Pellegrino set for the high jump

[Spear]

the free club coaches
Postby mcfc49 » Tue Apr 07, 2015 12:25 pm

I boarded the free club coaches yesterday at 1 15, along with 300 other city fans looking forward to seeing city play at palace. For some reason none of the 6 coaches left until 2 0clock. I heard a story saying that we were delayed so city tv could get a picture of us all leaving together. Another was that we were delayed for one of the coach drivers, who needed to take a 45 minute break for his tacograph. none of the coaches arrived until well after the kick off I got in the ground at 8.25. There was some traffic delay but nothing major. In any case 6 and a half hours is not long enough to get to palace. Lots of city fans who had done the trip before were saying they thought it was going to be touch and go to get to palace in time. Ian cheeseman said he was going to discuss this on his blue Tuesday programme tonight, we saw him in the services on the way back. In any case this is a bad cock up from whoever organised the free coaches. I believe this is the 3rd time that club coaches have arrived late for palace away. my away game was ruined before the match started and I believe the club should compensate the 300 fans in some way for their wasted forty pound away tickets.

 

[Spear]

hey silks, what you reckon ?

 

[Stocky]

hey silks, what you reckon ?

Busy using a magnifying glass to try and find his chin to post on here the little weasel.

 

[mistermagic]

It seems strange that people would suggest Klopp based on the terrible season he has had when Pelligrini himself has done better in comparison this season and is just a year from winning the league. This culture of sacking after one poor season is completely toxic. City went out in Europe to one of the best teams in the world, I think some perspective is needed here. No other English teams did any better.

No. Dortmund were always going to have a transitional season after letting Lewandowski go to Bayern. They didn't replace him well (neither Immobile nor Ramos are good enough to fix his studs) and injuries has caused a very unsettled defence (plus Weidenfeller has been average at best). City have been found out this season for not being all that good and their title win last season is the flukiest in the past seasons. Once again, the only reason they won the league was because Mourinho won at Anfield. Otherwise Liverpool would have, deservedly, won.
I've watched City a lot this season (possibly the side I've watched the most including PSG) and they've been shambolic and lacking killer instinct throughout the season despite Aguero. Pellegrini's stubborness of playing the outdated 442 just doesn't work against any side and he's been found out against Barca who really could have scored 10 goals in those two games such were the glaring tactical holes in Pellegrini's "plan".
Pelligrini needs to go if City are to get anywhere near a title challenge in the coming years. They also have an ageing squad and an over-reliance on experienced players and not enough chances are given to the youth. Shame.

 

[merseyboyred]

City were really good in the league last season, let's not diminish them on that. They scored one more goal than us & kept a tighter ship at the back. They were deserved winners.

 

[Mustard]

No. Dortmund were always going to have a transitional season after letting Lewandowski go to Bayern. They didn't replace him well (neither Immobile nor Ramos are good enough to fix his studs) and injuries has caused a very unsettled defence (plus Weidenfeller has been average at best). City have been found out this season for not being all that good and their title win last season is the flukiest in the past seasons. Once again, the only reason they won the league was because Mourinho won at Anfield. Otherwise Liverpool would have, deservedly, won.
I've watched City a lot this season (possibly the side I've watched the most including PSG) and they've been shambolic and lacking killer instinct throughout the season despite Aguero. Pellegrini's stubborness of playing the outdated 442 just doesn't work against any side and he's been found out against Barca who really could have scored 10 goals in those two games such were the glaring tactical holes in Pellegrini's "plan".
Pelligrini needs to go if City are to get anywhere near a title challenge in the coming years. They also have an ageing squad and an over-reliance on experienced players and not enough chances are given to the youth. Shame.

There is transitional season and there is finding yourself at the bottom of the league come New Year. Klopp is a very vogue manager but he really fucked up this season by letting things get so bad, there are clubs with far smaller resources than Dortmund who have done a lot better. Injuries can only be an excuse to a certain extent in the job he is in, he built the squad after all. I do empathise with him having to sell his star players, after all it's not too dissimilar to Arsenal a few years ago, but he still has one of the top 4 squads in the league. Besides, problems with injuries and lack of form don't sound too dissimilar to what City have experienced this season.

I think you are doing City a bit of a disservice by discrediting their league win like that. Over 38 games City were the most consistent team, as good as Liverpool were at the end of the season they were pretty bad at the start. Now I don't think City have been great this season either, but just a year ago they were very good and this season the fall has been nowhere near as significant as that of the man who many think should replace Pellegrini. I think Klopp will bounce back, but given Pellegrini is a year out from winning the league, he deserves more time, at least a season. If anybody should go, it's Txiki Begiristain who has been poor in terms of identifying signings. I agree City's squad is ageing but that's not just down to Pellegrini. The whole philosophy of the club seems at odds with Klopp who is more in the Wenger mould of giving young talent a chance even if it's in vain, another flawed genius.

