They're backed to another extend than you, albeit you've spent much lately.
Also I think Pellegrini would have the league in a headlock. Only reason he didn't was mostly that he competed against Fergie. Pellegrini's City was more entertaining btw.
Do you find Man City (and other Pep teams) boring?
- Thread starter Tyrion
- Start date
They're backed to another extend than you, albeit you've spent much lately.
Also I think Pellegrini would have the league in a headlock. Only reason he didn't was mostly that he competed against Fergie. Pellegrini's City was more entertaining btw.
Reading this of on a Man Utd forum, of all places, never ever ever gets old. XD
To think of this thread when we're struggling to create a decent chance against Wolves at home.
True
Yes, I've always found Peps style of play boring. It is effective though. Tactical fouls prevent counter attacks which add to the monotony.
Liverpool, Chelsea much better to watch.
Yes, you cannot talk about anything else apart from moaning about United. FFS.
My dislike for Liverpool is greater but I can say their style of play is entertaining. Peps teams have always been boring to watch for the neutral.
Back in your box pal.
Just pointing out the ludicrous nature of a thread mocking great football, when true boring football is what we're dishing up today.
He was strategically, I mean even City destroy teams, before kickoff or within the first 20-30 mins or half the game, however Tyson relied on 3 things:
1. He focused on trying to force mistakes from him opposition
Now this is one thing City do a lot of as well.
2. He'd work on creating openings
This is what City do in terms of creating chances / xG
3. He'd try getting into dominate angles to attack
Again you can liken this to City and their positional play / numerical superiority, they try to get players in 1 v 1 position or try to create a 2 v 1
I think the problem with Spain, Barcelona and other Pep teams was, they controlled the game for majority of the time and if the opposition team didn't tried to play football, it became extremely mundane as when they could not break down the buses, they used to resort of play acting. But the actual game play, IMO was always breathtaking. Especially Barcelona in peak with almost everyone in the team in the attacking phase was supremely composed on the ball, they knew how to dribble. And it wasn't like Barcelona used to pass the ball sideways just for the sake of possession. Barcelona post him under Villanova, Ti
If there was a team which exploited the negative advantage of tiki-taka, than it was 2012 Spain which was really negative for majority of the game, until Pedro/Torres used to come late on and provide some directness, 2010 team has a bad rep on that regard, they just didn't had anyone other than Villa banging them goals, but that team was really attacking.
Pep's team are boring in a sense that they dominate the game too much, that very few games where opposition has a chance. But the actual football, nah.
I think their is a section of neutrals who enjoy free flowing controlled choas brilliance, find his team boring. Otherwise some of the passing, dribbling, flicks and goals City score, they are far from the so called boring.
United have always had money, but we have also always had budgets. We aren't or have never been a state-owned club who can spend 4/5x what our nearest rivals can spend in one window.
Utd total transfer budget in the last ten years is something like 10% less than City.
That's why it never gets old.
Well then you missed my point. It's about how quickly you can spend it so you can fix multiple positions at once and move on from your failures quickly.
Plus, nobody is arguing about United - we have been horribly run. We could have spent £2BN and I'm not sure we would have won anything. I'm not saying "it worries me United can't compete", I worry that nobody will be able to compete and we will see the league become like France or Germany
We could've gone for that if it wasn't for De Gea.
Incorrect, Fergie retired the summer Pellegrini came in. He was up against Moyes United. Pellegrini was in one of the worst PL era where even Leicester won the league, if he couldn't dominate then he wasn't going to dominate against Conte, Klopp or Tuchel
We aren't dishing up anything. The team we support is.
Nothing we say becomes more or less true depending on how well our team is playing.
