Champions League 2012-13 Discussion

[Crayo]

Hate him now.

 

[Lacky]

Hate him now.

Does that mean you hate me? :upset:

 

[Crayo]

ofc ipebomb:

Lol jokes, Leeds sucks but Richards is a God.

 

[Lacky]

Richard is a big god. Don't know how he's so fast for his size. :

 

[Rysenberg]

Was a decent game tonight between Ajax and shitty. I was actually really impressed with the way City played in the first half, despite the fact they had little possession they pretty much cruised throughout until they conceded a fairly cheap goal from a defensive perspective - Clichy lets his man get a ball in extremely easily and they then let De Jong get enough time to get a shot away - was a fantastic finish though. Ajax played some decent stuff at times but on the main were largely ineffective. They played a lot of neat stuff in the middle of the park, but they rarely got themselves into City's box and must have passed the ball back to their keeper at least 15 times in the first half alone. They also looked very vulnerable at the back. Their full backs play far too far forward and at times it was basically 4 City players on the two centre halfs which is just not good enough. IMO they should be thankful they went into half time 1-1.

The second half City started really well I thought. They didn't allow Ajax to play so easily around the back and were pressing really high up the pitch which seemed to be going pretty well for them. However, in the end Zonal marking was what fucking killed them. It is so painfully stupid and I can't believe that somebody who is meant to be one of the top managers in the world deploys such a god awful system. Lescott ended up getting beaten by somebody who is much weaker in the air than him because he couldn't get close enough to him, along with the uncertainty of 'Should I be the one going for this going for this ball or is it going in my teammate's area?' rather than simply 'Right this is going to my man, I'm winning this ball or at least making it awkward for my opponent'. Oh, and he also did the absolutely criminal thing which is not putting a man on the back post, Clichy - instead of being in a useless position - may have been able to stop a goal if he was placed there. But yeah, I say zonal marking was what killed them, but the only reason I said that is because it led Mancini to make a horrendous tactical decision.

He goes from a fairly balanced 4-3-1-2 to a god-knows-what-the-fuck-it-was. You had two centre halfs playing and Clichy just confused playing everyone onside although the time(essentially his normal role). So yeah, basically from that point on City had absolutely no chance and just made it ridiculously easy for Ajax who ended up getting a third from someone being in a bad position for City playing everyone onside. Guess who? Gael Clichy!

Awful result for City who should have beaten that Ajax side easily. IMHO Mancini's errors were what led them to defeat. City's midfield is so much stronger than Ajax's who had Christian Poulsen in their team for christ's sake! Still, take nothing away from Ajax, they were definitely worth their win tonight and could turn into a very decent and entertaining team if they can hold onto some of their young players.

 

[Lacky]

:bury:

 

[Rysenberg]

:bury:

I was quite nice to City, just not Mankini :

 

[Lacky]

You called us "Shitty" ity:

 

[Rysenberg]

You called us "Shitty" ity:

Oh yeah 1: My Dad and I always call them that :

 

[Lacky]

Well that's not nice. :Cry:

But yes, we played shit. I hope we get knocked out :

 

[Crayo]

Was a decent game tonight between Ajax and shitty. I was actually really impressed with the way City played in the first half, despite the fact they had little possession they pretty much cruised throughout until they conceded a fairly cheap goal from a defensive perspective - Clichy lets his man get a ball in extremely easily and they then let De Jong get enough time to get a shot away - was a fantastic finish though. Ajax played some decent stuff at times but on the main were largely ineffective. They played a lot of neat stuff in the middle of the park, but they rarely got themselves into City's box and must have passed the ball back to their keeper at least 15 times in the first half alone. They also looked very vulnerable at the back. Their full backs play far too far forward and at times it was basically 4 City players on the two centre halfs which is just not good enough. IMO they should be thankful they went into half time 1-1.

