Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
SteveF excellent article. And pretty well covered everything.
I hate the way all competitions are becoming so uncompetitive now. Yes, you get the odd fluke win by Leicester, but in the main it is the financially doped clubs that are hoovering up all the trophies.
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 2 minutes ago
SteveF excellent article. And pretty well covered everything.
I hate the way all competitions are becoming so uncompetitive now. Yes, you get the odd fluke win by Leicester, but in the main it is the financially doped clubs that are hoovering up all the trophies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There has been 4 different clubs win the PL title over the last 5 seasons Sandy. Then add in the fact that 4 different teams have won the FA cup in the last 5 years also. Yet again you're spouting absolute rubbish.
At least have the balls to respond to this then Sanluka
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pep Guardiola has spent £883.57 million in his five years at the club, including buying two players for over £60 million, five players for over £50 million, four players for over £40 million. He may not have purchased any mega money player, but he has blown all opposition out of the water with the spending power he has on tap.
You are making out that Pep is so good he is doing it on a shoestring. How good would he be without the money?
Regarding us not winning anything, I kind of agree with you there. I think it's wildly overplayed. The bottom line is that these days the very biggest clubs get to the finals so when we come to face them, we're never favourites to win anyway. To lose those finals were to be expected. It was par. I think we're in a difficult position. We're supposedly a member of the Premier League elite but in truth there is the top four teams in City, United, Chelsea and Liverpool and then there is a bit of a drop to Spurs and Arsenal, in terms of the traditional top six. We're Andy Murray in an era of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. We get to finals but someone much bigger comes along and snatches it from us. Sure, Arsenal won the FA Cup last year but with a bit of luck, we would have won some of the finals we've lost too. It's a combination of better teams and bad luck. Not some mystical hoodoo we can't shed.
Maybe, just maybe we are not good enough anymore and should look to play to come above Arsenal only!😊👍
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances and they didnt miss any sitters and won from a set piece. "woeful finishing" is a complete exaggeration but even still, finishing is a skill like any other part of the game so if they were guilty of woeful finishing that is a criticism of them not us being lucky. Don't get me wrong, we were barely in the game, but we actually defended pretty well.
As for the Laporte thing, Lucas may have been on the half way line but beyond Laporte he was effectively clean through & no way Laporte was catching him so who knows what may have come from that situation. It should not be dismissed so easily that City always foul to break up the counter attacks and player like Fernandino have denied belief in the past with the amount of fouls he gives away without being booked. Just more weak reffing and this whole "dont book a player early in the game" BS is inexcusable.
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pep Guardiola has spent £883.57 million in his five years at the club, including buying two players for over £60 million, five players for over £50 million, four players for over £40 million. He may not have purchased any mega money player, but he has blown all opposition out of the water with the spending power he has on tap.
You are making out that Pep is so good he is doing it on a shoestring. How good would he be without the money?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every manager needs money and to be fair, he's had a lot but United have spent exactly the same amount over the last 10 years (roughly a billion) and they've been nowhere near winning the league, let alone dominating. All they've got to show for it is a Europa League, one FA Cup and a League Cup I think, in 10 years. I'm telling you, Pep is the reason why City are dominating right now. If he'd joined United back in 2015/16, they'd be just as dominant. Sure, he probably can't do it as well on a shoestring but that's not the point. The point made in the original article was that money had made City dominant which isn't true as United have spent the same amount. Like I said, it wins you trophies here and there but you need more than that to be dominant. To put Pep's success down to money alone is just absurd.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by GTWI4T- some people deserve to get trolled (U6008)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 31 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances and they didnt miss any sitters and won from a set piece. "woeful finishing" is a complete exaggeration but even still, finishing is a skill like any other part of the game so if they were guilty of woeful finishing that is a criticism of them not us being lucky. Don't get me wrong, we were barely in the game, but we actually defended pretty well.
As for the Laporte thing, Lucas may have been on the half way line but beyond Laporte he was effectively clean through & no way Laporte was catching him so who knows what may have come from that situation. It should not be dismissed so easily that City always foul to break up the counter attacks and player like Fernandino have denied belief in the past with the amount of fouls he gives away without being booked. Just more weak reffing and this whole "dont book a player early in the game" BS is inexcusable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1) In the first half in particular every time they came forward they looked like they would score. Had Sterling made better decisions they could have been out of sight in 20 mins.