I keep seeing this argument here and it's completely false. First, this was posted on reddit a few days ago and I found it for you, have a careful look:
You can verify squads, matchday squads and bench players from transfermarkt:
https://www.transfermarkt.com/manchester-city/spielplan/verein/281
https://www.transfermarkt.com/fc-chelsea/spielplan/verein/631
https://www.transfermarkt.com/manchester-united/spielplan/verein/985
https://www.transfermarkt.com/fc-liverpool/spielplan/verein/31
Especially Manchester United and Chelsea in the past few years spent as much as City have while some of our past expensive purchases like Aguero, Silva, Toure have left the team, along with their wages.
We don't have 23 clones of the same quality, as the above picture proves (and you can look up transfermarkt squads), we actually have 17 first team quality players which include players like Zinchenko who wouldn't play for United.
This was your bench tonight vs Wolves:
| 26 | Dean Henderson | GK |
| 27 | Alex Telles | LB |
| 20 | Diogo Dalot | RB |
| 34 | Donny van de Beek | CM |
| 17 | Fred | CM |
| 14 | Jesse Lingard | AM |
| 18 | Bruno Fernandes | AM |
| 36 | Anthony Elanga | LW |
| 10 | Marcus Rashford |
You have Fred, Alex Telles, Bruno Fernandes, Rashford.
This was our bench vs Arsenal the other day:
| 13 | Zack Steffen | GK |
| 79 | Luke Mbete | CB |
| 2 | Kyle Walker | RB |
| 25 | Fernandinho | DM |
| 8 | Ilkay Gündogan | CM |
| 87 | James McAtee | AM |
| 80 | Cole Palmer | AM |
| 10 | Jack Grealish | LW |
| 37 | Kayky |
Kyle Walker just returned from a recent Covid isolation, Fernandinho is 36 years old.
Here, let's take a look at another game:
United bench vs Newcastle:
| 26 | Dean Henderson | GK |
| 4 | Phil Jones | CB |
| 23 | Luke Shaw | LB |
| 29 | Aaron Wan-Bissaka | RB |
| 31 | Nemanja Matic | DM |
| 34 | Donny van de Beek | CM |
| 25 | Jadon Sancho | LW |
| 36 | Anthony Elanga | LW |
| 21 | Edinson Cavani | CF |
You have 75m Sancho, 45m AWB, Shaw, Matic and Cavani while you have Ronaldo on the pitch, we play with no striker.
Here's our bench on the same matchday vs Leicester City:
| 33 | Scott Carson | GK |
| 13 | Zack Steffen | GK |
| 6 | Nathan Aké | CB |
| 79 | Luke Mbete | CB |
| 47 | Phil Foden | CM |
| 80 | Cole Palmer | AM |
| 10 | Jack Grealish | LW |
| 37 | Kayky | RW |
| 9 | Gabriel Jesus | CF |
Sure we have world class players but so do you and others, we play with Zinchenko on the left back, you choose from Alex Telles and Shaw, we play with Jesus and Gundogan up front, you bring on Cavani. You can also look up matchday shardly 23 clones of unmatchable quality thanks to finances, is there?
We have quality but the real success is in the coaching and team cohesion.
I keep seeing this argument here and it's completely false. First, this was posted on reddit a few days ago and I found it for you, have a careful look:
You can verify squads, matchday squads and bench players from transfermarkt:
https://www.transfermarkt.com/manchester-city/spielplan/verein/281
https://www.transfermarkt.com/fc-chelsea/spielplan/verein/631
https://www.transfermarkt.com/manchester-united/spielplan/verein/985
https://www.transfermarkt.com/fc-liverpool/spielplan/verein/31
Especially Manchester United and Chelsea in the past few years spent as much as City have while some of our past expensive purchases like Aguero, Silva, Toure have left the team, along with their wages.
We don't have 23 clones of the same quality, as the above picture proves (and you can look up transfermarkt squads), we actually have 17 first team quality players which include players like Zinchenko who wouldn't play for United.
This was your bench tonight vs Wolves:
26 Dean Henderson GK 27 Alex Telles LB 20 Diogo Dalot RB 34 Donny van de Beek CM 17 Fred CM 14 Jesse Lingard AM 18 Bruno Fernandes AM 36 Anthony Elanga LW 10 Marcus Rashford
You have Fred, Alex Telles, Bruno Fernandes, Rashford.
