Manchester City v Arsenal

Xavi6

allybhoy wrote: »

Dont think 3nill was too harsh to be honest, could and probably should have been more, missed peno and arsenal were so so wasteful in front of goal. know city had a few chances aswell but everytime arsenal went forward they looked like scoring. It was like playing fifa with the shoot button broken.

I don't disagree, just think we were very good having to play so long shorthanded. There were some super individual performances and we just go out and twat Wolves next week.

Why wasnt Johnson brought on?

Well it was between him and Balotelli for the last sub spot once we had to use Bridge.

KaiserGunner

karma_ wrote: »

Arsenal got very lucky today, no sending off in the 4th minute and it would have been a vastly different result. City played well with 10 for as long as they could but the effort took it's toll in the end. Mancini possibly made the mistake picking Boyata for this game where a more experienced head might have been a better pick, still it's early days of the season and hindsight is 20/20.

Nonsense, Arsenal werent lucky. Was a clear sending off, great through ball by Fabregas to put Chamakh through. Fabianski has now had a solid 5 or 6 matches now. Has to be no way back for Almunia now if Fabianski keeps this up.

efb

Thanks guys for the updates! Now off to Gay Prom with a big grin on my face!!!!

allybhoy

Xavi6 wrote: »

I don't disagree, just think we were very good having to play so long shorthanded. There were some super individual performances and we just go out and twat Wolves next week.



Well it was between him and Balotelli for the last sub spot once we had to use Bridge.

Yeh i just think he could have came on earlier especially considering you were down to ten, he's a very good engine and would have given good cover at the back aswell as going forward.

Anyways, as has been said once city went down to ten it was always going to be a really tough game, its hard enough playing arsenal with 11 let alone 10. First half City put it up to them and I thought Tevez in particular was class, but 2nd half legs just went.

OPENROAD

karma_ wrote: »

Arsenal got very lucky today, no sending off in the 4th minute and it would have been a vastly different result. City played well with 10 for as long as they could but the effort took it's toll in the end. Mancini possibly made the mistake picking Boyata for this game where a more experienced head might have been a better pick, still it's early days of the season and hindsight is 20/20.

How do you know?

karma_

I read it in the little book of pedantism.

KittyeeTrix

OPENROAD wrote: »

How do you know?

Probably just a guess but isn't it generally thought to be easier to play 11 against 11 rather than 11 against 10
May not have changed the result but most likely would've made the game easier to control......no??

Johner

karma_ wrote: »

Arsenal got very lucky today, no sending off in the 4th minute and it would have been a vastly different result. City played well with 10 for as long as they could but the effort took it's toll in the end. Mancini possibly made the mistake picking Boyata for this game where a more experienced head might have been a better pick, still it's early days of the season and hindsight is 20/20.

How did Arsenal get lucky? It's not there fault Boyata took Chamakh out.

KaiserGunner

OPENROAD wrote: »

How do you know?

Apparently Mancini thought the same as well. :pac:

Jigga

karma_ wrote: »

Arsenal got very lucky today, no sending off in the 4th minute and it would have been a vastly different result. City played well with 10 for as long as they could but the effort took it's toll in the end. Mancini possibly made the mistake picking Boyata for this game where a more experienced head might have been a better pick, still it's early days of the season and hindsight is 20/20.

Without that red card Arsenal would have been 1-0 up anyway.

Xavi6

Jigga wrote: »

Without that red card Arsenal would have been 1-0 up anyway.

But...

OPENROAD wrote: »

How do you know?

cson

You play the cards you're dealt and Arsenal played them relatively well at times. I say at times because they looked for periods like the team with only 10 men and tbh that's more a credit to City than it is a slight on Arsenal. Three is probably flattering but you gotta take your chances.

KeithAFC

3-0 to The Arsenal.

Dominated the match overall.

Pepe LeFrits

Delighted with the result, and it was badly needed. Hopefully the boys can get some momentum going as a number of the more difficult fixtures are out of the way.

Scuba Ste

KeithAFC wrote: »

3-0 to The Arsenal.

Dominated the match overall.

The least you'd expect against ten men for 85 mins tbh.

L'prof

Xavi6 wrote: »

I'm strangely ok with that defeat considering the circumstances. We were super for 75 minutes and 3-0 was a harsh final result.

The likes of Bridge and and Barry need to go but De Jong, Richards, Silva and Boateng were great today imo.

Arsenal have the ability to do that to any team, whether it's deserved or not, we just don't do it often enough . 10 men for most of the match played it's part, but it was a definite red and a silly challenge!