2) The missed two sitters with Sterling and Foden being six yards out and only having to not hit a defender to score. It was great defending, but there were sitters.
3) Lucas certainly wasn't clean through. You would have had a 3-2 to be fair, but Laporte was irrelevant in the way the scenario would have played out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who cares!!
Onwards!
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Hi Steve, why mention Laporte but not Regulion?
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances and they didnt miss any sitters and won from a set piece. "woeful finishing" is a complete exaggeration but even still, finishing is a skill like any other part of the game so if they were guilty of woeful finishing that is a criticism of them not us being lucky. Don't get me wrong, we were barely in the game, but we actually defended pretty well.
As for the Laporte thing, Lucas may have been on the half way line but beyond Laporte he was effectively clean through & no way Laporte was catching him so who knows what may have come from that situation. It should not be dismissed so easily that City always foul to break up the counter attacks and player like Fernandino have denied belief in the past with the amount of fouls he gives away without being booked. Just more weak reffing and this whole "dont book a player early in the game" BS is inexcusable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances
------------------
Yeah, they only mustered 21 shots
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pep Guardiola has spent £883.57 million in his five years at the club, including buying two players for over £60 million, five players for over £50 million, four players for over £40 million. He may not have purchased any mega money player, but he has blown all opposition out of the water with the spending power he has on tap.
You are making out that Pep is so good he is doing it on a shoestring. How good would he be without the money?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every manager needs money and to be fair, he's had a lot but United have spent exactly the same amount over the last 10 years (roughly a billion) and they've been nowhere near winning the league, let alone dominating. All they've got to show for it is a Europa League, one FA Cup and a League Cup I think, in 10 years. I'm telling you, Pep is the reason why City are dominating right now. If he'd joined United back in 2015/16, they'd be just as dominant. Sure, he probably can't do it as well on a shoestring but that's not the point. The point made in the original article was that money had made City dominant which isn't true as United have spent the same amount. Like I said, it wins you trophies here and there but you need more than that to be dominant. To put Pep's success down to money alone is just absurd.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United have not spent £883 million over five years, like Pep has.
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pep Guardiola has spent £883.57 million in his five years at the club, including buying two players for over £60 million, five players for over £50 million, four players for over £40 million. He may not have purchased any mega money player, but he has blown all opposition out of the water with the spending power he has on tap.
You are making out that Pep is so good he is doing it on a shoestring. How good would he be without the money?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every manager needs money and to be fair, he's had a lot but United have spent exactly the same amount over the last 10 years (roughly a billion) and they've been nowhere near winning the league, let alone dominating. All they've got to show for it is a Europa League, one FA Cup and a League Cup I think, in 10 years. I'm telling you, Pep is the reason why City are dominating right now. If he'd joined United back in 2015/16, they'd be just as dominant. Sure, he probably can't do it as well on a shoestring but that's not the point. The point made in the original article was that money had made City dominant which isn't true as United have spent the same amount. Like I said, it wins you trophies here and there but you need more than that to be dominant. To put Pep's success down to money alone is just absurd.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United have not spent £883 million over five years, like Pep has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct Sanluka but UTD have spent £846 million in the last 5 years
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances and they didnt miss any sitters and won from a set piece. "woeful finishing" is a complete exaggeration but even still, finishing is a skill like any other part of the game so if they were guilty of woeful finishing that is a criticism of them not us being lucky. Don't get me wrong, we were barely in the game, but we actually defended pretty well.
As for the Laporte thing, Lucas may have been on the half way line but beyond Laporte he was effectively clean through & no way Laporte was catching him so who knows what may have come from that situation. It should not be dismissed so easily that City always foul to break up the counter attacks and player like Fernandino have denied belief in the past with the amount of fouls he gives away without being booked. Just more weak reffing and this whole "dont book a player early in the game" BS is inexcusable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances
------------------
Yeah, they only mustered 21 shots
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How many top class saves did Lloris have to make? Why was he not man of the match if they "tore us apart" "had 21 shots" and yet managed 1 goal from a set piece.