I'm sorry but I really disagree with this analogy. Let's face it, Ajax are no Dortmund or Madrid, they're a weak Dutch team with an average age of like 20-21, who's most experienced player was like Ryan Babel right? I completely agree that they lacked any clear cut chances but they had no striker, Eriksen who is a CAM was playing up front, similar to Spains 4-6 formation. Why did they chuck in the extra man? To keep possession. Ajax were fucking incredible with the ball and have been so underrated by the pundits tonight. Did you see how they played at the back? City had one chance in 21 minutes and that was the goal, so no way should Ajax be thankful it was only 1-1 lol.

City's team is filled with incredible players so to concede like 60% possession and have one shot in the first half is nothing more than unacceptable. Ajax did look vulnerable at the back but they put both full backs forward, they should be praised for their ambition, they're at home against one of the best clubs in the world, they needed to attack to get anything. The one praise I give City is their defending in the first half, especially Clichy. It was a mixture between Ajax not finding the clinical ball (until the goal) and City's good defending that kept it at 1-1.

The second half City started really well I thought. They didn't allow Ajax to play so easily around the back and were pressing really high up the pitch which seemed to be going pretty well for them. However, in the end Zonal marking was what fucking killed them. It is so painfully stupid and I can't believe that somebody who is meant to be one of the top managers in the world deploys such a god awful system. Lescott ended up getting beaten by somebody who is much weaker in the air than him because he couldn't get close enough to him, along with the uncertainty of 'Should I be the one going for this going for this ball or is it going in my teammate's area?' rather than simply 'Right this is going to my man, I'm winning this ball or at least making it awkward for my opponent'. Oh, and he also did the absolutely criminal thing which is not putting a man on the back post, Clichy - instead of being in a useless position - may have been able to stop a goal if he was placed there. But yeah, I say zonal marking was what killed them, but the only reason I said that is because it led Mancini to make a horrendous tactical decision.

City did start well for like the first 5 minutes, they had a really good chance to score. Then -- again -- it was all Ajax. City conceded a terrible goal, the delivery was sweet but yeah the zonal marking system they use just was not working, but even with that system to concede against a TINY team when you have a MASSIVE team is again unacceptable and if it were United I would be absolutely raging.

He goes from a fairly balanced 4-3-1-2 to a god-knows-what-the-fuck-it-was. You had two centre halfs playing and Clichy just confused playing everyone onside although the time(essentially his normal role). So yeah, basically from that point on City had absolutely no chance and just made it ridiculously easy for Ajax who ended up getting a third from someone being in a bad position for City playing everyone onside. Guess who? Gael Clichy!

Whilst I agree that Mancini needs to fist the idea of 3 at the back with a rusty spoon, the formation change is NOT what lead to City's demise as Mancini said so correctly in his interview. City were already 2-1 down before that change AND had conceded an unhealthy amount of shots on their goal and still with like 40% possession. Something needed to change, but he got it wrong. You have Carlos Tevez on the bench and Aguero on the pitch, they're a lethal partnership, I would have taken off Dzeko who was relatively poor all night and linked them two up and done what City usually do - lump Yaya Toure forward.

Awful result for City who should have beaten that Ajax side easily. IMHO Mancini's errors were what led them to defeat. City's midfield is so much stronger than Ajax's who had Christian Poulsen in their team for christ's sake! Still, take nothing away from Ajax, they were definitely worth their win tonight and could turn into a very decent and entertaining team if they can hold onto some of their young players.

City should have gone there and won healthily, the style of football Ajax were playing is what City should be playing. Who is to blame for this? Maybe a bit of Mancini for his selection (Milner and Barry?) and then switching to a horrible formation which resulted in the third goal, but the ultimate blame goes on the players who got outplayed by a team filled with inexperienced players who have been taught to play football the right way. Yes City were poor, but Ajax were exceptional.

 

[Rysenberg]

I'm sorry but I really disagree with this analogy. Let's face it, Ajax are no Dortmund or Madrid, they're a weak Dutch team with an average age of like 20-21, who's most experienced player was like Ryan Babel right? I completely agree that they lacked any clear cut chances but they had no striker, Eriksen who is a CAM was playing up front, similar to Spains 4-6 formation. Why did they chuck in the extra man? To keep possession. Ajax were fucking incredible with the ball and have been so underrated by the pundits tonight. Did you see how they played at the back? City had one chance in 21 minutes and that was the goal, so no way should Ajax be thankful it was only 1-1 lol.

