Manchester City -V- Manchester United Match Thread 10/11/10

The Muppet

#15 wrote: »

Your posts on this thread. Awful.

Think that's what he means. It's like an unjustified holier-than-thou complex or something. Or just a bit of light trolling.

Bodishopha the thug.:)

davyjose

Xavi6 wrote: »

Not saying we deserved to win, just addressing the point that was made about us getting some sort of lesson.

It's somewhere between this and Mancini's comments that this proves City are on the same level as United. They might very well be ... but today didn't prove it.

Xavi6

Ordinary man wrote: »

De jong and barry hardly touched the ball, yaya kept losing it and silva,tevez and milner couldn't get 3 passes together between them.That's a team at home. The only time i was worried was when johnson came on. He is a class player

We strung loads of passes together, they were just 30 yards from our own goal. The problem is when De Jong, Barry etc get their head up they have two maybe three targets. How many times in the first half did crosses go into the box with no City player in their? Vidic had a field day.

The lads in midfield will be criticised for their passing going forward but there is a pretty big variable working against them.

ShooterSF

Pro. F wrote: »

I actually enjoyed that game which I know is weird. It was very tense with a steady flow. But it was more like watching United trying to score against a well organised smaller team than watching a big showdown type game. In the end the result is frustrating but I would have taken a draw before the game, especially with the injuries/virus.

I'm generally happy with the United performance. Carrick again impressed me - he's been doing a lot better this season imo. Fletcher put in a mighty shift and Scholes lasted well and really kept the ball moving nicely. Berbatov didn't do enough imo, disappointing.

City were laughably negative. They set themselves up so defensively that it made our midfield's job so much easier. Manccini will never win the PL.

Fletcher MOTM for me. I voted Scholes second and Vidic third.

Harsh. Not his preferred formation and at times the ball stuck to him like something extra sticky. I thought he played well.

Warper

Bodhisopha wrote: »

When all is said and done, City will finish top 4 and Mancini will view this as a good result.

No one is saying it was a bad result and that goes for both teams. The fact is City were playing at home and never attempted to win the match. City will probably finish in the Top 4 but it is negative tactics like tonight that means Mancini wont be around to manage them in the CL.

Bodhisopha

Watching those fools on "You're on Sky Sports" crying about the Italian mentality.

City will finish in the top 4. Job done as far as Mancini is concerned.

JerryHandbag

I thought the winner was coming yet again in stoppage time but Park ballsed up his one two with Nani. Happy enough with the draw.

LOL at Richard Keys sounding dejected at the end....I think Sky were expecting a 9 goal thriller

BERBA

It was sad to see tonight , city being the home team and afraid to have a go and not comitting too many men forward.

Pro. F

nullzero wrote: »

To an extenet it suited United to not take the game to City, as we're still in the middle of a difficult patch and coming through that unbeaten may well galvinise the sqaud.
I feel that had we pushed City we could have easily gotten a goal or two, neither side were great but at least United had some excuses to fall back on, City should have been taking their chance.

United were pushing for the win. You have to take into account the current injury problems for United, City's ultra defensiveness in the game and the fact that our two fullbacks had to be substituted during the game. United weren't playing defensively, they just didn't have the players on the pitch that were needed to create chances.

Ordinary man

Xavi6 wrote: »

We strung loads of passes together, they were just 30 yards from our own goal. The problem is when De Jong, Barry etc get their head up they have two maybe three targets. How many times in the first half did crosses go into the box with no City player in their? Vidic had a field day.

The lads in midfield will be criticised for their passing going forward but there is a pretty big variable working against them.

If you compare the united midfield to city's, scholes carrick and fletcher were all pushing forward. At some stage each of them was in or around city's area. City's just sat back

ROCKMAN

Thought Berbs did ok given the role he was asked to play , The lack of good service didn't help , Nani and Park where disappointing ,Carrick had one of his best performance in along while (he was very good in the last 20/25 mins)Fletcher put in a good session , Vidic was very good again ,But Rafeal was outstanding in the first half , seems to be really developing in a top player IMO.

Warper

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Watching those fools on "You're on Sky Sports" crying about the Italian mentality.

City will finish in the top 4. Job done as far as Mancini is concerned.