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pep Guardiola has spent £883.57 million in his five years at the club, including buying two players for over £60 million, five players for over £50 million, four players for over £40 million. He may not have purchased any mega money player, but he has blown all opposition out of the water with the spending power he has on tap.
You are making out that Pep is so good he is doing it on a shoestring. How good would he be without the money?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every manager needs money and to be fair, he's had a lot but United have spent exactly the same amount over the last 10 years (roughly a billion) and they've been nowhere near winning the league, let alone dominating. All they've got to show for it is a Europa League, one FA Cup and a League Cup I think, in 10 years. I'm telling you, Pep is the reason why City are dominating right now. If he'd joined United back in 2015/16, they'd be just as dominant. Sure, he probably can't do it as well on a shoestring but that's not the point. The point made in the original article was that money had made City dominant which isn't true as United have spent the same amount. Like I said, it wins you trophies here and there but you need more than that to be dominant. To put Pep's success down to money alone is just absurd.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you think city play the way they do you think that's just coaching?? In his first season at city he won nowt first thing he did was spend 130 million on three fullbacks he generally buys quick strong technical players at an average cost of 50 million each. That pressing game would not be effective at all without those players when they occasionally do get caught out they tactical foul offensively they generally use the same tactics too generally get to the byline whack it hard and low across the box or cut back on the floor he has an identifiable style of play and is certainly a good manager but without those players ...impossible wouldn't happen.
comment by The scenes (U22442)
posted 41 minutes ago
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pep Guardiola has spent £883.57 million in his five years at the club, including buying two players for over £60 million, five players for over £50 million, four players for over £40 million. He may not have purchased any mega money player, but he has blown all opposition out of the water with the spending power he has on tap.
You are making out that Pep is so good he is doing it on a shoestring. How good would he be without the money?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every manager needs money and to be fair, he's had a lot but United have spent exactly the same amount over the last 10 years (roughly a billion) and they've been nowhere near winning the league, let alone dominating. All they've got to show for it is a Europa League, one FA Cup and a League Cup I think, in 10 years. I'm telling you, Pep is the reason why City are dominating right now. If he'd joined United back in 2015/16, they'd be just as dominant. Sure, he probably can't do it as well on a shoestring but that's not the point. The point made in the original article was that money had made City dominant which isn't true as United have spent the same amount. Like I said, it wins you trophies here and there but you need more than that to be dominant. To put Pep's success down to money alone is just absurd.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United have not spent £883 million over five years, like Pep has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct Sanluka but UTD have spent £846 million in the last 5 years
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 56 minutes ago
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances and they didnt miss any sitters and won from a set piece. "woeful finishing" is a complete exaggeration but even still, finishing is a skill like any other part of the game so if they were guilty of woeful finishing that is a criticism of them not us being lucky. Don't get me wrong, we were barely in the game, but we actually defended pretty well.
As for the Laporte thing, Lucas may have been on the half way line but beyond Laporte he was effectively clean through & no way Laporte was catching him so who knows what may have come from that situation. It should not be dismissed so easily that City always foul to break up the counter attacks and player like Fernandino have denied belief in the past with the amount of fouls he gives away without being booked. Just more weak reffing and this whole "dont book a player early in the game" BS is inexcusable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances
------------------
Yeah, they only mustered 21 shots
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How many top class saves did Lloris have to make? Why was he not man of the match if they "tore us apart" "had 21 shots" and yet managed 1 goal from a set piece.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2 at least
Based on your shots your XG was 0.4, City was xG 3.6 or something. I know its all Hafi bullcrap but tell you that City did outclass you.
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
Hi Steve, why mention Laporte but not Regulion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
First, I can't mention everyone and everything, and felt I covered the main talking points. Not sure what you wanted me to say about Reguilion ? He certainly did not play a specific key role in the game, unlike Larporte, who was clearly a talking point.
I don't write particularly bias posts. Yes, everyone on here knows my views on the media, but I do try to comment on things that are factual, not deluded.
You need to clarify why you mentioned Reguillion in particular ??
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances and they didnt miss any sitters and won from a set piece. "woeful finishing" is a complete exaggeration but even still, finishing is a skill like any other part of the game so if they were guilty of woeful finishing that is a criticism of them not us being lucky. Don't get me wrong, we were barely in the game, but we actually defended pretty well.