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

Yes, transitional is a very charitable way to describe Dortmund's season. They're sitting in the bottom half of the table, having spend half the year flirting with relegation - that's a really poor effort.

 

[mistermagic]

I think now would be a good time to state that I'm not a particular fan of Dortmund or Klopp. It's a big club with a big fanbase and Klopp got them out of the shit all those years ago and kudos to the board for not sacking him but I'm just stating that he's had problems to deal with. Such problems are common to all managers but if he had the financial power Pellegrini has then he certainly wouldn't have spent half the year in the bottom 3. For one thing he could have signed Lewandowski. Then again the board were a bit pussies on that issue...

 

[silkyman]

Rumours that he's been sacked already, but there we go. City never claimed to be a club who 'don't sack managers'!

Delivered a double last season, so can't be too annoyed with his record over two seasons.

I'd like to see Paddy V have it until the end of the season if it's true.

 

[Abertawe]

Nowhere else to throw in this humble brag so here goes

 

[Stevencc]

He looks better in the Swansea kit too.

 

[JimJams]

Which is ultimately the most important thing.

 

[Humongous Fungus]

Bony didn't feature against palace did he? Is he injured?

 

[Steady]

Wrote this about City's transfer policy. It really is a bit shit: http://www.football365.com/f365-says/9793915/F365-Says

 

[Stevencc]

Don't be so harsh on yourself, it's a fine article.

 

[Steady]

As you can tell, I rely on sub-editors to check everything I right.

 

[Stevencc]

It's the only weigh.

 

[Pyeman]

Wrote this about City's transfer policy. It really is a bit shit: http://www.football365.com/f365-says/9793915/F365-Says

I look at a lot of those players, and many of them had good reputations and/or had enjoyed a reasonable level of success prior to moving to Man City.

This leads me to wonder, is their transfer policy the issue, or are they buying decent players who subsequently regress whilst at the club?

I'm inclined to think a bit of both. Buying good players is fine, but if they don't fit your playing style/formation/philosophy etc then it's a failure of transfer policy. And then it's no real surprise that the players subsequently don't progress as you'd expect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Steady]

I look at a lot of those players, and many of them had good reputations and/or had enjoyed a reasonable level of success prior to moving to Man City.

This leads me to wonder, is their transfer policy the issue, or are they buying decent players who subsequently regress whilst at the club?

I'm inclined to think a bit of both. Buying good players is fine, but if they don't fit your playing style/formation/philosophy etc then it's is a failure of transfer policy. And then it's no real surprise that the players subsequently don't progress as you'd expect.

For me, their transfer policy is the issue because they're buying decent players who, in all likelihood at the time of signing, will regress sooner rather than later.

For example, look at Fernandinho. He was signed as a 28-year-old and played a key role in City's title-winning 2013/14 season. In isolation, it looks a great signing as he facilitated much of the attacking work Yaya Toure was freed up to do.

Looking at the transfer on a business basis, which unfortunately football should be judged on, shows that City signed a 28-year-old for £30million from a club who hardly needed the money (Shakhtar). It's just horrible business, he turns 30 next month and has no re-sale value.

Signing like Fernando, Stevan Jovetic, even Wilfried Bony this season were just not needed whatsoever. You look at that City side and you don't see a core for the future. How long does Toure have left? Kompany's 29 tomorrow, and I think only Sergio Aguero and Joe Hart were under 29/30 of the players who started against Palace. There's no forward thinking, just short-termism, which will obviously help them on a temporary basis, but when it comes to those players inevitably leaving or regressing, what have they put in place to replace them?

 

[Pyeman]

I'd certainly agree that their transfer policy is short-sighted. And when they do make signings 'for the future', ie Jack Rodwell, they aren't given the chance to progress because City are so concerned with the present.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Stevencc]

I think you are both right in terms of current and recent first team transfers but they have done a lot of work in building the infrastructure for the future in terms of academies and facilities etc that should pay dividends for them in the longer term.

 

[Smally]

When they got all the money, short term signings made sense. When they won the league under Mancini and even last summer they should have started to look for younger players to recruit. I see them linked with the likes of Henderson, Wilshere, Coutinho, all in their early to mid 20's, this is the ideal age to sign long-term players

 

[Steady]

I think you are both right in terms of current and recent first team transfers but they have done a lot of work in building the infrastructure for the future in terms of academies and facilities etc that should pay dividends for them in the longer term.

That's perhaps fair, but we won't know for a good five or so years. As well as that, we've heard plenty about Chelsea's youth set-up for years now, but with them prioritising trophies and glory now, we've seen little to nothing. It takes a very brave manager to give them the chance.

