held our own for 45 mins. 

 

Nothing wrong with straw clutching in the circumstances. What else is there? 

John Stones scored a better goal in the champions league earlier this season. Against Dortmund I believe it was.

[RowlattsFox]

I'm not sure, I think there is a lot of false positivity going on as we try and convince ourselves it was better than under Rodgers. Reality is it wasn't, we started playing once the game was over and made it look respectable. Similar to some games under Rodgers where we would score late and then play well after. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather people be positive than negative and I hope that positivity can create an atmosphere next week where we have to win. We know we can create and score but need to show a greater desire to defend stubbornly otherwise there is no chance we win the at least 2 of the next 3 games to stand a chance of survival.

[Foxdiamond]

13 minutes ago, RowlattsFox said:

I'm not sure, I think there is a lot of false positivity going on as we try and convince ourselves it was better than under Rodgers. Reality is it wasn't, we started playing once the game was over and made it look respectable. Similar to some games under Rodgers where we would score late and then play well after. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather people be positive than negative and I hope that positivity can create an atmosphere next week where we have to win. We know we can create and score but need to show a greater desire to defend stubbornly otherwise there is no chance we win the at least 2 of the next 3 games to stand a chance of survival.

Man City away is always a difficult fixture at any time for any team. Now that is out of the way we will soon see if the positive vibe evaporates or if a vital upturn is on the cards

[CUJimmy]

Got back from work earlier than expected and after 30 mins was wishing I hadn’t!

 

Reflecting this morning though we were trying a new defensive set-up, with a CB who has been criminally under-used for months, against Haaland, De Bruyne, Grealish and Mahrez so it was always going to be tough.

 

Once the bleeding had been stemmed though we started to look better, particularly going forward creating the two big chances for Madders and Kels through the kind of pressing and incisive passing we haven’t seen for months.

 

I like a back 3 with Cags giving both speed and physicality with stronger ball playing skills to enable better linkage with the midfield.  This also allows our full backs, who are all better going forward than defensively to push up more and provide width.  A fit and firing Cags also negates the argument for Wilf’s strength and height over Pappy as a CDM.

 

This is not the time for too much buggering around - as I said in another thread, decide on a way of playing and stick with it until the end of the season so I would go with:

 

Ward (only joking, Iverson obviously)

 

Woutt

Soutts

Cags

 

Ricky if fit, Timmy if not

Youri

Mendy

VK although Luke looked decent

 

Madders

 

Kells

Harvey if fit, Daka if not

 

If Man City have a weakness it is not putting games like this to bed.  If either of our two big chances had been taken it would have been a very interesting last 10-15 mins.  I seem to remember us giving them a 4 goal start a couple of seasons ago then getting it back to 4-3 with enough time to potentially snatch an equaliser.  They also did the same in the CL against Real Madrid (iirc).

 

Anyway, looking forward to Saturday and hopefully a huge welcome back to Shakey and 3 points to kick-start GE2.

 

 

 

 

 

[old koppite]

30 minutes ago, Tommy Fresh said:

I've said this as well, those whinging that Man City were coasting haven't grasped that a Man City side making changes and cruising are still miles better than Leeds, Everton, Wolves and West Ham.

I agree. It puzzles me why these people think that the Man City subs ( or replace that with any top team we play if we have a good spell against them after they’re leading) don’t think to them selves “ here’s my chance, I’m going to show the boss why I should be first choice” . So the obvious conclusion is that despite the sub’s efforts, our players actually matched them , or believe or not (but some on here would never accept it) played better than them !  
It’s a Leicester default mentality thing; revert to being sceptical! 

[Corky]

If positives are false then so are negatives. We were never getting a positive result yesterday so we have to look for small things.

 

This is why Man City matches are not a good judge of where you are.

[NotTheMarketLeader]

10 hours ago, lee7 said:

It's baffling that Rodgers spent months watching us put in woeful defensive displays yet still would of happily seen out the season refusing to play Soyuncu. 