As for the Laporte thing, Lucas may have been on the half way line but beyond Laporte he was effectively clean through & no way Laporte was catching him so who knows what may have come from that situation. It should not be dismissed so easily that City always foul to break up the counter attacks and player like Fernandino have denied belief in the past with the amount of fouls he gives away without being booked. Just more weak reffing and this whole "dont book a player early in the game" BS is inexcusable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances
------------------
Yeah, they only mustered 21 shots
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Look, I fully support that everyone on here is entitled to an opinion, but to say Laporte would not have made the second tackle if he had ( quite rightly ) received a card for the first tackle. That is absolute rubbish, and not even close to wishful thinking.
He made two yellow card tackles. Should have gone. End of.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by SteveF (U22027)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
Hi Steve, why mention Laporte but not Regulion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
First, I can't mention everyone and everything, and felt I covered the main talking points. Not sure what you wanted me to say about Reguilion ? He certainly did not play a specific key role in the game, unlike Larporte, who was clearly a talking point.
I don't write particularly bias posts. Yes, everyone on here knows my views on the media, but I do try to comment on things that are factual, not deluded.
You need to clarify why you mentioned Reguillion in particular ??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Give it a rest Sandy you post like a hormonal teenager
Sign in if you want to comment
Reflections on yesterday
Page 1 of 2
posted on 26/4/21
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
posted on 26/4/21
SteveF excellent article. And pretty well covered everything.
I hate the way all competitions are becoming so uncompetitive now. Yes, you get the odd fluke win by Leicester, but in the main it is the financially doped clubs that are hoovering up all the trophies.
posted on 26/4/21
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 2 minutes ago
SteveF excellent article. And pretty well covered everything.
I hate the way all competitions are becoming so uncompetitive now. Yes, you get the odd fluke win by Leicester, but in the main it is the financially doped clubs that are hoovering up all the trophies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There has been 4 different clubs win the PL title over the last 5 seasons Sandy. Then add in the fact that 4 different teams have won the FA cup in the last 5 years also. Yet again you're spouting absolute rubbish.
At least have the balls to respond to this then Sanluka
posted on 26/4/21
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pep Guardiola has spent £883.57 million in his five years at the club, including buying two players for over £60 million, five players for over £50 million, four players for over £40 million. He may not have purchased any mega money player, but he has blown all opposition out of the water with the spending power he has on tap.
You are making out that Pep is so good he is doing it on a shoestring. How good would he be without the money?
posted on 26/4/21
Regarding us not winning anything, I kind of agree with you there. I think it's wildly overplayed. The bottom line is that these days the very biggest clubs get to the finals so when we come to face them, we're never favourites to win anyway. To lose those finals were to be expected. It was par. I think we're in a difficult position. We're supposedly a member of the Premier League elite but in truth there is the top four teams in City, United, Chelsea and Liverpool and then there is a bit of a drop to Spurs and Arsenal, in terms of the traditional top six. We're Andy Murray in an era of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. We get to finals but someone much bigger comes along and snatches it from us. Sure, Arsenal won the FA Cup last year but with a bit of luck, we would have won some of the finals we've lost too. It's a combination of better teams and bad luck. Not some mystical hoodoo we can't shed.
posted on 26/4/21
Maybe, just maybe we are not good enough anymore and should look to play to come above Arsenal only!😊👍
posted on 26/4/21
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances and they didnt miss any sitters and won from a set piece. "woeful finishing" is a complete exaggeration but even still, finishing is a skill like any other part of the game so if they were guilty of woeful finishing that is a criticism of them not us being lucky. Don't get me wrong, we were barely in the game, but we actually defended pretty well.
As for the Laporte thing, Lucas may have been on the half way line but beyond Laporte he was effectively clean through & no way Laporte was catching him so who knows what may have come from that situation. It should not be dismissed so easily that City always foul to break up the counter attacks and player like Fernandino have denied belief in the past with the amount of fouls he gives away without being booked. Just more weak reffing and this whole "dont book a player early in the game" BS is inexcusable.
posted on 26/4/21
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pep Guardiola has spent £883.57 million in his five years at the club, including buying two players for over £60 million, five players for over £50 million, four players for over £40 million. He may not have purchased any mega money player, but he has blown all opposition out of the water with the spending power he has on tap.