City's team is filled with incredible players so to concede like 60% possession and have one shot in the first half is nothing more than unacceptable. Ajax did look vulnerable at the back but they put both full backs forward, they should be praised for their ambition, they're at home against one of the best clubs in the world, they needed to attack to get anything. The one praise I give City is their defending in the first half, especially Clichy. It was a mixture between Ajax not finding the clinical ball (until the goal) and City's good defending that kept it at 1-1.

You see I totally disagree with this. Ajax's style of play looks fantastic and all that, but it's very ineffective when trying to score goals. City played very well in the first half, they sat back and contained them whilst they played passes within the midfield, hardly threatening. Up until Ajax scored City pressed them enough and if they had continued doing so and didn't allow their guy on the right so much time to pick out a pass/get a ball in then they would have gone in at half time 0-1 up, and IMO would have probably gone on to win the game. Ajax passing and attacking play from their full backs is nice to watch at times and yeah, they do deserve respect for doing that in a European competition, but it doesn't make it a good style of play. They SHOULD be thankful it was 1-1, committing that many men forward is absolutely suicidal and the fact that City only needed to attack once to get a goal kind of tells its own story. Ajax had so much possession - yet they only had one decent chance the whole half as well?

As for Clichy I just don't rate him at all. He had tough opponents but he sat too deep on a number of occasions and allowed their right player to get a ball in without any pressure on him which turned out to be extremely costly.

City did start well for like the first 5 minutes, they had a really good chance to score. Then -- again -- it was all Ajax. City conceded a terrible goal, the delivery was sweet but yeah the zonal marking system they use just was not working, but even with that system to concede against a TINY team when you have a MASSIVE team is again unacceptable and if it were United I would be absolutely raging.

It is probably poor from the defenders as well but Mancini is definitely the one that needs to take the blame for that one. If that was man marking and there was a man on the post then there's absolutely no way that would have ended up being a goal.

Whilst I agree that Mancini needs to fist the idea of 3 at the back with a rusty spoon, the formation change is NOT what lead to City's demise as Mancini said so correctly in his interview. City were already 2-1 down before that change AND had conceded an unhealthy amount of shots on their goal and still with like 40% possession. Something needed to change, but he got it wrong. You have Carlos Tevez on the bench and Aguero on the pitch, they're a lethal partnership, I would have taken off Dzeko who was relatively poor all night and linked them two up and done what City usually do - lump Yaya Toure forward.

I wouldn't have changed anything from 1st-60th minute tactics wise for City besides awful marking system. Up until that second goal City - tactics wise - had played the game to absolute perfection as when they were one up they allowed Ajax to keep possession whilst not being a threat, obviously until City's defence fucked up and allowed them the opportunity to score. They then started the second half well putting more pressure on them as City knew that they needed a goal, and I honestly think they would have gotten one if Mancini had just kept the 4-2-3-1 rather than changing to the god-knows-what-the-fuck-it-was then they would have not lost that all important third goal which killed the game.

And I thought Dzeko should have been subbed as well. Well, in saying that just about the only thing possible in that god awful formation was humping the ball forward and I guess he was the best man to win the ball for them, so I can kind of understand why he did keep him on; but I agree.

City should have gone there and won healthily, the style of football Ajax were playing is what City should be playing. Who is to blame for this? Maybe a bit of Mancini for his selection (Milner and Barry?) and then switching to a horrible formation which resulted in the third goal, but the ultimate blame goes on the players who got outplayed by a team filled with inexperienced players who have been taught to play football the right way. Yes City were poor, but Ajax were exceptional.

The only point where the players cost City was the first goal. Up until that point they did their jobs well but the first as I've said multiple times was their fault. However the second and third were both a direct result of Mancini's tactical ineptitude. As I said, Ajax were worth their win and could turn out to be a good side, but they were nothing special tonight and a team that were laid out better could have beaten them comfortably tonight.

