►►►►►► Match Ratings vs Manchester City ◄◄◄◄◄◄

MOTM


  • Total voters
    175

steve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2003
Messages
3,492
I really think you're wrong. Until yesterday i don't think the players genuinely thought they could do it. It showed to an extent in the first half when they played conservatively and without real belief. At 2 0 we were done and i think some of them felt that too but the quick goals back made them believe for the first time in the whole match...now they'll look at it and think " we should've won, we can beat them". I don't think they felt that way before kick off, not deep down...now they do. I think this can only be a positive...yesterday will have made some of them grow without doubt...
 

Mr Pink

SC Supporter
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
44,533
Didn't Arsenal come back twice to beat Chelsea away this season ? They also came back yesterday themselves only to loose like us late on. Chelsea have won games late (Wolves) too.

I have said this for a while now, but there is a vulnerability to all of us at the moment. In some ways, this is the weakest Championship race for a while. There are 5 teams who are all very close, and as defensively poor as each other. All five teams showed it again this weekend. And I'm not saying we are the worst either. But I think that was more of a blow than a boost to our morale yesterday. I hope I'm wrong.
Yeah but I put that down to Chelsea's suicide high line that played into Arsenal's hands rather than a sheer winning mentality.
 

sloth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,993
I really think you're wrong. Until yesterday i don't think the players genuinely thought they could do it. It showed to an extent in the first half when they played conservatively and without real belief. At 2 0 we were done and i think some of them felt that too but the quick goals back made them believe for the first time in the whole match...now they'll look at it and think " we should've won, we can beat them". I don't think they felt that way before kick off, not deep down...now they do. I think this can only be a positive...yesterday will have made some of them grow without doubt...
Yep, I pretty much agree with that.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,771
I really think you're wrong. Until yesterday i don't think the players genuinely thought they could do it. It showed to an extent in the first half when they played conservatively and without real belief. At 2 0 we were done and i think some of them felt that too but the quick goals back made them believe for the first time in the whole match...now they'll look at it and think " we should've won, we can beat them". I don't think they felt that way before kick off, not deep down...now they do. I think this can only be a positive...yesterday will have made some of them grow without doubt...
I actually thought we were very good in the first half. That was exactly how I wanted us to play - given the circumstances and who he'd picked - we actually had more ball than them and it reminded me of our approach to AC Milan. Keep it tight, keep a grip of the ball as much as poss, no silly bollocks and nick a win if we can.

I hope you're right, but I think the team that got the biggest lift from that game was City, they will feel they have that winners ability and having contrived to chuck it away at the death I think will do nothing for our belief.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
10,295
I actually thought we were very good in the first half. That was exactly how I wanted us to play - given the circumstances and who he'd picked - we actually had more ball than them and it reminded me of our approach to AC Milan. Keep it tight, keep a grip of the ball as much as poss, no silly bollocks and nick a win if we can.

I hope you're right, but I think the team that got the biggest lift from that game was City, they will feel they have that winners ability and having contrived to chuck it away at the death I think will do nothing for our belief.
I thought we hung on in the first 45. Little or nothing going forward and a real hairy spell about midway through that first 45. City were finding a way through but they were wasteful.
 

Mr Pink

SC Supporter
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
44,533
I actually thought we were very good in the first half. That was exactly how I wanted us to play - given the circumstances and who he'd picked - we actually had more ball than them and it reminded me of our approach to AC Milan. Keep it tight, keep a grip of the ball as much as poss, no silly bollocks and nick a win if we can.

I hope you're right, but I think the team that got the biggest lift from that game was City, they will feel they have that winners ability and having contrived to chuck it away at the death I think will do nothing for our belief.
BC whilst I was glad it was still 0-0 at half time to, you couldn't of been that happy given that the ball was coming back at us quite a bit...

I thought our second half performance had a lot more burst and thrust, were as the fist half was tentative with us playing ok up until a point but ultimately the ball wasn't sticking when we knocked it up to Defoe - obviously.

Ironically though - that's how we got back into the game :grin:

I thought our second half performance was excellent and we were the better team in that half.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,771
I thought we hung on in the first 45. Little or nothing going forward and a real hairy spell about midway through that first 45. City were finding a way through but they were wasteful.
We had 51% of the ball first half. Second half they had 59%. They got into a couple of good positions first half, but we got behind them a couple of times too but wasted the opportunity to play a final ball.

Second half they got on top for the first 15-20 minutes more than they ever did first half. At 2 down we had little to loose and we had a good 15 minutes, but I wouldn't have said at any time were either side hanging on. This was a game of few real chances and but for really shit schoolboy defending would have possibly been a goalless draw.

I' going to try and watch it again, but that's my honest assessment.
 

mpickard2087

Fantastic Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
19,313
We had 51% of the ball first half. Second half they had 59%. They got into a couple of good positions first half, but we got behind them a couple of times too but wasted the opportunity to play a final ball.

Second half they got on top for the first 15-20 minutes more than they ever did first half. At 2 down we had little to loose and we had a good 15 minutes, but I wouldn't have said at any time were either side hanging on. This was a game of few real chances and but for really shit schoolboy defending would have possibly been a goalless draw.

I' going to try and watch it again, but that's my honest assessment.
The bit in bold is yesterdays game in a nutshell. An even game low on quality (bar one moment from Bale).
 