This was our bench vs Arsenal the other day:
13 Zack Steffen GK 79 Luke Mbete CB 2 Kyle Walker RB 25 Fernandinho DM 8 Ilkay Gündogan CM 87 James McAtee AM 80 Cole Palmer AM 10 Jack Grealish LW 37 Kayky
Kyle Walker just returned from a recent Covid isolation, Fernandinho is 36 years old.
Here, let's take a look at another game:
United bench vs Newcastle:
26 Dean Henderson GK 4 Phil Jones CB 23 Luke Shaw LB 29 Aaron Wan-Bissaka RB 31 Nemanja Matic DM 34 Donny van de Beek CM 25 Jadon Sancho LW 36 Anthony Elanga LW 21 Edinson Cavani CF
You have 75m Sancho, 45m AWB, Shaw, Matic and Cavani while you have Ronaldo on the pitch, we play with no striker.
Here's our bench on the same matchday vs Leicester City:
33 Scott Carson GK 13 Zack Steffen GK 6 Nathan Aké CB 79 Luke Mbete CB 47 Phil Foden CM 80 Cole Palmer AM 10 Jack Grealish LW 37 Kayky RW 9 Gabriel Jesus CF
Sure we have world class players but so do you and others, we play with Zinchenko on the left back, you choose from Alex Telles and Shaw, we play with Jesus and Gundogan up front, you bring on Cavani. You can also look up matchday shardly 23 clones of unmatchable quality thanks to finances, is there?
We have quality but the real success is in the coaching and team cohesion.
I honestly don't understand what point you are trying to make? What has posting the squads and benches got to do with anything? What haa Kyle Walker having COVID got to do with anything? You mention "36yo Fernandinho" as if the age of a now bit-part player is a negative, whilst failing to note United's two starting CFs are that age. Honestly, it's just an incoherent rant.
City have had econonic advantages over and above what any team in history has had ever, arguably in any league. I don't see how that can be disputed. As rich as some clubs have been, they have always had budgets. City had no budget. They had no books to balance. They had no shareholders to satisfy or loans to repay. There current success is solely attributable to this.
I don’t watch them or any other teams to be honest. I used to watch every football match going but my love for football is threadbare to say the least.
It is understandable to hate City, everybody does. But they have scored 53 goals in 21 games. That is not a sign of boring football.
Footballs only fun if it's competitive (unless you're one of those football purist people who used to wank yourself silly over Peps Barca or Spain NT getting 97% possession and stringing together 3000 consecutive passes). With City now, the league is feeling less and less interesting.
Look at Chelsea and Liverpool this season. Neck and neck, both getting hit by tiredness and injuries, AFCON about to bite, and both relying on some great players they simply couldn't replace if the wrong injury or collapse in form happened. Meanwhile City just churn along, every player replaceable by someone basically equal on their bench. De Bruyne, their best player is injured? No worries, just switch in another £50-100m guy and keep the winning streak going.
Can anyone seriously argue that the league is more fun with them in it? Other than City fans?
Look at Chelsea and Liverpool this season. Neck and neck, both getting hit by tiredness and injuries, AFCON about to bite, and both relying on some great players they simply couldn't replace if the wrong injury or collapse in form happened. Meanwhile City just churn along, every player replaceable by someone basically equal on their bench. De Bruyne, their best player is injured? No worries, just switch in another £50-100m guy and keep the winning streak going.
Can anyone seriously argue that the league is more fun with them in it? Other than City fans?
Sorry but had to chuckle at the fact that a Chelsea fan is moaning about another team spending extortionate amounts of money to dominate the league.
Sorry but had to chuckle at the fact that a Chelsea fan is moaning about another team spending extortionate amounts of money to dominate the league.