Xavi6

http://www.teamtalk.com/news/2483/6466686/Cesc-thrilled-with-outstanding-Gunners

"Even if they were 15 and we were 11 we would still go and win," he (Fabregas) added.

Frisbee

Xavi6 wrote: »

http://www.teamtalk.com/news/2483/6466686/Cesc-thrilled-with-outstanding-Gunners

1. Great gif.
2. First time I read that I thought he meant age.
3. Disrespectful comment. Reminds me of Evra talking about us two season ago.
4. Great gif.

Arsenal1986

In fairness when you see him say it, Im pretty sure what he meant was that Arsenal still would have had the same pressure and desire to win if they were against 11 men. He was saying it in response to the Sky reporter asking him, 'Do you think there was more pressure on Arsenal to win after City had ten me the whole game?'

He didnt mean it as disrespectful to City Im pretty sure.

IvySlayer

Frisbee wrote: »

1. Great gif.
2. First time I read that I thought he meant age.
3. Disrespectful comment. Reminds me of Evra talking about us two season ago.
4. Great gif.

It was better when Archi used it. Xavi you thief

Sergio

Bout time Man city were brought down a peg or two!All the begrudgers can moan about the 10 men against 11 but i still think the gooners were the much better team and created better chances to win the game today.
Money doesnt buy you results or league titles!

KittyeeTrix

Colinboy wrote: »

Bout time Man city were brought down a peg or two!All the begrudgers can moan about the 10 men against 11 but i still think the gooners were the much better team and created better chances to win the game today.
Money doesnt buy you results or league titles!

OPENROAD

Frisbee wrote: »

1. Great gif.
2. First time I read that I thought he meant age.
3. Disrespectful comment. Reminds me of Evra talking about us two season ago.
4. Great gif.

I think you have to take the comments in the context of the question that he was asked

Xavi6

Colinboy wrote: »

Bout time Man city were brought down a peg or two!All the begrudgers can moan about the 10 men against 11 but i still think the gooners were the much better team and created better chances to win the game today.
Money doesnt buy you results or league titles!

Begrudgers like yourself for example?

cson

I would imagine Fabregas' comment was more along the lines of they would be trying to win the game against any number of City players; even 15 of them!

Colinboy

Colinboy wrote: »

Bout time Man city were brought down a peg or two!All the begrudgers can moan about the 10 men against 11 but i still think the gooners were the much better team and created better chances to win the game today.
Money doesnt buy you results or league titles!

dont agree with that at all, i think 11 city players on the field would have been too much for arsenal. 3-0 flattered arsenal greatly i feel

L'prof

Deleted User wrote: »

dont agree with that at all, i think 11 city players on the field would have been too much for arsenal. 3-0 flattered arsenal greatly i feel

And I don't agree with this at all, I still think Arsenal had just about enough to edge the game. 3-0 was a fair enough reflection on the game yesterday, Arsenal went ahead to a 10 man City team, who then had to chase the game leaving even more holes in an already suspect defence!

TheSpecialOne

Arsenal didn't even break sweat yesterday quite a comfortable win...of course we had nervy occasions to be expected when playing a top side at their ground...Arsenal have a serious team this year and even have a top quality bench and we have our injured players e.g. Van Persie, Vermaelen. No excuses this year we have to win something...as for City i just think they need to dump Roberto and open up a bit more as they could really spank some teams if they wanted.

efb

Were gonna finish 2nd, were gonna finish 2nd...

KeithAFC

Bit funny seeing mancini saying they would win with 11v11 when Chamakh was on good odds to find the net with that pass only to be taken out.

Xavi6

KeithAFC wrote: »

Bit funny seeing mancini saying they would win with 11v11 when Chamakh was on good odds to find the net with that pass only to be taken out.

I didn't realise it was first goal winner.

L'prof

Xavi6 wrote: »

I didn't realise it was first goal winner.

No, first to 3...badaboom :pac:

SlickRic

Colinboy wrote: »

Bout time Man city were brought down a peg or two!All the begrudgers can moan about the 10 men against 11 but i still think the gooners were the much better team and created better chances to win the game today.
Money doesnt buy you results or league titles!

the fact that it was 11 v 10 for 85 minutes means we will never know.

all we know is, 11 v 10, Arsenal were exemplary really, apart from a couple of iffy moments in defence.

if City are to be title challengers, which i think they are very capable of being this season if Chelsea don't run away with it, then Mancini is going to have to somehow learn what Rafa took far too long to learn at Liverpool (i'm just using it as an example; no Rafa baiting or topic changes please) and that is, that you need to go for it in this league, and i think already this season, City just look too cautious.

i'd love to see, from City's point of view;

---

De Jong---Toure

---

Johnson

---

Silva

---

Milner

---

Tevez

---

starting a few games, especially at home. i think that team could tear a few apart.