This is one time where I agree with them. City have the players to beat any team on a given day. This was a massive game for City and was a chance for them to prove that they are finally up there with the big boys. Mancini's tactics didnt allow them to prove that. Failure to create one decent chance at home is poor. The multi-billionaire owners would have had a big interest in this match, probably watching it in a palace somewhere gathered round with mates. Im sure they wouldnt have liked the negativity in the team's set-up. After all these boys are just in it for a fun hobby. There was nothing fun about tonight. After spending 300m or whatever and to put in a performance like that in a marquee game doesn't bode well for Mancini.

Xavi6

Ordinary man wrote: »

If you compare the united midfield to city's, scholes carrick and fletcher were all pushing forward. At some stage each of them was in or around city's area. City's just sat back

And that's Mancini's doing.

I'll 100% defend the players on this one.

Bodhisopha

Warper wrote: »

This is one time where I agree with them. City have the players to beat any team on a given day. This was a massive game for City and was a chance for them to prove that they are finally up there with the big boys. Mancini's tactics didnt allow them to prove that. Failure to create one decent chance at home is poor. The multi-billionaire owners would have had a big interest in this match, probably watching it in a palace somewhere gathered round with mates. Im sure they wouldnt have liked the negativity in the team's set-up. After all these boys are just in it for a fun hobby. There was nothing fun about tonight. After spending 300m or whatever and to put in a performance like that in a marquee game doesn't bode well for Mancini.

I take your point and appreciate the fact that you took the time to make a point, unlike others.

I doubt the owners know too much about football to begin with, but in any case, considering the results of late a draw doesn't look too bad on paper, much less at the end of the season having achieved their objective of finishing fourth. What's harder to swallow, sharing the spoils or losing to your biggest rivals at home? A loss would've put a serious dent in Mancini's security as manager. While it doesn't look so great now, follow this up with a run of 3 or 4 wins and things look a lot rosier. This was a must not lose game rather than a must win.

As i said, both managers will be pleased.

Pro. F

ShooterSF wrote: »

Harsh. Not his preferred formation and at times the ball stuck to him like something extra sticky. I thought he played well.

It doesn't matter that it's not his prefered formation. It's true that he's neither mobile enough nor fast enough to do well on his own upfront but that's not an excuse to play lazily when he's in that formation. I'm not disappointed by his lack of goals, I'm disappointed by his lack of effort and his generally poor display. And continuing to have great close control is also no excuse for an overall poor performance. Yeah you've got great close control, now fúcking do something with it.

And before someone responds with comments about Berba haters and goals and such, I have not been a Berba hater. I was more than forgiving and endlessly patient with him last season. But this season he showed what he could do when he put his mind to it. I expect him to produce the level of work and effort that he's shown he's easily capable of every time he plays.

jaykay74

:pac:

lol at Raf all hyped up and Scholes wanders into shot not bothered at all. Reminds me of his trophy celebrations for the lesser cups

Pro. F

Bodhisopha wrote: »

I take your point and appreciate the fact that you took the time to make a point, unlike others.

I doubt the owners know too much about football to begin with, but in any case, considering the results of late a draw doesn't look too bad on paper, much less at the end of the season having achieved their objective of finishing fourth. What's harder to swallow, sharing the spoils or losing to your biggest rivals at home? A loss would've put a serious dent in Mancini's security as manager. While it doesn't look so great now, follow this up with a run of 3 or 4 wins and things look a lot rosier. This was a must not lose game rather than a must win.

As i said, both managers will be pleased.

And as everyone else has said Mancini won't stay manager if he continues to set his teams out like that. Playing boring shíte defensive football might be forgiven this season if he manages to finish in the top four but if he carries on like that he won't win the league, he'll bore the owners and he'll get the sack.

Also, Ferguson won't be pleased until he has won the league.

Bodhisopha

Pro. F wrote: »

And as everyone else has said Mancini won't stay manager if he continues to set his teams out like that. Playing boring shíte defensive football might be forgiven this season if he manages to finish in the top four but if he carries on like that he won't win the league, he'll bore the owners and he'll get the sack.

Also, Ferguson won't be pleased until he has won the league.

Yeah, i agree with you but you surely must agree that a loss tonight would've been a bigger blow for Mancini than City as a club. Reach fourth, strenghten in every transfer window, and it's onwards on upwards you would think. If not? He's done, but not done as quickly as he might be if he goes gung ho at his biggest rivals.