You are making out that Pep is so good he is doing it on a shoestring. How good would he be without the money?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every manager needs money and to be fair, he's had a lot but United have spent exactly the same amount over the last 10 years (roughly a billion) and they've been nowhere near winning the league, let alone dominating. All they've got to show for it is a Europa League, one FA Cup and a League Cup I think, in 10 years. I'm telling you, Pep is the reason why City are dominating right now. If he'd joined United back in 2015/16, they'd be just as dominant. Sure, he probably can't do it as well on a shoestring but that's not the point. The point made in the original article was that money had made City dominant which isn't true as United have spent the same amount. Like I said, it wins you trophies here and there but you need more than that to be dominant. To put Pep's success down to money alone is just absurd.
posted on 26/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/4/21
comment by GTWI4T- some people deserve to get trolled (U6008)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 31 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances and they didnt miss any sitters and won from a set piece. "woeful finishing" is a complete exaggeration but even still, finishing is a skill like any other part of the game so if they were guilty of woeful finishing that is a criticism of them not us being lucky. Don't get me wrong, we were barely in the game, but we actually defended pretty well.
As for the Laporte thing, Lucas may have been on the half way line but beyond Laporte he was effectively clean through & no way Laporte was catching him so who knows what may have come from that situation. It should not be dismissed so easily that City always foul to break up the counter attacks and player like Fernandino have denied belief in the past with the amount of fouls he gives away without being booked. Just more weak reffing and this whole "dont book a player early in the game" BS is inexcusable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1) In the first half in particular every time they came forward they looked like they would score. Had Sterling made better decisions they could have been out of sight in 20 mins.
2) The missed two sitters with Sterling and Foden being six yards out and only having to not hit a defender to score. It was great defending, but there were sitters.
3) Lucas certainly wasn't clean through. You would have had a 3-2 to be fair, but Laporte was irrelevant in the way the scenario would have played out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who cares!!
Onwards!
posted on 26/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/4/21
Hi Steve, why mention Laporte but not Regulion?
posted on 26/4/21
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances and they didnt miss any sitters and won from a set piece. "woeful finishing" is a complete exaggeration but even still, finishing is a skill like any other part of the game so if they were guilty of woeful finishing that is a criticism of them not us being lucky. Don't get me wrong, we were barely in the game, but we actually defended pretty well.
As for the Laporte thing, Lucas may have been on the half way line but beyond Laporte he was effectively clean through & no way Laporte was catching him so who knows what may have come from that situation. It should not be dismissed so easily that City always foul to break up the counter attacks and player like Fernandino have denied belief in the past with the amount of fouls he gives away without being booked. Just more weak reffing and this whole "dont book a player early in the game" BS is inexcusable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances
------------------
Yeah, they only mustered 21 shots
posted on 26/4/21
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pep Guardiola has spent £883.57 million in his five years at the club, including buying two players for over £60 million, five players for over £50 million, four players for over £40 million. He may not have purchased any mega money player, but he has blown all opposition out of the water with the spending power he has on tap.
You are making out that Pep is so good he is doing it on a shoestring. How good would he be without the money?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every manager needs money and to be fair, he's had a lot but United have spent exactly the same amount over the last 10 years (roughly a billion) and they've been nowhere near winning the league, let alone dominating. All they've got to show for it is a Europa League, one FA Cup and a League Cup I think, in 10 years. I'm telling you, Pep is the reason why City are dominating right now. If he'd joined United back in 2015/16, they'd be just as dominant. Sure, he probably can't do it as well on a shoestring but that's not the point. The point made in the original article was that money had made City dominant which isn't true as United have spent the same amount. Like I said, it wins you trophies here and there but you need more than that to be dominant. To put Pep's success down to money alone is just absurd.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United have not spent £883 million over five years, like Pep has.
posted on 26/4/21
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pep Guardiola has spent £883.57 million in his five years at the club, including buying two players for over £60 million, five players for over £50 million, four players for over £40 million. He may not have purchased any mega money player, but he has blown all opposition out of the water with the spending power he has on tap.