Pro. F

SlickRic wrote: »

the fact that it was 11 v 10 for 85 minutes means we will never know.

all we know is, 11 v 10, Arsenal were exemplary really, apart from a couple of iffy moments in defence.

if City are to be title challengers, which i think they are very capable of being this season if Chelsea don't run away with it, then Mancini is going to have to somehow learn what Rafa took far too long to learn at Liverpool (i'm just using it as an example; no Rafa baiting or topic changes please) and that is, that you need to go for it in this league, and i think already this season, City just look too cautious.

Totally agree. City losing yesterday shows nothing about their title winning potential. Arsenal did well to capitalise on their advantage and City couldn't get near them in those circumstances.

It's how City approach games against weaker opposition or how they go about capitalising on any good fortune that comes their way that will make or break their hopes of winning the league.

Personally I doubt Mancini will be able to get his head around having to be adventurous in the league, but time will tell.

flahavaj

The main reasons I see that City aren't quite gonna win the league this year are

1. Poor defenders - Kompany and Boateng look quality (and Kolarov I'm sure will be good as well)but apart from that they're short on genuinely good defenders They need a top class partner for Kompany at CB. Toure and Lescott aren't good enough and players they have as cover like Bridge and Richards are lacking as well. They've shipped out the lies of Onouha and Dunne in the last couple of years, both of whom are better than soem of the CB's still at the club.

2. Mancini's negativity. As Slick said, you have to go for the three points all the time to win the league. Being afraid to be beaten away from home just isn't good enough. I really don't think theres any need to play Barry, Toure and de Jong in the one team. He also needs to play Johnson more - I understand wanting to introduce a young guy slowly but he starts on the bench way to much for me.

3. Gareth Barry starting every week. He's pointless. Milner is twice the player and would do a great job bombing on with Toure and de Jong behind.

4. It's Man City. They always find a way to mess it up. (Sorry had to be said :pac:).

I do think they'll be comfortably top 4 this year though, which will make them an even better prospect for more signings next Summer.

ntlbell

Pro. F wrote: »

Personally I doubt Mancini will be able to get his head around having to be adventurous in the league, but time will tell.

Considering city were down to 10 men i thought they were pretty adventerous yesterday. it was probably the one game where it called for a bit of mancini negativity tho.

He should have gave walter smith a ring 5 mins in

KeithAFC

Xavi6 wrote: »

I didn't realise it was first goal winner.

Goals change games. A lot of our players performed well yesterday.

Frisbee

KeithAFC wrote: »

Goals change games. A lot of our players performed well yesterday.

Gilesy?

Pepe LeFrits

On the 15-man headlines...

cesc4official Cesc Fàbregas Soler
Once again you see that people read things and understand things the way that will work better for them....

I never said we would beat city with 15 men, i said that even if they were 15 players, we´d have still try to go for the victory as usual.
2 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply

JohnnyRyan99

flahavaj wrote: »

The main reasons I see that City aren't quite gonna win the league this year are

First thing i'll say is as a City fan if we qualified for CL i would be delighted.

On point No.1, Richards at the moment is better than Onuoha but i would still 100% love to see Onuoha comeback, i really do feel Richars could be great, he is very young and for me this season, bar Spurs game has been better than Eng first choice G Johnson.. I agree completely with the rest of your statment, Toure and Lescott(especially) arent good enough..

No.2. I agree with negativity, but at least he's starting Silva more which is a massive plus IMO.

No.3. I agree a midfield without Barry is best but that means we have to switch to a 4-4-2. Because De Jong and Toure must start for me with Milner and AJ on the wings behind Silva and Tevez up front! Silva behind Tevez of course.

No.4. Thats why i think we might Fúck up even finishing 4th!!

Scuba Ste

JohnnyRyan99 wrote: »

No.4. Thats why i think we might Fúck up even finishing 4th!!

Can't see us doing that, last season we came within a whisper of 4th. This season with a much better squad, I think 4th is nailed on, we look good enough to do better tbh.

Sundays game says nothing about either team, 10 v 11 should always be a win for a team like Arsenal. We've beat Liverpool, Chelsea and drawn away to Spurs so far, I think that says enough about us. The United game will tell us a lot more about ourselves and I think we'll beat them well.

efb

OPENROAD wrote: »

Martin Tyler :mad:

Imagining Barbra Streisand tune remixed with 'Martin Tyler' replacing 'Barbra Streisand'