As for Fergie winning another league title.. i think he's done in that respect.

FlawedGenius

The worst Manchester derby ever??

Warper

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Yeah, i agree with you but you surely must agree that a loss tonight would've been a bigger blow for Mancini than City as a club. Reach fourth, strenghten in every transfer window, and it's onwards on upwards you would think. If not? He's done, but not done as quickly as he might be if he goes gung ho at his biggest rivals.

As for Fergie winning another league title.. i think he's done in that respect.

The squad that City have, there is no reason why they shouldn't be aiming for first place in the League. Mancini is just too negative, playing 3 defensive midfielders in most games. He is so negative, he has said Chelsea will win the League on numerous occasions. The players cannot be happy with this as they are top-class players who want to win trophies. He doesnt seem to believe in his players which might explain all the so-called squabbles within the squad.

steelcityblues

FlawedGenius wrote: »

The worst Manchester derby ever??

The one at Eastlands last season was poor too!

Warper

FlawedGenius wrote: »

The worst Manchester derby ever??

The fact it got a whole 5 mins highlights on MOTD would agree with this.

Xavi6

FlawedGenius wrote: »

The worst Manchester derby ever??

For a neutral maybe. Nowhere near as bad as the one that took place this day 16 years ago for me.

Pro. F

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Yeah, i agree with you but you surely must agree that a loss tonight would've been a bigger blow for Mancini than City as a club. Reach fourth, strenghten in every transfer window, and it's onwards on upwards you would think. If not? He's done, but not done as quickly as he might be if he goes gung ho at his biggest rivals.

Mancini's job wouldn't have been in any danger if he had lost tonight. He was defensive because that is his nature, no other reason. His defensiveness is not something that is particularly helping City towards finishing in the top four either, in reality he is holding the team back. They should be looking like contenders with the squad and spending power they have but with him in charge they'll be happy if they get fourth.

Also, since when are the options to either be ultra defensive or gung-ho attacking? It amazes me how often people use that weak reasoning.

City have more or less reached the point where adding anymore players would do more harm than good imo. So I wouldn't be expecting much improvement in that regard either.

Bodhisopha wrote: »

As for Fergie winning another league title.. i think he's done in that respect.

lol fair enough.

Bodhisopha

Pro. F wrote: »

Mancini's job wouldn't have been in any danger if he had lost tonight. He was defensive because that is his nature, no other reason. His defensiveness is not something that is particularly helping City towards finishing in the top four either, in reality he is holding the team back. They should be looking like contenders with the squad and spending power they have but with him in charge they'll be happy if they get fourth.

Also, since when are the options to either be ultra defensive or gung-ho attacking? It amazes me how often people use that weak reasoning.

City have more or less reached the point where adding anymore players would do more harm than good imo. So I wouldn't be expecting much improvement in that regard either.



lol fair enough.

Mancini came out and said he believes City are equal to United. He would sound ridiculous saying that if City lost tonight at home but as it stands it was a very even game eventhough United clearly wanted the 3 points more. Of course his job is in more danger if he loses, to state otherwise is to almost state that City don't really mind losing to their biggest rivals. Silly, imo.

I agree with you and Warper that they are good enough to be at least be challenging for 2nd spot but i'm sure he was told to get into the top 4 this season and as he is clearly a cautious man, he is content to achieve just that and anything better is a bonus.

City have reached a point where adding more players would do more harm than good? Sorry, but you'll have to elaborate on that one. How do you identify when a team have reached such a point that bringing in better quality players does more harm than good?

steelcityblues

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Yeah, i agree with you but you surely must agree that a loss tonight would've been a bigger blow for Mancini than City as a club. Reach fourth, strenghten in every transfer window, and it's onwards on upwards you would think. If not? He's done, but not done as quickly as he might be if he goes gung ho at his biggest rivals.

As for Fergie winning another league title.. i think he's done in that respect.

This could be a funny quote to bring up again next May!

lordgoat

Boring Boring City. Boring Boring City.

Spurs for fourth at least they'll give it a go.

No let's waste some time and bring on a sub in the 91st minute when playing at home...


2 points dropped for united. Nearly as annoying as west brom but hey they know how to attack at least.

Pro. F

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Mancini came out and said he believes City are equal to United. He would sound ridiculous saying that if City lost tonight at home but as it stands it was a very even game eventhough United clearly wanted the 3 points more. Of course his job is in more danger if he loses, to state otherwise is to almost state that City don't really mind losing to their biggest rivals. Silly, imo.