 

[Crayo]

You see I totally disagree with this. Ajax's style of play looks fantastic and all that, but it's very ineffective when trying to score goals. City played very well in the first half, they sat back and contained them whilst they played passes within the midfield, hardly threatening. Up until Ajax scored City pressed them enough and if they had continued doing so and didn't allow their guy on the right so much time to pick out a pass/get a ball in then they would have gone in at half time 0-1 up, and IMO would have probably gone on to win the game. Ajax passing and attacking play from their full backs is nice to watch at times and yeah, they do deserve respect for doing that in a European competition, but it doesn't make it a good style of play. They SHOULD be thankful it was 1-1, committing that many men forward is absolutely suicidal and the fact that City only needed to attack once to get a goal kind of tells its own story. Ajax had so much possession - yet they only had one decent chance the whole half as well?

It was ineffective because they had no striker and no one putting in the clinical ball, the style of play itself was obviously effective because Manchester City -- one of the greatest squads in the world -- had like 40% possession and one shot on target in the first half. If that's not effective then I'm unsure what is. I'm flabbergasted on how Ajax should be thankful it was only 1 City scored when the goal they conceded was City's only shot in the first half and it came because of a wonder pass from Michael Richards that opened them up... I just don't understand that logic personally.

Ajax didn't do anything different than what Dortmund did against City on THEIR turf, it's a style that City, United, Barca, Madrid and Dortmund all do, you commit your full backs forward. City had one counter attack in the first half, should Ajax regret their whole style of play which dominated the premier league champions because of one wonder pass? Not at all. Also, it depends on what defines a chance on goal. They had quite a few shots on City's goal and were certainly in opportunities, they were just wasteful in the very final third. The style that got there was absolutely spot on and they deserved the goal they got, something you can't say for City unless you think the premier league champions going to defend against a weak Dutch team is acceptable football for a club of that stature.

As for Clichy I just don't rate him at all. He had tough opponents but he sat too deep on a number of occasions and allowed their right player to get a ball in without any pressure on him which turned out to be extremely costly.


It is probably poor from the defenders as well but Mancini is definitely the one that needs to take the blame for that one. If that was man marking and there was a man on the post then there's absolutely no way that would have ended up being a goal.

Clichy had a blinding first half except for the goal maybe. Ajax's approach play ALL came from the right hand side (which is City's left) and Clichy won every single battle, they couldn't get past him. The sky pundits said exactly the same, as soon as he was out of position though as a CB he became their worst player.

Agreed on the Mancini point, no idea why a massive team like City need to play Zonal against -- let's face it -- a team of midgets.

I wouldn't have changed anything from 1st-60th minute tactics wise for City besides awful marking system. Up until that second goal City - tactics wise - had played the game to absolute perfection as when they were one up they allowed Ajax to keep possession whilst not being a threat, obviously until City's defence fucked up and allowed them the opportunity to score. They then started the second half well putting more pressure on them as City knew that they needed a goal, and I honestly think they would have gotten one if Mancini had just kept the 4-2-3-1 rather than changing to the god-knows-what-the-fuck-it-was then they would have not lost that all important third goal which killed the game.

Disagreed again here. Ajax were threatening throughout the whole game, they just couldn't get that ball in. City weren't going to win by getting dominated in their own half. It wasn't like Ajax were passing it around their defenders and building possession up, all the possession was in City's final third, a goal was inevitable.

Whether City would have got one if they stuck is debatable, I saw no evidence (apart from the first attack in the second half) that they were going to go on and score. As soon as Kolarov (I think) came on, that's when they began to look threatening with crosses. Other than that they were seriously poor going forward with Yaya flopping in Europe again, and Milner and Barry possibly being the worst attacking midfielders in life. Nasri was their only threat throughout the game, and he's off and on too. Ajax pressed beautifully.

And I thought Dzeko should have been subbed as well. Well, in saying that just about the only thing possible in that god awful formation was humping the ball forward and I guess he was the best man to win the ball for them, so I can kind of understand why he did keep him on; but I agree.

Yeah, and the funny thing was, they didn't even lump the ball to him. They kept playing him in behind and hoping his AMAZING PACE will win them the game :haha:. That explained Manchester City, they were so unadventurous and maybe that's because Silva wasn't playing and Aguero was shoved on the left hand side.