 

The bloke would of literally watched us get relegated rather than swallow his pride and  play Cags 

 

He has proven to be a sociopathic **** let’s face it 

[iancognito]

1 hour ago, Col city fan said:

You weren’t watching a different game. That’s what happened.

Why it’s been given the slant it has on here is typical to FT. You see it all the time. People are prepared to give Smith et al the benefit of the doubt at present, generally because we have no choice. We’ll either stay up or go down with him in charge.

But if that performance yesterday had happened with Rodgers still in charge, there’d have been none of this positivity about what had been seen in the second half. Most people would have been fuming about the first half and that would have been that. 
FT is it’s own microcosm of football fanism.

The relegation fight starts now, after which Smith will either be hailed ‘a hero’ if he keeps us up (he’ll only have done his job btw) or ‘a bad appointment’ if he doesn’t (where the argument will probably be then that ‘he didn’t have enough time’ etc).

Fascinating stuff to read.

I have no problems with the management team from yesterday, if you'd had Rodgers and co in charge yesterday it would have been the same story but with less fight in the 2nd half. But so many criticisms get batted away because "it's Man City". Nacho misses chances against Southampton - gets battered. Against Man City - play him next week, he's the best we've got. Same with Ndidi. People saying "Rodgers ruined him" or "he's had injuries". So has Praet and he looked a mile better yesterday. Just be even- handed. Ndidi, KDH and Kristiansen were poor. Regardless of the opposition.

[Dahnsouff]

It’s one game, people need to put the brake on their expectations with Soyuncu, I hope beyond hope he is back to his best but steady on

 

[Craig]

1 hour ago, slymunn said:

John Stones scored a better goal in the champions league earlier this season. Against Dortmund I believe it was.

With his right foot. This was a volley with his left.  

[kenny]

1 hour ago, RowlattsFox said:

I'm not sure, I think there is a lot of false positivity going on as we try and convince ourselves it was better than under Rodgers. Reality is it wasn't, we started playing once the game was over and made it look respectable. Similar to some games under Rodgers where we would score late and then play well after. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather people be positive than negative and I hope that positivity can create an atmosphere next week where we have to win. We know we can create and score but need to show a greater desire to defend stubbornly otherwise there is no chance we win the at least 2 of the next 3 games to stand a chance of survival.

We made substitutions that improved how we played.

 

Big source of optimism right there.

[StriderHiryu]

Game over after 30 minutes. But for a team absolutely bereft of confidence the overall result is not awful, much better than a 5/6 goal spanking for sure. 
 

We have to start winning game’s starting next week. I’m not confident but will get behind the team and new coaching setup. 

[justfoxes]

2 hours ago, Fazzer 7 said:

Soy has to start v wolves. Would love to know what went down between him and Rodgers. Mendy for Ndidi and possibly Praet for KDH, Nacho for Vardy and we're in with a shout. 

And a huge dose of confidence and a will to fight for every ball a fully focused Madders and Co and a repeat of an amazing foxes faithful 12th Man like at Man City which was one hell of an atmosphere! COYB 

[Seventyseven]

2 hours ago, Tommy Fresh said:

I've said this as well, those whinging that Man City were coasting haven't grasped that a Man City side making changes and cruising are still miles better than Leeds, Everton, Wolves and West Ham.

A training mode Man City isn’t more competitive than any of those sides. 

[Tommy Fresh]

5 minutes ago, Seventyseven said:

A training mode Man City isn’t more competitive than any of those sides. 

Have you seen those sides?

[lee7]

11 hours ago, TK95 said:

Still fail to understand what the issue was to begin with

I'm not sure but it's pretty clear all the interviews about Soyuncu not being up to the level and not training well were most likely bullsh*t. 

Yesterday he looked like our best defender and he played well for Turkey a few months back too. 

 

It just makes me hate Brendan even more knowing that he would of rather put the club and fans through a relegation than swallow his pride.