You are making out that Pep is so good he is doing it on a shoestring. How good would he be without the money?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every manager needs money and to be fair, he's had a lot but United have spent exactly the same amount over the last 10 years (roughly a billion) and they've been nowhere near winning the league, let alone dominating. All they've got to show for it is a Europa League, one FA Cup and a League Cup I think, in 10 years. I'm telling you, Pep is the reason why City are dominating right now. If he'd joined United back in 2015/16, they'd be just as dominant. Sure, he probably can't do it as well on a shoestring but that's not the point. The point made in the original article was that money had made City dominant which isn't true as United have spent the same amount. Like I said, it wins you trophies here and there but you need more than that to be dominant. To put Pep's success down to money alone is just absurd.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United have not spent £883 million over five years, like Pep has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct Sanluka but UTD have spent £846 million in the last 5 years
posted on 26/4/21
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances and they didnt miss any sitters and won from a set piece. "woeful finishing" is a complete exaggeration but even still, finishing is a skill like any other part of the game so if they were guilty of woeful finishing that is a criticism of them not us being lucky. Don't get me wrong, we were barely in the game, but we actually defended pretty well.
As for the Laporte thing, Lucas may have been on the half way line but beyond Laporte he was effectively clean through & no way Laporte was catching him so who knows what may have come from that situation. It should not be dismissed so easily that City always foul to break up the counter attacks and player like Fernandino have denied belief in the past with the amount of fouls he gives away without being booked. Just more weak reffing and this whole "dont book a player early in the game" BS is inexcusable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances
------------------
Yeah, they only mustered 21 shots
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How many top class saves did Lloris have to make? Why was he not man of the match if they "tore us apart" "had 21 shots" and yet managed 1 goal from a set piece.
posted on 26/4/21
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pep Guardiola has spent £883.57 million in his five years at the club, including buying two players for over £60 million, five players for over £50 million, four players for over £40 million. He may not have purchased any mega money player, but he has blown all opposition out of the water with the spending power he has on tap.
You are making out that Pep is so good he is doing it on a shoestring. How good would he be without the money?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every manager needs money and to be fair, he's had a lot but United have spent exactly the same amount over the last 10 years (roughly a billion) and they've been nowhere near winning the league, let alone dominating. All they've got to show for it is a Europa League, one FA Cup and a League Cup I think, in 10 years. I'm telling you, Pep is the reason why City are dominating right now. If he'd joined United back in 2015/16, they'd be just as dominant. Sure, he probably can't do it as well on a shoestring but that's not the point. The point made in the original article was that money had made City dominant which isn't true as United have spent the same amount. Like I said, it wins you trophies here and there but you need more than that to be dominant. To put Pep's success down to money alone is just absurd.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you think city play the way they do you think that's just coaching?? In his first season at city he won nowt first thing he did was spend 130 million on three fullbacks he generally buys quick strong technical players at an average cost of 50 million each. That pressing game would not be effective at all without those players when they occasionally do get caught out they tactical foul offensively they generally use the same tactics too generally get to the byline whack it hard and low across the box or cut back on the floor he has an identifiable style of play and is certainly a good manager but without those players ...impossible wouldn't happen.
posted on 26/4/21
comment by The scenes (U22442)
posted 41 minutes ago
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, Ryan Mason, super league boss for 24 hours (U20567)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pep Guardiola has spent £883.57 million in his five years at the club, including buying two players for over £60 million, five players for over £50 million, four players for over £40 million. He may not have purchased any mega money player, but he has blown all opposition out of the water with the spending power he has on tap.
You are making out that Pep is so good he is doing it on a shoestring. How good would he be without the money?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every manager needs money and to be fair, he's had a lot but United have spent exactly the same amount over the last 10 years (roughly a billion) and they've been nowhere near winning the league, let alone dominating. All they've got to show for it is a Europa League, one FA Cup and a League Cup I think, in 10 years. I'm telling you, Pep is the reason why City are dominating right now. If he'd joined United back in 2015/16, they'd be just as dominant. Sure, he probably can't do it as well on a shoestring but that's not the point. The point made in the original article was that money had made City dominant which isn't true as United have spent the same amount. Like I said, it wins you trophies here and there but you need more than that to be dominant. To put Pep's success down to money alone is just absurd.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United have not spent £883 million over five years, like Pep has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct Sanluka but UTD have spent £846 million in the last 5 years
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 26/4/21
0.04 XG
posted on 26/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/4/21
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 56 minutes ago
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances and they didnt miss any sitters and won from a set piece. "woeful finishing" is a complete exaggeration but even still, finishing is a skill like any other part of the game so if they were guilty of woeful finishing that is a criticism of them not us being lucky. Don't get me wrong, we were barely in the game, but we actually defended pretty well.