The only point where the players cost City was the first goal. Up until that point they did their jobs well but the first as I've said multiple times was their fault. However the second and third were both a direct result of Mancini's tactical ineptitude. As I said, Ajax were worth their win and could turn out to be a good side, but they were nothing special tonight and a team that were laid out better could have beaten them comfortably tonight.

I'm sorry but bad tactics or not, a team with Yaya Toure, Lescott, Kompany, Richards, Dzeko and Barry should NOT be conceding from a corner against an absolutely tiny weak Ajax team, zonal marking or not.

It's fun to debate, but honestly, Ajax outplayed City. City had a total of like 4 formations played and they had a front 5 in the end, and Ajax still cruised. They were outplayed. I don't think you can blame Mancini for a team of 11 superstars performing badly to be honest, bad tactics or not. As I said before, Ajax were exceptional, City were horrible, and I think most City fans would say the same thing. I can not defend going to Ajax and defending. If it were United, we would have concede 5 goals and scored 6. Why? Because our defending is in shambles but we go and attack because our attack force is insane. City has an awesome defensive unit AND an awesome attacking unit. How can a team with Yaya Toure, Aguero, Dzeko and Nasri all starting with Tevez, Balotelli and Kolarov on the bench possibly seek to defend against Ajax? No way in my books.

Really fun to debate this though.

 

[Rysenberg]

It was ineffective because they had no striker and no one putting in the clinical ball, the style of play itself was obviously effective because Manchester City -- one of the greatest squads in the world -- had like 40% possession and one shot on target in the first half. If that's not effective then I'm unsure what is. I'm flabbergasted on how Ajax should be thankful it was only 1 City scored when the goal they conceded was City's only shot in the first half and it came because of a wonder pass from Michael Richards that opened them up... I just don't understand that logic personally.

Ajax didn't do anything different than what Dortmund did against City on THEIR turf, it's a style that City, United, Barca, Madrid and Dortmund all do, you commit your full backs forward. City had one counter attack in the first half, should Ajax regret their whole style of play which dominated the premier league champions because of one wonder pass? Not at all. Also, it depends on what defines a chance on goal. They had quite a few shots on City's goal and were certainly in opportunities, they were just wasteful in the very final third. The style that got there was absolutely spot on and they deserved the goal they got, something you can't say for City unless you think the premier league champions going to defend against a weak Dutch team is acceptable football for a club of that stature.

It's a pretty unusual view, but I just don't understand the love for possession at all. My Uncle, who's job is to bet on football, has an extremely complicated formula to figure out who he should put money on for games which incorporates a lot of the match stats - but not possession. You can have all the possession in the world but if you don't do anything signficant(sp) with it then it's totally irrelevant. Despite only having 40% possession Man City were comfortable throughout that first half in my opinion and possibly, contrary to what I just stated, could have attacked them slightly more in an attempt to get a second goal and pounce on the vulnerability of the Ajax defence.

Man Utd, Barca(In saying that, probably not the best example for this at the moment given the amount they have been conceding!) and Madrid will all keep a couple of men back covering if they send their full backs forward. It's just standard football practice for me that, unless you're desperately chasing a game, if your full back bombs forward you take a CM back to cover, and Ajax didn't do this which left their defence totally exposed a few times. Far too risky and that's why I believe they were fortunate to go in at 1-1, one counter attack from City and it could have easily been 2-0.

Clichy had a blinding first half except for the goal maybe. Ajax's approach play ALL came from the right hand side (which is City's left) and Clichy won every single battle, they couldn't get past him. The sky pundits said exactly the same, as soon as he was out of position though as a CB he became their worst player.

I thought he was pish, as I've said he sat back far too deep and was the main reason they didn't go into half time winning. Yeah he was even worse second but as you say that wasn't really his fault.

Agreed on the Mancini point, no idea why a massive team like City need to play Zonal against -- let's face it -- a team of midgets.

Yup.

Disagreed again here. Ajax were threatening throughout the whole game, they just couldn't get that ball in. City weren't going to win by getting dominated in their own half. It wasn't like Ajax were passing it around their defenders and building possession up, all the possession was in City's final third, a goal was inevitable.