[jerry]

3 hours ago, Fazzer 7 said:

Soy has to start v wolves. Would love to know what went down between him and Rodgers. Mendy for Ndidi and possibly Praet for KDH, Nacho for Vardy and we're in with a shout. 

In retrospect not a bad  first fixture for the new management team to have had. No one expecting anything from it and has enabled them to look at the squad to see who has the fight and ability to play in the upcoming games and also the best formation. The season is now encapsulated in 7 games.

[PaulW]

17 hours ago, iancognito said:

So he can miss even more open goals?

Just remind me.....how many shots on goal did Vardy manage?

[Pliskin]

Just as a reminder, Man City had Mahrez, Grealish, Silva, KDB and Haaland all on the pitch from the off. 
 

And people are lamenting us for being 3-0 quickly. That’s exactly what that side was set up to do. 
 

We’re a bit fragile at the moment, it was Smiths first game in charge, so there was little opportunity to get things so right in time to play arguably the best team in the league. 
 

Let’s just focus on next week.Wolves aren’t Man City. 

[jmono84]

Even with Man C’s strong team at the start I felt they didn’t carve us open too much. It’s a shame a CB volley out of nowhere and a silly handball put us 2-0 down within 10mins.

 

The game plan was gone almost straight away but even then they only scored another because of our mistake in the middle and Iversen only had the Mahrez save from a corner. I think the 3-0 at half time flattered them.

 

They made lots of subs and you could see in Peps face he was worried when Maddison missed his chance at 3-1 because I don’t think they had anymore to make. Maddison scores that chance and I think we would have at least got a point.

[PaulW]

15 hours ago, Col city fan said:

Pep did exactly the right thing.

The game was over, with huge games looming and he weighed it up that we wouldn’t score 3 in the second half.

We didn’t. We didn’t even score 2.

It was good management therefore as he was right to do what he did.

People saying we did well to have a go, we’ll, yes.. but look at the context of the game.

Forget today. It means nothing now. IF we continue to come forward and to create chances whilst not conceding (aka second half today, given the context) then we’ll have a fighting chance. But let’s see what happens now and don’t base anything much on a second half today in a game that was already done.

Relegation battle starts now. 

Actually, the game meant, and means, a great deal.  We could easily have rolled over, thinking as you suggest, "this game means nothing" and lost by a cricket score.  The fact that we didn''t, means that we have a better goal difference than most (all?) of those around us, which could easily mean all world at the end of the season.  

[Chrysalis]

3 hours ago, RowlattsFox said:

I'm not sure, I think there is a lot of false positivity going on as we try and convince ourselves it was better than under Rodgers. Reality is it wasn't, we started playing once the game was over and made it look respectable. Similar to some games under Rodgers where we would score late and then play well after. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather people be positive than negative and I hope that positivity can create an atmosphere next week where we have to win. We know we can create and score but need to show a greater desire to defend stubbornly otherwise there is no chance we win the at least 2 of the next 3 games to stand a chance of survival.

You honestly couldnt tell the difference?

 

I mean going from 20 slow passes between the CB's and then losing it before going across the halfway line, between getting the ball to nacho after 3 passes, and lots of dribbling play?

 

I think you just looked at the score and thought "cant tell the difference boss".

[inckley fox]

55 minutes ago, Seventyseven said:

A training mode Man City isn’t more competitive than any of those sides. 

No, and it's true that we were pretty awful when the game was at its most competitive. Not only in terms of the gulf in quality, but also in our ability to win our 50-50s, second balls, apply pressure, offer options. A lot of the stuff which we tend to put down to effort, and which we've repeatedly been told is just a reflection of low confidence. They were a pushover.

 

However, the good news is that Man City underestimated us in the second half. They made a miscalculation that the game was over, and in how far they needed to stretch themselves to see it out. We very nearly worked our way back into it and had the chances to get a result. So to see us making a fist of it, even against a (very good) side who'd taken their foot off the gas, and keeping our goal difference advantage over some rivals, might just reignite something.