I remember the game against Brighton and someone post on twitter, how their starting 11 cost between 300-400m and another 250m on the bench and another 100m out injured and this man complaining
Pep's Barca side were completely ruthless to the degree that many teams gave up before the ball was even kicked and their midfield, especially prime Xavi and Iniesta, completely sucked out any intensity out of most games because they were so effective at passing the ball and ruthlessly pressuring the opponent to give up possession in the 20-30% of the time they had it.
Pep's City are not quite at this level and won't be simply because his Barca team was full of such generational talents, but it sure feels like this is the closest it's going to get.
Pep's City are not quite at this level and won't be simply because his Barca team was full of such generational talents, but it sure feels like this is the closest it's going to get.
Sorry but had to chuckle at the fact that a Chelsea fan is moaning about another team spending extortionate amounts of money to dominate the league.
Remind me of when exactly we dominated the league?
I was thinking the same.
I don't find Pep's teams boring, just not the most entertaining either.
I actually blame their opponents more.
I hate his teams. Mainly because they are almost always the best football teams of their times at some point.
They play football the way it should be. It hurts to admit it but they're an amazing team to watch.
2004-06.
In 04-05 you lost only once and achieved the highest points tally in the premier league which was only broken recently by Man City and Liverpool.
In 05-06 you started the league with 9 wins in a row and the first 6 games of those you didn't concede any goals. You were already >10 points ahead of any other team only 9 games into the season. By around the same stage of the season as we are now (Jan) you were 11 points ahead of the closest challengers.
Out of interest, how often did you watch Pep’s Barça side? In el clásico matches and late on in the UCL yeah it was entertaining, but in the run of the mill league matches, it was a chore to watch.
The same as with Liverpool, they can overcommit when in possession because as soon as they lose the ball, they foul the opposition and regroup their machine.
Christ. If we dominated teams like they did I guarantee not a single United fan would utter the word boring in the match thread.
We were magnificent at the time, but we never dominated in the way this City team have been. We won 2 titles back to back and then didn't win again for another 4 years. United won 3 in a row in between.
My point being that despite other teams having good seasons sometimes, it's pretty much always been competitive (since the equal tedium of United domination in the past), and if teams looked untouchable one year, it rarely lasted into future seasons.
I watched them whenever they were on TV, I thought they were superb to a man.
Tactical, thoughtful, controlled and skillful. Near enough the perfect team in my (and many managers/journalists) opinion.
Sometimes the games are a chore to watch because of the opposition, we see it often when the opposition try to nullify the game. That doesn't take anything away from the team though.
I don't see the same with Peps City however, they are more robust and more of a steamroller with less precision about them. They seem to look to get forward quicker than the Barca of old.
High possession teams are always boring to watch IMO (if you are not a supporter of the team). I hated van Gaals approach too (i know we didn't create nearly as much chances but sill)...
Sure you could say the opposing team makes it boring by sitting deep in their own half but why would they willingly give them space and get punished for it. City has spend a lot of money for very good/world class players and coaches.
I almost wish there was a limitation of allowed back passes during an possession phase so the team have to find quicker solutions to score a goal (I know it would be a stupid rule but i it always comes to my mind when i watch City or similar teams)...
Sure you could say the opposing team makes it boring by sitting deep in their own half but why would they willingly give them space and get punished for it. City has spend a lot of money for very good/world class players and coaches.
I almost wish there was a limitation of allowed back passes during an possession phase so the team have to find quicker solutions to score a goal (I know it would be a stupid rule but i it always comes to my mind when i watch City or similar teams)...
Bring in a 45 second shot clock. Problem solved.
The delusion is real. I keep pointing out that aside from City, no club in EUROPE has spent more money than Manchester United in the last 10 transfer windows. Yes, City spend a lot. But guess what? So do Man United. And they don’t exactly get the same results. So what’s the difference?
No. Seen this side live a bunch of times and have always been impressed by the skill they display. And for people to call Pep’s Barca boring?! The mind boggles.