His job would have been in no appreciable danger if they had lost tonight.

And it's not like saying that City don't really mind losing to their rivals, that's an idiotic connection to make to what I said.

If Mancini is choosing his tactics based on how it will look if they lose after he made some statement then he is a truly awful manager. What point are you trying to prove? That he's right to use his ultra defensive tactics?

Bodhisopha wrote: »

I agree with you and Warper that they are good enough to be at least be challenging for 2nd spot but i'm sure he was told to get into the top 4 this season and as he is clearly a cautious man, he is content to achieve just that and anything better is a bonus.

Yes he is cautious. That will get him the sack eventually.

Bodhisopha wrote: »

City have reached a point where adding more players would do more harm than good? Sorry, but you'll have to elaborate on that one. How do you identify when a team have reached such a point that bringing in better quality players does more harm than good?

Every time you change the squad by adding new players then you are disrupting the team. A lot of the time that is a price worth paying but sometimes, like when you already have a squad full of quality players, it's not. Some times a team just needs to settle down and build up their cohesion with the players they have. City are chock full of good players, adding yet more is probably only going to bring disruption.

UnitedIrishman

The City bus was well parked tonight.

I'd cry if I had to watch Gareth Barry and De Jong in a midfield for anymore than 180 mins a season.

Fair enough, points shared and all that but if that's how City plan on playing to get to the top then they'll be some time getting there.

PHB

Ugh. Disappointed we didn't win, but we didn't really have enough up front to break City down. Berbatov did ok, Nani clearly wasnt on top form and Park couldnt offer much. Neither Scholes, nor Carrick, nor Fletcher were creative enough to make something happen. Valencia on the right or Rooney on top form int he middle could have been enough.

I tell you what though, tonight confirmed my belief that City haven't got a hope of winning the title, and will imo, not make it fourth place. At home, against a weakened United side, playing three central midfielders, one central midfield on the right wing, and a about as defensive a striker as you'll get. Substitutions in injury time in order to slow the game down. Mancini had absolutely no desire to win the game. He played for the draw and succedded, because United couldn't break them down. Fair enough, but its not exactly ambitious and I think over the season, it'll result in them not getting 4th.

kryogen

Pro. F wrote: »

It doesn't matter that it's not his prefered formation. It's true that he's neither mobile enough nor fast enough to do well on his own upfront but that's not an excuse to play lazily when he's in that formation. I'm not disappointed by his lack of goals, I'm disappointed by his lack of effort and his generally poor display. And continuing to have great close control is also no excuse for an overall poor performance. Yeah you've got great close control, now fúcking do something with it.

And before someone responds with comments about Berba haters and goals and such, I have not been a Berba hater. I was more than forgiving and endlessly patient with him last season. But this season he showed what he could do when he put his mind to it. I expect him to produce the level of work and effort that he's shown he's easily capable of every time he plays.

Berba played well tonight (again) imo and in most people i have spoken to opinions

Pro. F

kryogen wrote: »

Berba played well tonight (again) imo and in most people i have spoken to opinions

Most people are wrong :P

Bodhisopha

Pro. F wrote: »

His job would have been in no appreciable danger if they had lost tonight.

And it's not like saying that City don't really mind losing to their rivals, that's an idiotic connection to make to what I said.

If Mancini is choosing his tactics based on how it will look if they lose after he made some statement then he is a truly awful manager. What point are you trying to prove? That he's right to use his ultra defensive tactics?



Yes he is cautious. That will get him the sack eventually.



Every time you change the squad by adding new players then you are disrupting the team. A lot of the time that is a price worth paying but sometimes, like when you already have a squad full of quality players, it's not. Some times a team just needs to settle down and build up their cohesion with the players they have. City are chock full of good players, adding yet more is probably only going to bring disruption.

Mancini was under pressure, at least in the media before winning against West Brom, to think that his position wouldn't be under further scrutiny following a loss at home against their City rivals is idiotic in the extreme. I have nothing more to say on that.