As for the Laporte thing, Lucas may have been on the half way line but beyond Laporte he was effectively clean through & no way Laporte was catching him so who knows what may have come from that situation. It should not be dismissed so easily that City always foul to break up the counter attacks and player like Fernandino have denied belief in the past with the amount of fouls he gives away without being booked. Just more weak reffing and this whole "dont book a player early in the game" BS is inexcusable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances
------------------
Yeah, they only mustered 21 shots
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How many top class saves did Lloris have to make? Why was he not man of the match if they "tore us apart" "had 21 shots" and yet managed 1 goal from a set piece.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2 at least
Based on your shots your XG was 0.4, City was xG 3.6 or something. I know its all Hafi bullcrap but tell you that City did outclass you.
posted on 26/4/21
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
Hi Steve, why mention Laporte but not Regulion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
First, I can't mention everyone and everything, and felt I covered the main talking points. Not sure what you wanted me to say about Reguilion ? He certainly did not play a specific key role in the game, unlike Larporte, who was clearly a talking point.
I don't write particularly bias posts. Yes, everyone on here knows my views on the media, but I do try to comment on things that are factual, not deluded.
You need to clarify why you mentioned Reguillion in particular ??
posted on 26/4/21
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why is that Laporte thing even a debate? Do you really think if he was on a yellow for the first he would have committed the foul that led to the second? Moura was on the halfway line. If Laporte had let him go on account of him being on a yellow it's extremely doubtful anything would have come of it anyway. It's naive to suggest that the tackle would have remained the same. City absolutely tore us apart and were it not for woeful finishing, brilliant goalkeeping and heroic defending, it would have been a cricket score. We have no grounds to moan about decisions.
On your point about City's dominance - yes they spend big but no bigger than United and Chelsea, who in recent years (apart from this one with United) we've competed closely with in the league. There's one reason and one reason only (no, I'm not Ted Hastings) why City are as dominant as they are - Pep Guardiola. He won't be there forever. Prior to his arrival, sure they won things, but they certainly weren't dominant. That will change eventually. We should be using it as an inspiration rather than poking it with a stick. I think the most they've spent on one player is for Dias at around £60m. That's the same as Ndombele roughly. It's about getting every area right. Owners, recruitment, manager, style of play. Sure money helps but whilst it can buy you trophies, it can't buy domination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances and they didnt miss any sitters and won from a set piece. "woeful finishing" is a complete exaggeration but even still, finishing is a skill like any other part of the game so if they were guilty of woeful finishing that is a criticism of them not us being lucky. Don't get me wrong, we were barely in the game, but we actually defended pretty well.
As for the Laporte thing, Lucas may have been on the half way line but beyond Laporte he was effectively clean through & no way Laporte was catching him so who knows what may have come from that situation. It should not be dismissed so easily that City always foul to break up the counter attacks and player like Fernandino have denied belief in the past with the amount of fouls he gives away without being booked. Just more weak reffing and this whole "dont book a player early in the game" BS is inexcusable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City did not tear us apart! They dominated the ball but they didnt create a huge amount of chances
------------------
Yeah, they only mustered 21 shots
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Look, I fully support that everyone on here is entitled to an opinion, but to say Laporte would not have made the second tackle if he had ( quite rightly ) received a card for the first tackle. That is absolute rubbish, and not even close to wishful thinking.
He made two yellow card tackles. Should have gone. End of.
posted on 26/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/4/21
comment by SteveF (U22027)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
Hi Steve, why mention Laporte but not Regulion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
First, I can't mention everyone and everything, and felt I covered the main talking points. Not sure what you wanted me to say about Reguilion ? He certainly did not play a specific key role in the game, unlike Larporte, who was clearly a talking point.
I don't write particularly bias posts. Yes, everyone on here knows my views on the media, but I do try to comment on things that are factual, not deluded.
You need to clarify why you mentioned Reguillion in particular ??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Give it a rest Sandy you post like a hormonal teenager
Page 1 of 2