But they weren't being dominated at all that's the thing. They weren't ball chasing or being pissed around with by Ajax like they should have been doing, Ajax spent the majority of their time passing the ball around midfield and defence (again, the amount of backpasses) and only penetrated (teehee) City's defence once - which De jong finished like a mother fucking boss.

In fact, just had a brief look at the stats on BBC

Whether City would have got one if they stuck is debatable, I saw no evidence (apart from the first attack in the second half) that they were going to go on and score. As soon as Kolarov (I think) came on, that's when they began to look threatening with crosses. Other than that they were seriously poor going forward with Yaya flopping in Europe again, and Milner and Barry possibly being the worst attacking midfielders in life. Nasri was their only threat throughout the game, and he's off and on too. Ajax pressed beautifully.

I think they easily could have got the win. I agree Yaya let them down big time tonight, a few bilstering(sp) runs from him could have raped the Ajax back line tonight. I agree that Milner is gash and is not exactly the guy to play off of Gareth Barry who can do a job if accompanied by an alright player.

Yeah, and the funny thing was, they didn't even lump the ball to him. They kept playing him in behind and hoping his AMAZING PACE will win them the game :haha:. That explained Manchester City, they were so unadventurous and maybe that's because Silva wasn't playing and Aguero was shoved on the left hand side.

Yeah that was all Blue. I tend not to notice player choice with any team that isn't Hibs as I don't follow them close enough but I agree that does sound pretty awful. And yeah god knows why Mancini signed Dzeko, he's talented as hell but he has no idea how to play to his strengths.

[/quote]

I'm sorry but bad tactics or not, a team with Yaya Toure, Lescott, Kompany, Richards, Dzeko and Barry should NOT be conceding from a corner against an absolutely tiny weak Ajax team, zonal marking or not.

They most certainly shouldn't, but I find it hard to blame them in that case because it's such a shambolic system. Lescott probably should have done better though.

It's fun to debate, but honestly, Ajax outplayed City. City had a total of like 4 formations played and they had a front 5 in the end, and Ajax still cruised. They were outplayed. I don't think you can blame Mancini for a team of 11 superstars performing badly to be honest, bad tactics or not. As I said before, Ajax were exceptional, City were horrible, and I think most City fans would say the same thing. I can not defend going to Ajax and defending. If it were United, we would have concede 5 goals and scored 6. Why? Because our defending is in shambles but we go and attack because our attack force is insane. City has an awesome defensive unit AND an awesome attacking unit. How can a team with Yaya Toure, Aguero, Dzeko and Nasri all starting with Tevez, Balotelli and Kolarov on the bench possibly seek to defend against Ajax? No way in my books.

Really fun to debate this though.

Yeah but the game was literally thrown away by managerial mistakes for the 2nd and 3rd goals. He took off Lescott - a big Centre half - and plays CLichy there instead... WTF? Then he basically removed their midfield and left them with no option but to pass the ball in their own half until eventually they had to hoof it. Mancini seemed to lack any sort of real plan and that formation at the end was sheer desperation which the players cannot be blamed for at all. It made it all too easy for Ajax in the end.

Agreed, it is, hands are knackered lol.

 

[Crayo]

It's a pretty unusual view, but I just don't understand the love for possession at all. My Uncle, who's job is to bet on football, has an extremely complicated formula to figure out who he should put money on for games which incorporates a lot of the match stats - but not possession. You can have all the possession in the world but if you don't do anything signficant(sp) with it then it's totally irrelevant. Despite only having 40% possession Man City were comfortable throughout that first half in my opinion and possibly, contrary to what I just stated, could have attacked them slightly more in an attempt to get a second goal and pounce on the vulnerability of the Ajax defence.

Man Utd, Barca(In saying that, probably not the best example for this at the moment given the amount they have been conceding!) and Madrid will all keep a couple of men back covering if they send their full backs forward. It's just standard football practice for me that, unless you're desperately chasing a game, if your full back bombs forward you take a CM back to cover, and Ajax didn't do this which left their defence totally exposed a few times. Far too risky and that's why I believe they were fortunate to go in at 1-1, one counter attack from City and it could have easily been 2-0.