You seem to have magically identified the point at which City buying a new player would be detrimental to the club but i'm not sure i agree with your line of reasoning. You're a United fan? Where did Yaya Toure play the last time he played against United? Where did he play tonight? Are you really telling me there are no players City, the richest club in the world could add that would improve them in that particular position (amongst others)? If you are on the wind up then i feel thoroughly foolish because i have fallen for it hook, line and sinker. More fool me.

darsar

PHB wrote: »

Ugh. Disappointed we didn't win, but we didn't really have enough up front to break City down. Berbatov did ok, Nani clearly wasnt on top form and Park couldnt offer much. Neither Scholes, nor Carrick, nor Fletcher were creative enough to make something happen. Valencia on the right or Rooney on top form int he middle could have been enough.

I tell you what though, tonight confirmed my belief that City haven't got a hope of winning the title, and will imo, not make it fourth place. At home, against a weakened United side, playing three central midfielders, one central midfield on the right wing, and a about as defensive a striker as you'll get. Substitutions in injury time in order to slow the game down. Mancini had absolutely no desire to win the game. He played for the draw and succedded, because United couldn't break them down. Fair enough, but its not exactly ambitious and I think over the season, it'll result in them not getting 4th.

Is this the flu virus that affected nobody? Give it a rest. You couldn't break city down and that's it. Rooney was not there. One player does not constitute a "weakened team".

Pro. F

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Mancini was under pressure, at least in the media before winning against West Brom, to think that his position wouldn't be under further scrutiny following a loss at home against their City rivals is idiotic in the extreme. I have nothing more to say on that.

Him being under ''pressure'' from the media is of fúck all relevance. I very much doubt he's stupid enough to worry about that sort of gossip.

The city owners have shown themselve to be ruthless but not totally stupid. Him getting sacked this early in the season because he lost to the local rivals would have been totally stupid and there was zero chance of it happening. All your talk of him being under more pressure is just nonsense speculation. Not something any half sensible manager is going to be worrying about. Mancini played defensively because that is the type of manager he is, not because his job was under pressure.

Bodhisopha wrote: »

You seem to have magically identified the point at which City buying a new player would be detrimental to the club but i'm not sure i agree with your line of reasoning. You're a United fan? Where did Yaya Toure play the last time he played against United? Where did he play tonight? Are you really telling me there are no players City, the richest club in the world could add that would improve them in that particular position (amongst others)?

I don't understand what you're on about tbh. I'm not saying it's a hard and fast fact that City shouldn't buy anymore players. But it's simple comon sense that if you keep on buying quality players and squeezing them into the squad, and therefor squeezing others out, then at some point you're only going to disrupt the team rather than improve it. I happen to think that that point has been reached for now, you may or may not agree.

It's not something that requires magical skills to observe, it's actually a really simple concept.

Pro. F

darsar wrote: »

Is this the flu virus that affected nobody? Give it a rest. You couldn't break city down and that's it. Rooney was not there. One player does not constitute a "weakened team".

It does if he's your most important player. Take Rooney out of any team and they will suffer. You're also forgetting Valencia (very important) and Giggs (far less so).

And how do you know the virus affected nobody?

J. Marston

I said I'd take a 0-0 but I feel frustrated now, City were there for the taking. Surprised they didn't have more of a go, especially since they were at home.
Credit where it's due though, they were good defensively.

I thought Carrick was very good tonight, along with Berba. Vidic was his usual brilliant self, captaincy seems to suit him.
Highlight of the night: Rafael tearing into Tevez, no fear in the lad .

lordgoat

darsar wrote: »

Is this the flu virus that affected nobody? Give it a rest. You couldn't break city down and that's it. Rooney was not there. One player does not constitute a "weakened team".

Rooney Giggs Valencia

Plus Owen and Anderson would have given options to change the game.

Give it a rest, ya g'man.

Mister men

Watched the "highlights" there this morning. Looked like two poor teams scrapping it out at the bottom of the league from the football i saw. Really poor stuff. United fans had better hope the rumours about Rooney only signing a new contract so United can get more money for him in January are not true as they look lost without him. City had better hope they can get a top class manager in there real soon because they are headed nowhere at present.

JimsAlterEgo

Mister men wrote: »

Watched the "highlights" there this morning. Looked like two poor teams scrapping it out at the bottom of the league from the football i saw. Really poor stuff. United fans had better hope the rumours about Rooney only signing a new contract so United can get more money for him in January are not true as they look lost without him. City had better hope they can get a top class manager in there real soon because they are headed nowhere at present.

try watching the entire match and then commenting :rolleyes:

Moneymaker

Yeah, that was easily the most god awful game of football i've seen this year.