When they got all the money, short term signings made sense. When they won the league under Mancini and even last summer they should have started to look for younger players to recruit. I see them linked with the likes of Henderson, Wilshere, Coutinho, all in their early to mid 20's, this is the ideal age to sign long-term players

To an extent, definitely. I'm not knocking short-term signings as clubs do it for a reason. You can't just sign a bunch of 20-year-olds then think 'we'll win the league in a couple of years when they all come good'. But you need a mixture, and City are completely lopsided in that respect. The closest thing to them in terms of set-up with youth, the amount of money they have and everything are Chelsea, and you see Eden Hazard, Oscar and plenty more younger players starting every week. City's youngest regular starter is their keeper.

Their whole transfer policy is built on sand, but how long will their castle stand up against the wave of time?

(What a fucking incredible pay-off).

 

[Nath]

City have been attempting to buy trophies, which is why they've bought ready made players. It really is a shite policy considering they could bring in some top young players for the money spent. With the exception of RvP/Falcao, United have brought in some younger players who are good enough to start now, but more importantly have years to offer. Young players are given first team experience. The likes of Januzaj, Blackett, Wilson and McNair have got plenty of playing time this season. Whilst we pay big money, at least we have some kind of future plan.

City really need a clear out this summer. I'd expect the likes of Jovetic, Sagna, Dzeko, Yaya, Fernandinho, Kolarov to be sold. It'll be interesting to see if some of the youth players are given more of an opportunity.

 

[JimJams]

I don't see much reason to sell Jovetic, Kolarov and Fernandinho. Yaya is on big wages (well they all are but comparatively) and is in his twilight years, yet there's still interest from Inter so getting rid of him for a fee would be possible, and Dzeko still has a decent enough rep and years ahead of him to fetch a fair sum from somebody. However if the Bosnian leaves then Jovetic has a place, if Yaya leaves then selling Fernandinho makes them light in the midfield, and at present they only have two defensive mids anyway in him and 'Nando. With Kolarov I don't think he'd garner a fee that'd be substantial enough to be worth selling for as that then gives them the problem of replacing him. And with Sagna he cost fack all and signed for 3 years, I'd assume they'll let him see out his contract as again it'll mean not having to find a new right back. Unless of course they decide to finally let Micah Richards play a game.

 

[mistermagic]

Wrote this about City's transfer policy. It really is a bit shit: http://www.football365.com/f365-says/9793915/F365-Says

If I may offer some piece of constructive criticism (being a writer myself), I find it amazing that you can judge Bony on his 5 (FIVE) games in a Man City shirt especially when in 3 of those he played less than a half-hour.
Jovetic stinking is 100% down Pellegrini refusing to play with a second striker (Jovetic being the only the club has except Yaya) and sticking with the outdated crap of 442 with the more than useless Dzeko partnering Aguero up top. Play Jovetic behind Aguero and you'll see he's the dogs bawls. Or something.

 

[Jarv]

where do City stand in terms of spending this summer and still hitting FFP. the limits are combined losses over the 3 previous years of 30m Euros. I'm sure i read somewhere they aren't allowed to increase their total Salaries at all either for this next season. in which case they will be quite hampered to be within the regulations and make major overhauls.

 

[silkyman]

If I may offer some piece of constructive criticism (being a writer myself), I find it amazing that you can judge Bony on his 5 (FIVE) games in a Man City shirt especially when in 3 of those he played less than a half-hour.
Jovetic stinking is 100% down Pellegrini refusing to play with a second striker (Jovetic being the only the club has except Yaya) and sticking with the outdated crap of 442 with the more than useless Dzeko partnering Aguero up top. Play Jovetic behind Aguero and you'll see he's the dogs bawls. Or something.

Oh I don't know. It looked like totally impartial and fair reporting to me.

 

[Steady]

If I may offer some piece of constructive criticism (being a writer myself), I find it amazing that you can judge Bony on his 5 (FIVE) games in a Man City shirt especially when in 3 of those he played less than a half-hour.
Jovetic stinking is 100% down Pellegrini refusing to play with a second striker (Jovetic being the only the club has except Yaya) and sticking with the outdated crap of 442 with the more than useless Dzeko partnering Aguero up top. Play Jovetic behind Aguero and you'll see he's the dogs bawls. Or something.

It's less a criticism of Bony, more a criticism of the signing. They didn't need him, and it felt like a complete 'flavour of the month' signing after his 2014 form. Can you see Bony playing a huge role in City's starting XI in three years' time or more? I'll be fairly surprised if they hadn't sold him on by then.

Oh I don't know. It looked like totally impartial and fair reporting to me.

Cheers for your input mate. Care to share more?

 

[silkyman]

Bony was a like for like replacement for Negredo. Due to injuries, City had only just played about a month without a single recognised striker. He wasn't signed as 'flavour of the month' he offered something different and was needed at the time and will play his part in future.