EastLondonYid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
5,276
Funny how low some are marking.....if JD had managed to stick that one in would the marks have been so indifferent?

I thought we played ever so well and i didn't agree with Neville and Souness at HT, we played well in the first half, if that was man u they would have been saying it was a professional job well done, and the performance we put on to nearly win was truely inspiring, i don't think any of our players deserved less than 7.
 

Mr Pink

SC Supporter
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
44,533
We had 51% of the ball first half. Second half they had 59%. They got into a couple of good positions first half, but we got behind them a couple of times too but wasted the opportunity to play a final ball.

Second half they got on top for the first 15-20 minutes more than they ever did first half. At 2 down we had little to loose and we had a good 15 minutes, but I wouldn't have said at any time were either side hanging on. This was a game of few real chances and but for really shit schoolboy defending would have possibly been a goalless draw.

I' going to try and watch it again, but that's my honest assessment.
This is the thing though...we didn't look dangerous at all in the first half, and they didn't either really.

The bottam line is when we went behind we started to play with some conviction.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
10,295
We had 51% of the ball first half. Second half they had 59%. They got into a couple of good positions first half, but we got behind them a couple of times too but wasted the opportunity to play a final ball.

Second half they got on top for the first 15-20 minutes more than they ever did first half. At 2 down we had little to loose and we had a good 15 minutes, but I wouldn't have said at any time were either side hanging on. This was a game of few real chances and but for really shit schoolboy defending would have possibly been a goalless draw.

I' going to try and watch it again, but that's my honest assessment.
I am 26 mins through the first half here and they have already got at our back four 6 times. They got into great postions. We were relying on last ditch defending and poor shooting.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,771
BC whilst I was glad it was still 0-0 at half time to, you couldn't of been that happy given that the ball was coming back at us quite a bit...

I thought our second half performance had a lot more burst and thrust, were as the fist half was tentative with us playing ok up until a point but ultimately the ball wasn't sticking when we knocked it up to Defoe - obviously.

Ironically though - that's how we got back into the game :grin:

I thought our second half performance was excellent and we were the better team in that half.
See above posts. I agree Defoe meant we had poor retention on their third. but I was really happy with the majority of our first half performance. It was cagey, but that was better than the crap we played first 45 against Arsenal, or the middle 60 minutes against Chelsea.

We got back in the game because there defence was as vulnerable as ours, not because we played them off the pitch. We held our own, and I prefer that to open end to end bollocks, the likes of which Arsenal and ManU served up.
 

mpickard2087

Fantastic Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
19,313
I am 26 mins through the first half here and they have already got at our back four 6 times. They got into great postions. We were relying on last ditch defending and poor shooting.
In these 6 times how many were down the Walker/Kaboul channel, my instinct yday was that they were targeting these two quite a bit (eventually payed off with the first goal)
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,771
I am 26 mins through the first half here and they have already got at our back four 6 times. They got into great postions. We were relying on last ditch defending and poor shooting.
I'll watch it again when I get a chance. I did think our most dominant spell came when we put Livermore on and went kind of 433, but I was happy with how the first half went considering how we lined up. I'd expected them to have more ball.
 

mpickard2087

Fantastic Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
19,313
This is the thing though...we didn't look dangerous at all in the first half, and they didn't either really.

The bottam line is when we went behind we started to play with some conviction.
IMO this was a large part down to Bale sticking to the left and actually running at his man for once! Looked much more dangerous and I hope this has been noted by Harry and the staff, I dont want him playing in the centre thinking he is Messi. It worked once against Norwich, I havent been impressed since.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
10,295
In these 6 times how many were down the Walker/Kaboul channel, my instinct yday was that they were targeting these two quite a bit (eventually payed off with the first goal)
I don't know exactly but I can find out later tonight when I have more time. It was certainly an area I felt they were profiting in in the first half when I watched the game live. And they continually found space between the lines.
 

Mr Pink

SC Supporter
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
44,533
IMO this was a large part down to Bale sticking to the left and actually running at his man for once! Looked much more dangerous and I hope this has been noted by Harry and the staff, I dont want him playing in the centre thinking he is Messi. It worked once against Norwich, I havent been impressed since.
Agreed...
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
10,295
I'll watch it again when I get a chance. I did think our most dominant spell came when we put Livermore on and went kind of 433, but I was happy with how the first half went considering how we lined up. I'd expected them to have more ball.
I like stats as much as anyone, BC, but we created jackshit whilst they carved out numerous good chances in that first 30 mins alone. Pleat's analysis in The Guardian was a good read.
 

sloth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,993
I actually thought we were very good in the first half. That was exactly how I wanted us to play - given the circumstances and who he'd picked - we actually had more ball than them and it reminded me of our approach to AC Milan. Keep it tight, keep a grip of the ball as much as poss, no silly bollocks and nick a win if we can.

I hope you're right, but I think the team that got the biggest lift from that game was City, they will feel they have that winners ability and having contrived to chuck it away at the death I think will do nothing for our belief.
Where do you get first half/second half possession stats BC?

I was looking for possession stats before and after Livermore's introduction this morning, for part of a piece I was going to write in the tactics thread, but couldn't find them anywhere.
 
Top