I got plenty of entertainment watching Yaya Toure though. He is a lolbad player. Then you remember he supposedly earns 200k a week.

Berbatov and Vidic had good games for United. City defended well as a unit but their lack of attacking ambition(at home too!) was shocking.

Ush1

Moneymaker wrote: »

Yeah, that was easily the most god awful game of football i've seen this year.

I got plenty of entertainment watching Yaya Toure though. He is a lolbad player. Then you remember he supposedly earns 200k a week.

Berbatov and Vidic had good games for United. City defended well as a unit but their lack of attacking ambition(at home too!) was shocking.

Says it all about Mancini when his primary supporting attacking player to Tevez is a defensive midfielder.

Gotta say, much as I'm not a De Jong fan, you'd be glad to have him on your team and hate playing against him.

Thought it was gonna be a draw and it was, a terrible draw.

kryogen

darsar wrote: »

Is this the flu virus that affected nobody? Give it a rest. You couldn't break city down and that's it. Rooney was not there. One player does not constitute a "weakened team".

Valencia was also not there, Giggs was not there, Nani was not 100% along with a couple of others

And to be technically pedantic about it, one player does constitute a weakend team. technically

kryogen

Am i the only one who actually enjoyed the game last night? very encouraged by the performances of a number of players, we were too light up front unfortunately to cut City open enough, we created chances, not many, and unfortunately we didnt take them. More cutting edge in front of goal from the few players who had chances and it could have been a fantastic night

From an attacking perspective i guess the game was no spectactle. But i must say i did enjoy the chess game

DOC09UNAM

Mister men wrote: »

Watched the "highlights" there this morning. Looked like two poor teams scrapping it out at the bottom of the league from the football i saw. Really poor stuff. United fans had better hope the rumours about Rooney only signing a new contract so United can get more money for him in January are not true as they look lost without him. City had better hope they can get a top class manager in there real soon because they are headed nowhere at present.

No, Liverpool - Wigan was like two teams at the bottom scrapping it out.

Man City - Utd was two teams at the top both defending well and being unable to break each other down.

And, lol @ coming in making a judgement off the match from the highlights.

killwill

kryogen wrote: »

Am i the only one who actually enjoyed the game last night? very encouraged by the performances of a number of players, we were too light up front unfortunately to cut City open enough, we created chances, not many, and unfortunately we didnt take them. More cutting edge in front of goal from the few players who had chances and it could have been a fantastic night

From an attacking perspective i guess the game was no spectactle. But i must say i did enjoy the chess game

Quick, sharp passing by United for probably th first time this season, so I enjoyed that part tbh.
United seem to be playing to the standard of their opposition instead of raising their performance and that worries me.
Hopefully a good win Saturday and confidence will be sky high.

lordgoat

kryogen wrote: »

Am i the only one who actually enjoyed the game last night? very encouraged by the performances of a number of players, we were too light up front unfortunately to cut City open enough, we created chances, not many, and unfortunately we didnt take them. More cutting edge in front of goal from the few players who had chances and it could have been a fantastic night

From an attacking perspective i guess the game was no spectactle. But i must say i did enjoy the chess game

First match all season where after 20minutes i had no fear of sity scoring, unless it was going to be a set piece. We defended brilliantly and were not cut open once.

we should have taken the three points. I don't think i would ever be happy with a manager that made a time wasting sub in the dying seconds of the game when you're playing at home and supposedly challenging for trophies.

Had to laugh at Jon champion's commentary. "And city have been playing second fiddle to united for years. But that's all changed."

Eh no Jon, no it hasn't.

MUSEIST

Thsi was probably one of the dullest games I have ever seen, thanks Manchester

Mister men

MUSEIST wrote: »

Thsi was probably one of the dullest games I have ever seen, thanks Manchester

How dare you. Don't you know the premiership is the most exciting super duper league in the world.

Mister men

DOC09UNAM wrote: »

No, Liverpool - Wigan was like two teams at the bottom scrapping it out.

Man City - Utd was two teams at the top both defending well and being unable to break each other down.

And, lol @ coming in making a judgement off the match from the highlights.

Well i've been watching football for over 30 years and i think it's a safe bet that if the highlights are dull the match usually was. Just a hunch like.