I don't think we'll ever agree on the possession front, but to your point about them not having anyone back, urm, Poulsen? He was their CDM and very rarely went forward. He sat when the full backs went forward like all the big clubs do. City didn't have many counter-attacks to be honest so I don't see how that's even a talking point, Ajax were really comfortable for the majority.

I thought he was pish, as I've said he sat back far too deep and was the main reason they didn't go into half time winning. Yeah he was even worse second but as you say that wasn't really his fault.

How could he go forward when Ajax were strolling past their whole team with their incredible football? If he went forward, then the whole right hand side where Ajax were really pushing would have been completely vulnerable. It would have been Blue for Clichy to go forward.

But they weren't being dominated at all that's the thing. They weren't ball chasing or being pissed around with by Ajax like they should have been doing, Ajax spent the majority of their time passing the ball around midfield and defence (again, the amount of backpasses) and only penetrated (teehee) City's defence once - which De jong finished like a mother fucking boss.

In fact, just had a brief look at the stats on BBC

Stats are stats, did you see the game? Ajax were dominating son. They weren't passing it around the defence at all, the only time they did that was the right time which was incredibly brave. City were pressing high and instead of launching it forward to a team of giants, they passed round them EVERY TIME like Barca do and Liverpool try to do but fail every week (lol). Ajax had more shots (1 more all be it) and had 6 on target against City. City only had the same because of their spurt in the second half where all teams sit back like Ajax did eventually and City got in because they had like EVERYONE forward lol. Ajax outplayed them, can you argue against that?

I think they easily could have got the win. I agree Yaya let them down big time tonight, a few bilstering(sp) runs from him could have raped the Ajax back line tonight. I agree that Milner is gash and is not exactly the guy to play off of Gareth Barry who can do a job if accompanied by an alright player.

They could have, actually, SHOULD have got the win there tonight, but they were outplayed. The march shouldn't even be competitive, this is an Ajax side who field their developmental squad. Their most experienced player in Vertongen (23 years old) and captain was sold to Tottenham, that's what side Ajax are, a selling team. City should have gone there, had 60% possession and came away with a 2-0 or 3-0 win, while dominating them with power. What happened was Ajax out-passed them and out-played them. They had more work ethic. More desire. Hats off to them.

Yeah that was all Blue. I tend not to notice player choice with any team that isn't Hibs as I don't follow them close enough but I agree that does sound pretty awful. And yeah god knows why Mancini signed Dzeko, he's talented as hell but he has no idea how to play to his strengths.

Lol this. Dzeko is just their super sub at the moment unfortunately.

They most certainly shouldn't, but I find it hard to blame them in that case because it's such a shambolic system. Lescott probably should have done better though.

Yeah, it was a mixture of the system and the defenders, either way it shouldn't have gone in. Ajax did well to get the corner, City did poor to concede it, which plays into my point of Ajax played exceptional and City played poor.

Yeah but the game was literally thrown away by managerial mistakes for the 2nd and 3rd goals. He took off Lescott - a big Centre half - and plays CLichy there instead... WTF? Then he basically removed their midfield and left them with no option but to pass the ball in their own half until eventually they had to hoof it. Mancini seemed to lack any sort of real plan and that formation at the end was sheer desperation which the players cannot be blamed for at all. It made it all too easy for Ajax in the end.

Agreed, it is, hands are knackered lol.

I actually understand taking Lescott off. Clichy CAN play right back and if you have Kolarov as left back with Kompany and Richards as centre backs then you have a very attacking defence if that makes sense. Kolarov especially is great going forward, where as Lescott literally looks like he's shit himself whenever he's given the ball. But to play three at the back with a fast full back as a centre half is just ridiculous.

And yeah, Mancini basically made it "just attack the fuck out of them" when they were 3-1 down. It shouldn't have got to that point, but Ajax were just so good with the ball. Let's not forget that City play possession football, that IS their style, that's what won them the league. Ajax were just better at it.

Fingers are aching, fuck you :tough:.